This is a modern-English version of Works of Martin Luther, with Introductions and Notes (Volume I), originally written by Luther, Martin.
It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling,
and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If
you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.
Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.
Produced by Michael McDermott, from scans obtained from
Produced by Michael McDermott, from scans obtained from
the Internet Archive
the Wayback Machine
WORKS OF MARTIN LUTHER WITH INTRODUCTIONS AND NOTES VOLUME I
PHILADELPHIA A. J. HOLMAN COMPANY 1915
PHILADELPHIA A. J. HOLMAN COMPANY 1915
Copyright, 1915, by A. J. HOLMAN COMPANY
Copyright, 1915, by A. J. HOLMAN COMPANY
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
TRANSLATOR'S NOTE
LUTHER'S PREFACES (C. M. Jacobs)
DISPUTATION ON INDULGENCES (1517)
Introduction (C. H. Jacobs)
Translation (C. M, Jacobs)
TREATISE ON BAPTISM (1519)
Introduction (H. E. Jacobs)
Translation (C. M. Jacobs)
DISCUSSION OF CONFESSION (1520)
Introduction (H. E. Jacobs)
Translation (C. M. Jacobs)
THE FOURTEEN OF CONSOLATION (1520)
Introduction (A. T. W. Steinhaeuser)
Translation (A. T. W. Steinhaeuser)
TREATISE ON GOOD WORKS (1520)
Introduction (A. T. W. Steinhaeuser)
Translation (A. T. W. Steinhaeuser)
TREATISE ON THE NEW TESTAMENT (1520)
Introduction (J. L. Neve)
Translation (J. J. Schindel)
THE PAPACY AT ROME (1520)
Introduction (T. E. Schmauk)
Translation (A. Steimle)
INDEX (W. A. Lambert)
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
TRANSLATOR'S NOTE
LUTHER'S PREFACES (C. M. Jacobs)
DISPUTATION ON INDULGENCES (1517)
Introduction (C. H. Jacobs)
Translation (C. M. Jacobs)
TREATISE ON BAPTISM (1519)
Introduction (H. E. Jacobs)
Translation (C. M. Jacobs)
DISCUSSION OF CONFESSION (1520)
Introduction (H. E. Jacobs)
Translation (C. M. Jacobs)
THE FOURTEEN OF CONSOLATION (1520)
Introduction (A. T. W. Steinhaeuser)
Translation (A. T. W. Steinhaeuser)
TREATISE ON GOOD WORKS (1520)
Introduction (A. T. W. Steinhaeuser)
Translation (A. T. W. Steinhaeuser)
TREATISE ON THE NEW TESTAMENT (1520)
Introduction (J. L. Neve)
Translation (J. J. Schindel)
THE PAPACY AT ROME (1520)
Introduction (T. E. Schmauk)
Translation (A. Steimle)
INDEX (W. A. Lambert)
INTRODUCTION
No historical study of current issues—politics or social science or theology—can far proceed without bringing the student face to face with the principles asserted by the Reformation of the Sixteenth Century and its great leader, Martin Luther. He has had many critics and many champions, but neither his critics nor his champions feel that the last word concerning him has been spoken, for scarcely a year passes that does not witness the publication of a new biography.
No historical study of current issues—politics, social science, or theology—can go far without confronting the principles put forward by the Reformation of the Sixteenth Century and its prominent leader, Martin Luther. He has had many critics and many supporters, but neither side feels that everything has been said about him, as hardly a year goes by without the release of a new biography.
Had Luther been nothing more than a man of his own time and his own nation the task of estimating him would long since have been completed. A few exhaustive treatises would have answered all demands. But the Catalogue of the British Museum, published in 1894, contains over two hundred folio pages, averaging about thirty-five titles to the page, of books and pamphlets written either by or about him, that have been gathered into this single collection, in a land foreign to the sphere of his labors, and this list has been greatly augmented since 1894. Above all other historical characters that have appeared since the first years of Christianity, he is a man of the present day no less than of the day in which he lived.
Had Luther been just a man of his time and nation, assessing him would have been straightforward by now. A few detailed studies would have covered everything needed. However, the Catalogue of the British Museum, published in 1894, includes over two hundred folio pages, with about thirty-five titles per page, of books and pamphlets written by or about him, all compiled in this single collection, in a land far removed from where he worked, and this list has grown significantly since 1894. Above all other historical figures since the early years of Christianity, he is as much a person of today as he was in his own time.
But Luther can be properly known and estimated only when he is allowed to speak for himself. He should be seen not through the eyes of others, but through our own. In order to judge the man we must know all sides of the man, and read the heaviest as well as the lightest of his works, the more scientific and theological as well as the more practical and popular, his informal letters as well as his formal treatises. We must take account of the time of each writing and the circumstances under which it was composed, of the adversaries against whom he was contending, and of the progress which he made in his opinions as time went on. The great fund of primary sources which the historical methods of the last generation have made available should also be laid under contribution to shed light upon his statements and his attitude toward the various questions involved in his life-struggles.
But we can truly understand and appreciate Luther only when we let him speak for himself. We should look at him through our own perspective, not through others’ viewpoints. To evaluate him fairly, we need to consider all aspects of his character, reading both his serious and lighter works, his more academic and theological texts as well as his practical and accessible ones, his casual letters alongside his formal writings. We must pay attention to the time each piece was written and the context in which it was created, the opponents he was facing, and how his views evolved over time. The wealth of primary sources that historical research from the last generation has made available should also be utilized to clarify his statements and his stance on the various issues he grappled with throughout his life.
As long as a writer can be read only in the language or languages in which he wrote, this necessary closer contact with his personality can be enjoyed only by a very limited circle of advanced scholars. But many of these will be grateful for a translation into their vernacular for more rapid reading, from which they may turn to the standard text when a question of more minute criticism is at stake. Even advanced students appreciate accurately rendered and scholarly annotated translations, by which the range of the leaders of human thought, with whom it is possible for them to be occupied, may be greatly enlarged. Such series of translations as those comprised in the well-edited Ante-Nicene, Nicene and Post-Nicene Libraries of the Fathers have served a most excellent purpose.
As long as a writer can only be read in the language or languages they wrote in, this necessary closer connection with their personality can only be appreciated by a very limited group of advanced scholars. However, many of these scholars will appreciate a translation into their own language for quicker reading, from which they can refer back to the original text when a more detailed critique is needed. Even advanced students value accurately translated and well-annotated versions, which significantly expand the range of the great thinkers they can engage with. Series of translations like those found in the well-edited Ante-Nicene, Nicene, and Post-Nicene Libraries of the Fathers have been incredibly beneficial.
In the series introduced by this volume the attempt is made to render a similar service with respect to Luther. This is no ambitious project to reproduce in English all that he wrote or that fell from his lips in the lecture-room or in the pulpit. The plan has been to furnish within the space of ten volumes a selection of such treatises as are either of most permanent value, or supply the best means for obtaining a true view of his many-sided literary activity and the sources of his abiding influence. The aim is not to popularize the writer, but to make the English, as far as possible, a faithful reproduction of the German or Latin. The work has been done by a small group of scholarly Lutheran pastors, residing near each other, and jointly preparing the copy for the printer. The first draft of each translation was thoroughly discussed and revised in a joint conference of the translators before final approval. Representative scholars, who have given more or less special study to Luther, have been called in to prepare some of the introductions. While the part contributed by each individual is credited at the proper place, it must yet be added that my former colleague, the late Rev. Prof. Adolph Spaeth, D. D., LL. D. (died June 25, 1910), was actively engaged as the Chairman of the Committee that organized the work, determined the plan, and, with the undersigned, made the first selection of the material to be included.
In the series started by this volume, we're aiming to provide a similar service regarding Luther. This isn’t an ambitious project to translate everything he wrote or said in lectures or sermons into English. The goal is to offer a selection across ten volumes that highlights the treatises with the most lasting significance or that best illustrate his diverse literary contributions and the origins of his enduring influence. We're not trying to make the writer popular; instead, we want to create an accurate English version of the German or Latin texts. This work has been undertaken by a small group of scholarly Lutheran pastors who live close to each other and are working together to prepare the copy for printing. Each translation's first draft was thoroughly discussed and revised during joint meetings of the translators before getting final approval. Notable scholars who have studied Luther to varying degrees have been invited to write some of the introductions. While each individual's contributions are credited in their proper places, it's important to mention that my former colleague, the late Rev. Prof. Adolph Spaeth, D.D., LL.D. (who passed away on June 25, 1910), played an active role as the Chairman of the Committee that organized the project, established the plan, and, along with me, made the initial selection of the materials to be included.
The other members of the Committee are the Rev. T. E. Schmauk,
D. D., LL. D., the Rev. L. D. Reed, D. D., the Rev. W. A. Lambert,
J. J. Schindel, A. Steimle, A. T. W. Steinhaeuser, and C. M.
Jacobs, D. D.; upon the five last named the burden of preparing
the translations and notes has rested.
The other members of the Committee are Rev. T. E. Schmauk,
D. D., LL. D., Rev. L. D. Reed, D. D., Rev. W. A. Lambert,
J. J. Schindel, A. Steimle, A. T. W. Steinhaeuser, and C. M.
Jacobs, D. D.; the last five named have taken on the responsibility
of preparing the translations and notes.
Their work has been laborious and difficult. Luther's complaints concerning the seriousness of his task in attempting to teach the patriarch Job to speak idiomatic German might doubtless have found an echo in the experience of this corps of scholars in forcing Luther into idiomatic English. We are confident, however, that, as in Luther's case, so also here, the general verdict of readers will be that they have been eminently successful. It should also be known that it has been purely a labor of love, performed in the midst of the exacting duties of large pastorates, and to serve the Church, to whose ministry they have consecrated their lives.
Their work has been tough and challenging. Luther's frustrations about the seriousness of his task in trying to teach the patriarch Job to speak everyday German probably resonate with the experiences of this group of scholars as they worked to translate Luther into fluent English. We believe, however, that just like in Luther's case, readers will generally agree that they have been incredibly successful. It's important to note that this has been purely a labor of love, carried out alongside the demanding responsibilities of large pastorates, all to serve the Church to which they have dedicated their lives.
The approaching jubilee of the Reformation in 1917 will call renewed attention to the author of these treatises. These volumes have been prepared with especial reference to the discussions which, we have every reason to believe, will then occur.
The upcoming jubilee of the Reformation in 1917 will bring fresh focus to the author of these writings. These volumes have been created specifically with the discussions we expect will take place then in mind.
Henry Eyster Jacobs.
Luther Theological Seminary,
Mt. Airy, Philadelphia.
Henry Eyster Jacobs.
Luther Theological Seminary,
Mt. Airy, Philadelphia.
TRANSLATORS' NOTE
The languages from which the following translations have been made are the Latin and the German,—the Latin of the German Universities, the German of the people, and both distinctively Luther's. In the Latin there is added to the imperfection of the form, when measured by classical standards, the difficulty of expressing in an old language the new thoughts of the Reformation. German was regarded even by Gibbon, two hundred and fifty years later, as a barbarous idiom. Luther, especially in his earlier writings, struggled to give form to a language and to express the highest thoughts in it. Where Luther thus struggled with two languages, it is evident that they have no easy task who attempt to reproduce the two in a third.
The translations that follow are based on Latin and German—the Latin from German universities, the German of the people, and both distinctly influenced by Luther. The Latin is not only imperfect when compared to classical standards, but also faces the challenge of conveying the new ideas of the Reformation in an old language. Even Gibbon viewed German, two hundred and fifty years later, as a primitive language. Luther, particularly in his earlier works, worked hard to shape the language and express profound ideas through it. Given Luther's struggles with both languages, it’s clear that anyone trying to translate them into a third language has a tough job ahead.
Modern Germans find it convenient to read Luther's German in a modernized text, sometimes rather hastily and uncritically constructed, and altogether unsafe as a basis for translation. Where the Germans have had to modify, a translator meets double difficulties. It may be puzzling for him to know Luther's exact meaning; it is even more puzzling to find the exact English equivalent.
Modern Germans find it easy to read Luther's German in a updated text, which is sometimes put together rather quickly and uncritically, making it an unreliable foundation for translation. When Germans need to make changes, a translator faces double challenges. It can be confusing to understand Luther's precise meaning; it's even more confusing to find the exact English equivalent.
In order to overcome these difficulties, in part at least, and present a translation both accurate and readable, the present group of translators have not simply distributed the work among themselves, but have together revised each translation as it was made. The original translator, at a meeting of the group, has submitted his work to the rest for criticism and correction, amounting at times to retranslation. No doubtful point, whether in sense or in sound, has been passed by unchallenged.
To tackle these challenges, at least in part, and create a translation that is both accurate and easy to read, this group of translators didn’t just split the work among themselves; they also reviewed each translation together as it was completed. During meetings, the original translator presented their work to the rest of the group for feedback and revisions, which sometimes led to a complete retranslation. No questionable aspect, whether in meaning or phrasing, has gone unchallenged.
Even with such care, the translation is not perfect. In places a variant reading is possible, a variant interpretation plausible. We can only claim that an honest effort has been made to be both accurate and clear, and submit the result of our labors to a fair and scholarly criticism. Critics can hardly be more severe than we have been to one another. If they find errors, it may be that we have seen them, and preferred the seeming error to the suggested correction; if not, we can accept criticism from others as gracefully as from each other.
Even with all this effort, the translation isn't flawless. In some areas, a different reading could work, and an alternative interpretation could make sense. We can only say that we've honestly tried to be both accurate and clear, and we present our work for fair and scholarly critique. Critics can’t be harsher than we’ve been on each other. If they point out mistakes, it might be because we noticed them too and chose to stick with what seems like an error over the proposed correction; if they don’t, we’re ready to accept feedback from others just as gracefully as we do from one another.
The sources from which our translations have been made are the best texts available in each case. In general, these are found in the Weimar Edition (D. Martin Luthers Werke. Kritische Gesammtausgabe. Weimar. Hermann Böhlaus Nachfolger, 1883 ff.), so far as this is completed. A more complete and fairly satisfactory edition is that known as the Erlangen Edition, in which the German and Latin works are published in separate series, 1826 ff. The text of the Berlin Edition (Luthers Werke, herausgegeben von Pfarrer D. Dr. Buchwald, etc., Berlin, C. A. Schwetschke und Sohn, third edition, 1905, ten volumes) is modernized, and where it has been used it has been carefully compared with the more critical texts. The two editions of Walch—the original, published 1740-1753, in twenty-four volumes, at Halle, and the modern edition, known as the St. Louis, Mo., edition, 1880 ff.—are entirely German, and somewhat modernized. For our purpose they could be used only as helps in the interpretation, and not as standard texts for translation. A very convenient and satisfactory critical text of selected treatises is to be found in Otto Clemen, Luthers Werke in Auswahl, Bonn, 4 vols., of which two volumes appeared in 1912.
The sources for our translations come from the best available texts in each instance. Typically, these can be found in the Weimar Edition (D. Martin Luthers Werke. Kritische Gesammtausgabe. Weimar. Hermann Böhlaus Nachfolger, 1883 ff.), as far as it has been completed. A more comprehensive and quite satisfactory edition is known as the Erlangen Edition, which publishes the German and Latin works in separate series, starting from 1826. The text of the Berlin Edition (Luthers Werke, edited by Pfarrer D. Dr. Buchwald, etc., Berlin, C. A. Schwetschke und Sohn, third edition, 1905, ten volumes) has been modernized, and wherever it has been used, it has been carefully compared with more critical texts. The two editions of Walch—the original published from 1740-1753 in twenty-four volumes in Halle, and the modern edition, known as the St. Louis, Mo. edition, starting from 1880—are entirely in German and somewhat modernized. For our purposes, they can only be used as aids in interpretation, rather than as standard texts for translation. A very convenient and satisfactory critical text of selected treatises can be found in Otto Clemen's Luthers Werke in Auswahl, Bonn, 4 vols., of which two volumes were published in 1912.
WORKS OF MARTIN LUTHER
SELECTIONS FROM LUTHER'S PREFACES TO HIS WORKS 1539 and 1545
SELECTIONS FROM LUTHER'S PREFACES TO HIS WORKS 1539 and 1545
I
LUTHER'S PREFACE TO THE FIRST PART OF HIS GERMAN WORKS[1]
EDITION OF 1539
I would gladly have seen all my books forgotten and destroyed; if only for the reason that I am afraid of the example.[2] For I see what benefit it has brought to the churches, that men have begun to collect many books and great libraries, outside and alongside of the Holy Scriptures; and have begun especially to scramble together, without any distinction, all sorts of "Fathers," "Councils," and "Doctors." Not only has good time been wasted, and the study of the Scriptures neglected; but the pure understanding of the divine Word is lost, until at last the Bible has come to lie forgotten in the dust under the bench.
I would gladly see all my books forgotten and destroyed if it meant avoiding the negative example. I can see how beneficial it has been for churches that people have started collecting many books and building large libraries, in addition to the Holy Scriptures; especially how they've begun to gather together, without any discernment, all kinds of "Fathers," "Councils," and "Doctors." Not only has time been wasted, and the study of the Scriptures neglected, but the true understanding of the divine Word has been lost, until eventually the Bible has ended up forgotten and gathering dust under the bench.
Although it is both useful and necessary that the writings of some of the Fathers and the decrees of some of the Councils should be preserved as witnesses and records, nevertheless, I think, est modus in rebus,[3] and it is no pity that the books of many of the Fathers and Councils have, by God's grace, been lost. If they had all remained, one could scarce go in or out for books, and we should still have nothing better than we find in the Holy Scriptures.
Although it's both useful and important to keep the writings of some of the Fathers and the decrees of some Councils as evidence and records, I believe there's a limit to this. It's not a loss that many of the books from the Fathers and Councils have, by God's grace, been lost. If all of them had survived, it would be nearly impossible to navigate through the sheer number of books, and we still wouldn't have anything better than what we find in the Holy Scriptures.
Then, too, it was our intention and our hope, when we began to put the Bible into German, that there would be less writing, and more studying and reading of the Scriptures. For all other writings should point to the Scriptures, as John pointed to Christ; when he said, "He must increase, but I must decrease." [John 3:30] In this way every one may drink for himself from the fresh spring, as all the Fathers have had to do when they wished to produce anything worth while. Neither Fathers nor Councils nor we ourselves will do so well, even when our very best is done, as the Holy Scriptures have done; that is to say, we shall never do so well as God Himself. Even though for our salvation we need to have the Holy Spirit and faith and divine language and divine works, nevertheless we must let the Prophets and Apostles sit at the desk, while we sit at their feet and listen to what they say. It is not for us to say what they must hear.
Then again, when we started translating the Bible into German, we hoped there would be less writing and more studying and reading of the Scriptures. All other writings should direct us to the Scriptures, just like John pointed to Christ when he said, "He must increase, but I must decrease." [John 3:30] This way, everyone can drink from the fresh spring for themselves, just as all the Fathers had to do when they wanted to create something meaningful. Neither the Fathers, the Councils, nor even we ourselves will achieve as much, even at our best, as the Holy Scriptures have done; in other words, we will never do as well as God Himself. Even though we need the Holy Spirit, faith, divine language, and divine works for our salvation, we must let the Prophets and Apostles take the lead, while we sit at their feet and listen to what they say. It is not our place to dictate what they should hear.
Since, however, I cannot prevent it, and, without my wish, they are now bent on collecting and printing my books—small honor to me—I shall have to let them put their energy and labor on the venture. I comfort myself with the thought that my books will yet be forgotten in the dust, especially when, by God's grace, I have written something good. Non ero melior patribus meis.[4][1 Kings 19:4] The other kind will be more likely to endure. For when the Bible can be left lying under the bench, and when it is true of the Fathers and Councils that the better they were, the more completely they have been forgotten; there is good hope that, when the curiosity of this age has been satisfied, my books too will not long remain; the more so, since it has begun to rain and snow books and "Doctors," of which many are already forgotten and gone to dust, so that one no longer remembers even their names. They themselves had hoped, to be sure, that they would always be in the market, and play schoolmaster to the churches.
Since I can't stop it, and whether I like it or not, people are determined to collect and publish my books—it's not a great honor for me—I’ll have to let them put their energy and effort into this project. I find comfort in the thought that my books will eventually be forgotten, especially when, by God's grace, I've written something good. Non ero melior patribus meis.[4][1 Kings 19:4] The other kind is more likely to last. After all, when the Bible can be left gathering dust under a bench, and the better the Church Fathers and Councils were, the more completely they've been forgotten; there’s a good chance that, once this age's curiosity fades, my books won’t stick around either. This is especially true since there's now a deluge of books and "Doctors," many of which have already vanished into oblivion, so much so that no one even remembers their names. They had hoped, of course, to remain relevant and guide the churches.
Well, then, let it go, in God's Name. I only ask in all kindness that the man who wishes at this time to have my books will by no means let them be a hindrance to his own study of the Scriptures, but read them as I read the orders and the ordures of the pope[5] and the books of the sophists. I look now and then to see what they have done, or learn from them the history and thought of their time, but I do not study them, or feel myself bound to conform to them. I do not treat the Fathers and the Councils very differently. In this I follow the example of St. Augustine, who is one of the first, and almost the only one of them to subject himself to the Holy Scriptures alone, uninfluenced by the books of all the Fathers and the Saints. This brought him into a hard fray with St. Jerome, who cast up to him the writings of his predecessors; but he did not care for that. If this example of St. Augustine had been followed, the pope would not have become Antichrist, the countless vermin, the swarming, parasitic mass of books would not have come into the Church, and the Bible would have kept its place in the pulpit.
Well, then, let it go, in God's name. I just kindly ask that the person who wants my books at this time doesn't let them get in the way of his own study of the Scriptures, but instead reads them like I read the orders and the nonsense of the pope and the writings of the sophists. I occasionally check in to see what they have done or to learn about the history and thoughts of their time, but I don't study them or feel obligated to follow them. I don't treat the Church Fathers and the Councils any differently. In this, I follow the example of St. Augustine, who is one of the first, and almost the only one among them, to submit himself to the Holy Scriptures alone, without being influenced by the writings of all the Fathers and Saints. This put him in a tough spot with St. Jerome, who brought up the works of his predecessors, but he didn't care about that. If everyone had followed St. Augustine’s example, the pope would not have become Antichrist, the countless swarms of useless books would not have entered the Church, and the Bible would have maintained its place in the pulpit.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Text as given in the Berlin Edition of the Buchwald and others, Vol. I pp. ix ff.
[1] Text as given in the Berlin Edition of the Buchwald and others, Vol. I pp. ix ff.
[2] I. e. The example set by preserving and collecting them.
[2] I. e. The example set by preserving and collecting them.
[3] "There is moderation in all things."
"Everything in moderation."
[4] "I shall not be better than my fathers." Cf. 1 Kings 19:4
[4] "I will not be better than my ancestors." Cf. 1 Kings 19:4
[5] Des Pabats Drecet and Drecketal. Luther makes a pun on decreta and decretalia—the official names for the decrees of the Pope.
[5] Des Pabats Drecet and Drecketal. Luther plays with the words decreta and decretalia—the official titles for the decrees issued by the Pope.
II DR. MARTIN LUTHER TO THE CHRISTIAN READER[1] EDITION OF 1545
Above all things I beseech the Christian reader and beg him for the sake of our Lord Jesus Christ, to read my earliest books very circumspectly and with much pity, knowing that before now I too was a monk, and one of the right frantic and raving papists. When I took up this matter against Indulgences, I was so full and drunken, yea, so besotted in papal doctrine that, out of my great zeal, I would have been ready to do murder—at least, I would have been glad to see and help that murder should be done—on all who would not be obedient and subject to the pope, even to his smallest word.
Above all, I urge the Christian reader and plead with him for the sake of our Lord Jesus Christ, to read my earliest books very carefully and with much compassion, knowing that at one point I was also a monk, and one of the most fervent and zealous papists. When I took up the issue against Indulgences, I was so filled with and intoxicated by papal doctrine that, out of my intense zeal, I would have been ready to commit murder—at the very least, I would have been eager to see and assist in that murder against anyone who would not obey and submit to the pope, even to his slightest command.
Such a Saul was I at that time; and I meant it right earnestly; and there are still many such today. In a word, I was not such a frozen and ice-cold[2] champion of the papacy as Eck and others of his kind have been and still are. They defend the Roman See more for the sake of the shameful belly, which is their god, than because they are really attached to its cause. Indeed I am wholly of the opinion that like latter-day Epicureans,[3] they only laugh at the pope. But I verily espoused this cause in deepest earnest and in all fidelity; the more so because I shrank from the Last Day with great anxiety and fear and terror, and yet from the depths of my heart desired to be saved.
At that time, I was just like Saul; I meant it seriously, and there are still many people like that today. In short, I wasn’t a cold-hearted supporter of the papacy like Eck and others of his kind, who do it more for their own greed than out of real loyalty to the cause. Honestly, I believe that, like modern-day Epicureans, they just mock the pope. But I truly committed myself to this cause with deep sincerity and loyalty; I did so especially because I was very anxious and terrified about the Last Day, while also deeply wishing to be saved.
Therefore, Christian reader, thou wilt find in my earliest books and writings how many points of faith I then, with all humility, yielded and conceded to the pope, which since then I have held and condemned for the most horrible blasphemy and abomination, and which I would have to be so held and so condemned forever. Amen.
Therefore, Christian reader, you will find in my earliest books and writings how many points of faith I then, with all humility, accepted and conceded to the pope, which I have since condemned as the most horrible blasphemy and abomination, and which I would want to be held and condemned as such forever. Amen.
Thou wilt therefore ascribe this my error, or as my opponents venomously call it, this inconsistency of mine,[4] to the time, and to my ignorance and inexperience. At the beginning I was quite alone and without any helpers, and moreover, to tell the truth, unskilled in all these things, and far too unlearned to discuss such high and weighty matters. For it was without any intention, purpose, or will of mine that I fell, quite unexpectedly, into this wrangling and contention. This I take God, the Searcher of hearts, to witness.
You will therefore attribute my mistake, or as my opponents spitefully call it, my inconsistency, to the timing, as well as my ignorance and lack of experience. In the beginning, I was completely alone and had no one to help me, and honestly, I was unskilled in all these matters and far too uneducated to discuss such serious and important topics. It was without any intention, purpose, or desire of mine that I unexpectedly got drawn into this argument and dispute. I take God, the Knower of hearts, as my witness.
I tell these things to the end that, if thou shalt read my books, thou mayest know and remember that I am one of those who, as St. Augustine says of himself, have grown by writing and by teaching others, and not one of those who, starting with nothing, have in a trice become the most exalted and most learned doctors. We find, alas! many of these self-grown doctors; who in truth are nothing, do nothing and accomplish nothing, are moreover untried and inexperienced, and yet, after a single took at the Scriptures, think themselves able wholly to exhaust its spirit.
I share this so that when you read my books, you’ll know and remember that I’m one of those who, like St. Augustine says about himself, has grown through writing and teaching others. I’m not one of those who suddenly become the most respected and knowledgeable experts from nothing. Unfortunately, we see many of these self-made experts; who, in reality, are nothing, do nothing, and achieve nothing. They are also untested and inexperienced, yet after just a quick glance at the Scriptures, they believe they can fully grasp its essence.
Farewell, dear reader, in the Lord. Pray that the Word may be further spread abroad, and may be strong against the miserable devil. For he is mighty and wicked, and just now is raving everywhere and raging cruelly, like one who well knows and feels that his time is short, and that the kingdom of his Vicar, the Antichrist in Rome,[5] is sore beset. But may the God of all grace and mercy strengthen and complete in us the work He has begun, to His honor and to the comfort of His little flock. Amen.
Farewell, dear reader, in the Lord. Please pray that the Word continues to spread and stands strong against the miserable devil. He is powerful and evil, and right now he's rampaging everywhere, acting fiercely, like someone who knows his time is limited and that the kingdom of his representative, the Antichrist in Rome, is under serious threat. But may the God of all grace and mercy strengthen and complete the work He has started in us, for His glory and for the comfort of His small flock. Amen.
FOOTNOTES
[1] From the Preface to the Complete Works (1545). Text according to the Berlin Edition of the Buchwald and others, Vol. I, pp. xi ff.
[1] From the Preface to the Complete Works (1545). Text according to the Berlin Edition of the Buchwald and others, Vol. I, pp. xi ff.
[2] Evidently a play on the Latin frigidus, often used in the sense of "trivial" or "silly"; so Luther refers to the "frigida decreta Paperum" in his Propositions for the Leipzipg Disputation (1519).
[2] Clearly a play on the Latin frigidus, often used to mean "trivial" or "silly"; thus, Luther references the "frigida decreta Paperum" in his Propositions for the Leipzig Disputation (1519).
[3] i. e. Frivolous mockers at holy things.
[3] i. e. Trivial mockers of sacred things.
[4] See Prefatory Note to the Fourteen of Consolation, below, p.109.
[4] See the Prefatory Note to the Fourteen of Consolation, below, p.109.
[5] Long before this Luther had repeatedly expressed the conviction that the Pope was the Antichrist foretold in 2 Thess. 2:3 f., and Rev. 13 and 17.
[5] Long before this, Luther had repeatedly stated his belief that the Pope was the Antichrist mentioned in 2 Thess. 2:3 f., and Rev. 13 and 17.
THE DISPUTATION OF DOCTOR MARTIN LUTHER
ON THE POWER AND EFFICACY OF INDULGENCES
(THE NINETY-FIVE THESES)
1517
TOGETHER WITH THREE LETTERS EXPLANATORY OF THE THESES
THE DISPUTATION OF DOCTOR MARTIN LUTHER
ON THE POWER AND EFFICACY OF INDULGENCES
(THE NINETY-FIVE THESES)
1517
TOGETHER WITH THREE LETTERS EXPLANATORY OF THE THESES
INTRODUCTION
"A Disputation of the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences" [1] is the full title of the document commonly called "The Ninety-five Theses." The form of the document was determined by the academic practice of the Middle Ages. In all the Mediæval Universities the "disputation" was a well-established institution. It was a debate, conducted according to accepted rules, on any subject which the chief disputant might elect, and no student's education was thought to be complete until he had shown his ability to defend himself in discussions of this kind. It was customary to set forth the subject which was to be discussed, in a series of "theses," which were statements of opinion tentatively advanced as the basis of argument. The author, or some other person he might designate, announced himself ready to defend these statements against all comers, and invited all who might wish to debate with him to a part in the discussion. Such an academic document, one out of many hundreds, exhaling the atmosphere of the Mediæval University, is the Disputation, which by its historical importance has earned the name "The XCV Theses."
"A Disputation of the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences" [1] is the full title of the document commonly known as "The Ninety-five Theses." The format of the document was shaped by the academic practices of the Middle Ages. In all the Medieval Universities, the "disputation" was a well-established tradition. It was a debate conducted according to accepted rules on any subject the main disputant chose, and no student's education was considered complete until they demonstrated their ability to defend themselves in discussions like this. It was common to outline the topic to be debated in a series of "theses," which were statements of opinion presented as a basis for argument. The author, or someone he appointed, would announce their readiness to defend these statements against anyone willing to challenge them, inviting all who wanted to participate in the discussion. This academic document, one among many hundreds, capturing the essence of the Medieval University, is the Disputation, which, due to its historical significance, has earned the title "The XCV Theses."
The Theses were published on the Eve of All Saints (Oct 31), 1517. They were not intended for any other public than that of the University,[2] and Luther did not even have them printed at first, though copies were forwarded to the Archbishop of Mainz, and to Luther's own diocesan, the Bishop of Brandenburg. The manner of their publication too was academic. They were simply posted on the door of the Church of All Saints—called the "Castle-church," to distinguish it from its neighbor, the "Town-church"—not because more people would see them there than elsewhere, but because that church-door was the customary place for posting such announcements, the predecessor of the "black-board" in the modern German University. It was not night, but mid-day[3] when the Theses were nailed up, and the Eve of All Saints was chosen, not that the crowds who would frequent the next day's festival might read them, for they were written in Latin, but because it was the customary day for the posting of theses. Moreover, the Feast of All Saints was the time when the precious relics, which earned the man who "adored" them, long years of indulgence,[4] were exhibited to worshipers, and the approach of this high feast-day put the thought of indulgences uppermost in the minds of everybody in Wittenberg, including the author of the Theses.[5]
The Theses were published on the Eve of All Saints (Oct 31), 1517. They were not meant for any audience other than the University,[2] and Luther didn’t even have them printed at first, though copies were sent to the Archbishop of Mainz and to Luther's own bishop, the Bishop of Brandenburg. The way they were published was also academic. They were simply posted on the door of the Church of All Saints—known as the "Castle-church" to distinguish it from the "Town-church" nearby—not because more people would see them there than anywhere else, but because that church door was the usual spot for posting such announcements, the precursor to the "black-board" in the modern German University. It wasn’t night, but midday[3] when the Theses were nailed up, and the Eve of All Saints was chosen, not because the crowds who would attend the next day's festival might read them, since they were written in Latin, but because it was the traditional day for posting theses. Additionally, the Feast of All Saints was when the treasured relics, which granted those who “venerated” them long years of indulgence,[4] were displayed to worshipers, and the approaching high feast day kept the topic of indulgences on everyone's mind in Wittenberg, including the author of the Theses.[5]
But neither the Theses nor the results which followed them could be confined to Wittenberg. Contrary to Luther's expectation and to his great surprise,[6] they circulated all through Germany with a rapidity that was startling. Within two months, before the end of 1517, three editions of the Latin text had been printed, one at Wittenberg, one at Nürnberg, and one as far away as Basel, and copies of the Theses had been sent to Rome. Numerous editions, both Latin and German, quickly followed. Luther's contemporaries saw in the publication of the Theses "the beginning of the Reformation," [7] and the judgment of modern times has confirmed their verdict, but the Protestant of to-day, and especially the Protestant layman, is almost certain to be surprised, possibly deeply disappointed, at their contents. They are not "a trumpet-blast of reform"; that title must be reserved for the great works of 1520.[8] The word "faith," destined to become the watchword of the Reformation, does not once occur in them; the validity of the Sacrament of Penance is not disputed; the right of the pope to forgive sins, especially in "reserved cases," is not denied; even the virtue of indulgences is admitted, within limits, and the question at issue is simply "What is that virtue?"
But neither the Theses nor the results that followed could be limited to Wittenberg. Contrary to Luther's expectations and to his great surprise, they spread rapidly throughout Germany. Within two months, before the end of 1517, three editions of the Latin text were printed—one in Wittenberg, one in Nürnberg, and another as far away as Basel—and copies of the Theses were sent to Rome. Numerous editions, both Latin and German, quickly followed. Luther's contemporaries saw the publication of the Theses as "the beginning of the Reformation," and modern judgment has confirmed their view. However, today's Protestants, especially laypeople, are likely to be surprised, and possibly even disappointed, by their content. They are not "a trumpet-blast of reform"; that title should be reserved for the major works of 1520. The word "faith," which would later become the rallying cry of the Reformation, doesn't appear once in them; the validity of the Sacrament of Penance is not questioned; the pope's right to forgive sins, especially in "reserved cases," is not denied; even the value of indulgences is acknowledged, within certain limits, and the real issue is merely "What is that value?"
To read the Theses, therefore, with a fair degree of comprehension we must know something of the time that produced them, and we must bear two facts continually in mind. We must remember that at this time Luther was a devoted son of the Church and servant of the pope, perhaps not quite the "right frantic and raving papist" [9] he afterwards called himself, but as yet entirely without suspicion of the extent to which he had inwardly diverged from the teachings of Roman theology. We must also remember that the Theses were no attempt at a searching examination of the whole structure and content of Roman teaching, but were directed against what Luther conceived to be merely abuses which had sprung up around a single group of doctrines centering in the Sacrament of Penance. He sincerely thought that the teaching of the Theses was in full agreement with the best traditions of the Church,[10] and his surprise that they should have caused so much excitement is undoubtedly genuine and not feigned. He shows himself both hurt and astonished that he should be assailed as a heretic and schismatic, and "called by six hundred other names of ignominy." [11] On the other hand, we are compelled to admit that from the outset Luther's opponents had grasped far more completely than he himself the true significance of his "purely academic protest."
To read the Theses with a decent level of understanding, we need to know a bit about the time in which they were written, and we must keep two important facts in mind. First, we should remember that at this point, Luther was a loyal member of the Church and a servant of the pope; he wasn't quite the "right frantic and raving papist" [9] he later described himself as, but he was still completely unaware of how much he had internally strayed from the teachings of Roman theology. Second, we need to understand that the Theses weren't meant to be a thorough critique of the entire framework and content of Roman teaching. Instead, they focused on what Luther believed were just abuses surrounding a specific set of doctrines related to the Sacrament of Penance. He genuinely thought that what he wrote in the Theses aligned with the best traditions of the Church,[10] and his surprise at the uproar they caused was definitely real, not fake. He expressed both hurt and shock that he was attacked as a heretic and schismatic and "called by six hundred other names of shame." [11] On the other hand, we must acknowledge that from the very beginning, Luther's opponents understood the real significance of his "purely academic protest" far better than he did.
2. Penance and Indulgence.—The purpose of the disputation which Luther proposed to hold was to clear up the subject of the virtue of "indulgences," and the indulgences were the most striking and characteristic feature of the religious life of the Church in the last three Centuries of the Middle Ages.[12] We meet them everywhere—indulgences for the adoration of relics, indulgences for worship at certain shrines, indulgences for pilgrimages here or there, indulgences for contributions to this or that special object of charity. Luther roundly charges the indulgence-vendors with teaching the people that the indulgences as a means to the remission of sins. What are these indulgences?
2. Penance and Indulgence.—The purpose of the debate that Luther wanted to hold was to clarify the issue of the value of "indulgences," which were the most notable and defining aspect of the Church's religious life during the last three centuries of the Middle Ages.[12] They were everywhere—indulgences for revering relics, indulgences for visiting certain shrines, indulgences for pilgrimages here and there, and indulgences for donations to various charitable causes. Luther strongly accused the sellers of indulgences of teaching people that these indulgences were a way to forgive sins. So, what exactly are these indulgences?
Their history is connected, on the one hand, with the history of the Sacrament of Penance, on the other with the history of the development of papal power. The Sacrament of Penance developed out of the administration of Church discipline. In the earliest days of the Church, the Christian who fell into sin was punished by exclusion from the communion of the Church. This excommunication was not, however, permanent, and the sinner could be restored to the privileges of Church-fellowship after he had confessed his sin, professed penitence, and performed certain penitential acts, chief among which were alms-giving, fasting and prayer, and, somewhat later, pilgrimage. These acts of penitence came to have the name of "satisfactions," and were a condition precedent to the reception of absolution. They varied in duration and severity, according to the enormity of the offence, end for the guidance of those who administered the discipline of the Church, sets of rules were formulated by which the "satisfactions" or "penances" were imposed. These codes are the "Penitential Canons." [13] The first step in the development of the indulgences may be found in the practice which gradually arose, of remitting some part of the enjoined "penances" on consideration of the performance of certain acts which could be regarded as meritorious.
Their history is linked to two main things: the history of the Sacrament of Penance and the evolution of papal authority. The Sacrament of Penance emerged from the enforcement of Church discipline. In the early days of the Church, a Christian who sinned was punished by being excluded from the Church's communion. However, this excommunication wasn’t permanent; the sinner could be welcomed back into the Church after confessing their sin, demonstrating genuine remorse, and completing certain acts of penance. The most significant of these were giving to the poor, fasting, praying, and later, making pilgrimages. These acts of penance became known as "satisfactions" and were required before receiving absolution. The duration and severity of these satisfactions varied based on the seriousness of the offense. To guide those enforcing Church discipline, sets of rules were created to dictate how "satisfactions" or "penances" were assigned. These guidelines are referred to as the "Penitential Canons." The initial steps towards indulgences can be traced back to a practice that gradually developed, allowing for the reduction of some prescribed "penances" in exchange for performing certain acts deemed meritorious.
The indulgences received a new form, however, and became a part of the regular Church administration, when the popes discovered the possibilities which lay in this institution for the advancement of their own power and the furtherance of their own interests. This discovery seems to date from the time of the Crusades. The crusading-indulgences, granted at first only to those who actually went to the Holy War, subsequently to those also who contributed to the expense of the expedition, were virtually the acceptance of this work as a substitute for any penance which the Church might otherwise require. As zeal for the Crusades began to wane, the indulgences were used more and more freely to stimulate lagging interest; their number was greatly increased, and those who purchased the indulgences with money far outnumbered those who actually took the Cross. Failing in their purpose as an incentive to enlistment in the crusading armies, they showed their value as a source of income, and from the beginning of the XIV. Century the sale of indulgences became a regular business.
The indulgences took on a new form and became part of the standard Church administration when the popes realized the potential this system had for increasing their own power and advancing their interests. This realization seems to have emerged during the Crusades. Initially, crusading indulgences were granted only to those who actually went to the Holy War, and later also to those who helped cover the costs of the expedition. Essentially, this made indulgences an alternative to any penance the Church might normally require. As enthusiasm for the Crusades began to decline, indulgences were increasingly used to boost waning interest; their availability surged, and people who bought indulgences with money far outnumbered those who actually joined the fight. Failing to serve as motivation for enlistment in the crusading armies, they proved to be valuable as a source of revenue, and from the early 14th Century, the sale of indulgences became a regular business.
About the same time a new kind of indulgence arose to take the place of the now somewhat antiquated crusading-indulgence. This was the Jubilee-indulgence, and had its origin in the Jubilee of 1300. By the Bull Antiquorum Habet Fide, Boniface VIII. granted to all who would visit the shrines of the Apostles in Rome during the year 1300 and during each succeeding centennial year, a plenary indulgence.[14] Little by little it became the custom to increase the number of these Jubilee-indulgences. Once in a hundred years was not often enough for Christians to have a chance for plenary forgiveness, and at last, unwilling to deprive of the privileges of the Jubilee those who were kept away from Rome, the popes came to grant the same plenary indulgence to all who would make certain contributions to the papal treasury.[15]
Around the same time, a new form of indulgence emerged to replace the now somewhat outdated crusading indulgence. This was the Jubilee indulgence, which originated from the Jubilee of 1300. By the Bull Antiquorum Habet Fide, Boniface VIII granted a plenary indulgence to anyone who visited the shrines of the Apostles in Rome during the year 1300 and every subsequent centennial year.[14] Gradually, it became customary to increase the number of these Jubilee indulgences. Once every hundred years was not frequent enough for Christians to have the opportunity for complete forgiveness, and eventually, not wanting to deny the Jubilee privileges to those who couldn't make it to Rome, the popes began to offer the same plenary indulgence to anyone who made specific contributions to the papal treasury.[15]
Meanwhile the Sacrament of Penance had become an integral part of the Roman sacramental system, and had replaced the earlier penitential discipline as the means by which the Church granted Christians forgiveness for sins committed after baptism. The scholastic theologians had busied themselves with the theory of this Sacrament. They distinguished between its "material," its "form" and its "effect." The "form" of the Sacrament was the absolution: its "effect," the forgiveness of sins; Its "material," three acts of the penitent: "confession," "contrition," and "satisfaction." "Confession" must be by word of mouth, and must include all the sins which the sinner could remember to have committed; "contrition" must be sincere sorrow of the heart, and must include the purpose henceforth to avoid sin; "satisfaction" must be made by works prescribed by the priest who heard confession. In the administration of the Sacrament, however, the absolution preceded "satisfaction" instead of following it, as it had done in the discipline of the early Church.[16] To justify this apparent inconsistency, the Doctors further distinguished between the "guilt" and the "penalty" of sin.[17] Sins were classified as "mortal" and "venial." [18] Mortal sins for which the offender had not received absolution were punished eternally, while venial sins were those which merited only some smaller penalty; but when a mortal sin was confessed and absolution granted, the guilt of the sin was done away, and with it the eternal penalty. And yet the absolution did not open the gate of heaven, though it closed the door of hell; the eternal penalty was not to be exacted, but there was a temporal penalty to be paid. The "satisfaction" was the temporal penalty, and if satisfaction was in arrears at death, the arrearage must be paid in purgatory, a place of punishment for mortal sins confessed and repented, but "unsatisfied," and for venial sins, which were not serious enough to bring eternal condemnation. The penalties of purgatory were "temporal," viz., they stopped somewhere this side of eternity, and their duration could be measured in days and years, though the number of the years might mount high into the thousands and tens of thousands.
Meanwhile, the Sacrament of Penance had become a key part of the Roman sacramental system, replacing the earlier penitential discipline as the way the Church granted Christians forgiveness for sins committed after baptism. Scholastic theologians focused on the theory of this Sacrament. They distinguished its "material," "form," and "effect." The "form" of the Sacrament was the absolution; its "effect" was the forgiveness of sins; its "material" consisted of three acts by the penitent: "confession," "contrition," and "satisfaction." "Confession" had to be oral and include all the sins the sinner could remember committing; "contrition" had to be genuine sorrow from the heart and included the intent to avoid sin in the future; "satisfaction" had to be fulfilled through actions prescribed by the priest who heard the confession. However, in the administration of the Sacrament, the absolution came before "satisfaction," instead of after as it had in the early Church's discipline. To explain this seeming contradiction, the Doctors further distinguished between the "guilt" and the "penalty" of sin. Sins were categorized as "mortal" and "venial." Mortal sins for which the offender had not received absolution were punished eternally, while venial sins warranted only a lesser penalty. However, when a mortal sin was confessed and absolution was granted, the guilt of the sin was removed, along with the eternal penalty. Yet, the absolution did not open the gates of heaven, although it closed the door to hell; the eternal penalty was lifted, but a temporal penalty remained. The "satisfaction" represented the temporal penalty, and if it was unpaid at death, the backlog would have to be settled in purgatory, a place for punishing mortal sins that were confessed and repented but "unsatisfied," as well as for venial sins, which were not serious enough to warrant eternal condemnation. The penalties of purgatory were "temporal"; they stopped short of eternity, and their duration could be measured in days and years, although the number of years could reach into the thousands and tens of thousands.
It was at this point that the practice of indulgences united with the theory of the Sacrament of Penance. The indulgences had to do with the "satisfaction." [19] They might be "partial," remitting only a portion of the penalties, measured by days or years of purgatory; or they might be "plenary," remitting all penalties due in this world or the next. In theory, however, no indulgence could remit the guilt or the eternal penalty of sin,[20] and the purchaser of an indulgence was not only expected to confess and be absolved, but he was also supposed to be corde contritus, i. e., "truly penitent." [21] A rigid insistence on the fulfilment of these conditions would have greatly restricted the value of the indulgences as a means of gain, for the right to hear confession and grant absolution belonged to the parish-priests. Consequently, it became the custom to endow the indulgence-vendors with extraordinary powers. They were given the authority to hear confession and grant absolution wherever they might be, and to absolve even from the sins which were normally "reserved" for the absolution of the higher Church authorities.
It was at this point that the practice of indulgences came together with the concept of the Sacrament of Penance. Indulgences had to do with "satisfaction." [19] They could be "partial," reducing only a portion of the penalties, measured by days or years of purgatory; or they could be "plenary," eliminating all penalties due in this world or the next. In theory, however, no indulgence could remove the guilt or the eternal penalty of sin,[20] and the buyer of an indulgence was not only expected to confess and be forgiven, but also to be corde contritus, i.e., "truly penitent." [21] A strict insistence on meeting these conditions would have significantly limited the value of indulgences as a way to profit, since the right to hear confessions and grant absolution belonged to the parish priests. As a result, it became common to give indulgence sellers special powers. They were allowed to hear confessions and grant absolution wherever they were, even for sins that were typically "reserved" for the absolution of higher Church authorities.
The demand for contrition was somewhat more difficult to meet. But here too there was a way out. Complete contrition included love to God as its motive, and the truly contrite man was not always easy to find; but some of the scholastic Doctors had discovered a substitute for contrition in what they called "attrition." viz., incomplete contrition, which might have fear for a motive, and which the Sacrament of Penance could transform into contrition. When, therefore, a man was afraid of hell or of purgatory, he could make his confession to the indulgence-seller or his agent, receive from him the absolution which gave his imperfect repentance the value of true contrition, released him from the guilt of sin, and changed its eternal penalty to a temporal penalty; then he could purchase the plenary indulgence, which remitted the temporal penalty, and so in one transaction, in which all the demands of the Church were formally met, he could become sure of heaven. Thus the indulgence robbed the Sacrament of Penance of its ethical content.
The demand for true remorse was a bit harder to fulfill. But there was a way around it. True remorse included love for God as its main motivator, and it wasn't always easy to find someone who genuinely felt that way. However, some of the scholarly Doctors had found a workaround called "attrition," which is incomplete remorse that might be motivated by fear. The Sacrament of Penance could then turn this attrition into true remorse. So, when someone was afraid of hell or purgatory, they could confess to the indulgence seller or their representative, receive absolution that gave their imperfect regret the same weight as true remorse, free them from the guilt of sin, and change its eternal punishment into a temporary one. Then, they could buy the plenary indulgence, which removed the temporary punishment, allowing them to ensure their place in heaven in one transaction that met all the Church's requirements. This way, indulgences diminished the ethical significance of the Sacrament of Penance.
Furthermore, indulgences were made available for souls already in purgatory. This kind of indulgence seems to have been granted for the first time in 1476. It had long been been that the prayers of the living availed to shorten the pains of the departed, and the institution of masses for the dead was of long standing; but it was not without some difficulty that the Popes succeeded in establishing their claim to power over purgatory. Their power over the souls of the living was not disputed. The "Power of the Keys" had been given to Peter and transmitted to his successors; the "Treasury of the Church," [22] i. e., the merits of Christ and of the Saints, was believed to be at their disposal, and it was this treasury which they employed in the granting of indulgences;[23] but it seemed reasonable to suppose that their jurisdiction ended with death. Accordingly, Pope Sixtus IV, in 1477, declared that the power of the Pope over purgatory, while genuine, was exercised only per modum sufiragii, "by way of intercession." [24] The distinction was thought dogmatically important, but to the layman, who looked more to results than to methods, the difference between intercession and jurisdiction was trifling. To him the important thing was that the Pope, whether by jurisdiction or intercession, was able to release the soul of a departed Christian from the penalties of purgatory. It is needless to say that these indulgences for the dead were eagerly purchased. In filial love and natural affection the indulgence vendor had powerful allies.
Furthermore, indulgences were made available for souls already in purgatory. This type of indulgence seems to have been granted for the first time in 1476. It had long been thought that the prayers of the living could help shorten the suffering of the departed, and the practice of holding masses for the dead dated back a long time; however, the Popes faced challenges in establishing their authority over purgatory. Their power over the souls of the living was not questioned. The "Power of the Keys" had been given to Peter and passed down to his successors; the "Treasury of the Church," meaning the merits of Christ and the Saints, was believed to be at their disposal, and it was this treasury that they used in granting indulgences; but it seemed reasonable to assume that their authority stopped at death. Therefore, Pope Sixtus IV, in 1477, declared that the Pope's power over purgatory, while real, was exercised only per modum sufragii, "by way of intercession." This distinction was considered dogmatically important, but to the ordinary person, who cared more about outcomes than methods, the difference between intercession and authority was minimal. For him, the crucial point was that the Pope, whether through authority or intercession, could free a departed Christian's soul from the penalties of purgatory. It goes without saying that these indulgences for the dead were eagerly bought. In feelings of love and natural affection, the indulgence seller had strong allies.
3. The Indulgence of 1515.—The XCV Theses were called forth by the preaching of the "Jubilee Indulgence" [25] of 1510, which was not placed on sale in central Germany until 1515. The financial needs of the papacy were never greater than in the last years of the XV. and the first years of the XVI. Century, and they were further increased by the resolve of Julius II. to erect a new church of St. Peter, which should surpass in magnificence all the churches of the world. The indulgence of 1510 was an extraordinary financial measure, the proceeds of which were to pay for the erection of the new Basilica, but when Julius died in 1513, the church was not completed, and the money had not been raised. The double task was bequeathed to his successor, Leo X. On the 31st of March, 1515, Leo proclaimed a plenary indulgence for the Archbishops of Magdeburg and Mainz, and appointed Albrecht, of Brandenburg, who was the incumbent of both sees and of the bishopric of Halberstadt as well, Commissioner for the sale of this indulgence. By a secret agreement, of which Luther was, of course, entirely ignorant, one-half of the proceeds was to be paid to the Fuggers of Ausburg on account of money advanced to the Archbishop for the payment of the fees to Rome, and of the sums demanded in consideration of a dispensation allowing him to occupy three sees at the same time; the other half of the proceeds was to go to the papal treasury to be applied to the building of the new church. The period during which the indulgence was to be on sale was eight years.
3. The Indulgence of 1515.—The XCV Theses were prompted by the preaching of the "Jubilee Indulgence" [25] of 1510, which wasn't sold in central Germany until 1515. The financial needs of the papacy were at an all-time high during the late 15th and early 16th centuries, further intensified by Julius II's decision to build a new St. Peter's Church that would outshine all the churches in the world. The indulgence of 1510 was an extraordinary financial strategy, meant to fund the construction of the new Basilica, but when Julius died in 1513, the church was still unfinished, and the funds were insufficient. This dual task was handed to his successor, Leo X. On March 31, 1515, Leo announced a plenary indulgence for the Archbishops of Magdeburg and Mainz, appointing Albrecht of Brandenburg, who held both positions as well as the bishopric of Halberstadt, as the Commissioner for selling this indulgence. According to a secret agreement, of which Luther was completely unaware, half of the proceeds were to be paid to the Fuggers of Augsburg to settle a loan made to the Archbishop for fees owed to Rome and for a dispensation that allowed him to hold three positions simultaneously; the other half would go to the papal treasury to support the building of the new church. The indulgence was set to be sold for eight years.
The actual work of organizing the "indulgence-campaign" was put into the hands of John Tetzel, whose large experience in the selling of indulgences fitted him excellently for the post of Sub-commissioner. The indulgence-sellers acted under the commission of the Archbishop and the directions of Tetzel, who took personal charge of the enterprise. The preachers went from city to city, and during the time that they were preaching the indulgence in any given place, all other preaching was required to cease.[26] They held out the usual inducements to prospective buyers. The plenary nature of the indulgence was made especially prominent, and the people were eloquently exhorted that the purchase of indulgence-letters was better than all good works, that they were an insurance against the pains of hell and of purgatory, that they availed for all satisfactions, even in the case of the most heinous sins that could be conceived.[27] "Confessional letters" [28] were one of the forms of this indulgence. They gave their possessor permission to choose his own confessor, and entitled him to plenary remission once in his life, to absolution from sins normally reserved, etc. The indulgences for the dead were zealously proclaimed, and the duty of purchasing for departed souls release from the pains of purgatory was most urgently enjoined. So great was the power of the indulgence to alleviate the pains of purgatory, that the souls of the departed were said to pass into heaven the instant that the coins of the indulgence-buyer jinked in the money-box.[29]
The actual work of organizing the "indulgence campaign" was handed over to John Tetzel, whose extensive experience in selling indulgences made him perfectly suited for the role of Sub-commissioner. The indulgence sellers operated under the authority of the Archbishop and the guidance of Tetzel, who took personal control of the initiative. The preachers traveled from city to city, and while they were preaching the indulgence in a specific location, all other preaching had to stop. They presented the usual incentives to potential buyers. The complete nature of the indulgence was highlighted, and people were passionately encouraged to believe that buying indulgence letters was better than doing all good works, that they provided protection against the torments of hell and purgatory, and that they covered all forms of penance, even for the most serious sins imaginable. "Confessional letters" were one of the types of this indulgence. They allowed the holder to choose their own confessor and granted them complete forgiveness once in their life, along with absolution from normally reserved sins, etc. The indulgences for the deceased were eagerly promoted, and the necessity of buying them to free souls from the pains of purgatory was strongly emphasized. The power of the indulgence to ease purgatory's suffering was so immense that it was said the souls of the departed would enter heaven the moment the coins from the indulgence buyer tinkled in the donation box.
4. Luther's Protest—The Theses were Luther's protest against the manner in which this indulgence was preached, and against the Use conception of the efficacy of indulgences which the people obtained from such preaching. They were not his first protest, however. In a sermon, preached July 37th, 1516,[30] he had issued a warning against the false idea that a man who had bought an indulgence was sure of salvation, and had declared the assertion that souls could be bought out of purgatory to be "a piece of temerity." His warnings were repeated in other sermons, preached October 31st, 1516, and February 14th, 1517.[31] The burden of these warnings is always the same: the indulgences lead men astray; they incite to fear of God's penalties and not to fear of sin; they encourage false hopes of salvation, and make light of the true condition of forgiveness, vis., sincere and genuine repentance.
4. Luther's Protest—The Theses were Luther's protest against how this indulgence was preached and the misguided idea about the effectiveness of indulgences that people got from such preaching. However, this wasn't his first protest. In a sermon delivered on July 37th, 1516,[30] he warned against the misconception that someone who bought an indulgence was guaranteed salvation, and he called the claim that souls could be purchased out of purgatory "a ridiculous assertion." He repeated these warnings in other sermons on October 31st, 1516, and February 14th, 1517.[31] The core message of these warnings is always the same: indulgences mislead people; they instill fear of God's punishments instead of fear of sin; they foster false hopes of salvation and trivialize the genuine condition for forgiveness, which is sincere and heartfelt repentance.
These warnings are repeated in the Theses. The preaching of indulgences has concealed the true nature of repentance; the first thing to consider is what "our Lord and Master Jesus Christ means," when He says, "Repent." [32] Without denying the pope's right to the power of the keys, Luther wishes to come into the clear about the extent of the pope's jurisdiction, which does not reach as far as purgatory. He believes that the pope has the right to remit "penalties," but these penalties are of the same sort as those which were imposed in the early Church as a condition precedent to the absolution; they are ecclesiastical penalties merely, and do not extend beyond the grave; the true penalty of sin is hatred of self, which continues until entrance into the kingdom of heaven.[33]
These warnings are repeated in the Theses. The practice of selling indulgences has obscured the true meaning of repentance; the first thing to think about is what "our Lord and Master Jesus Christ means" when He says, "Repent." [32] While not denying the pope's authority to the power of the keys, Luther wants to clarify the limits of the pope's jurisdiction, which doesn’t extend to purgatory. He believes that the pope has the right to lift "penalties," but these penalties are similar to those given in the early Church as a prerequisite for absolution; they are merely ecclesiastical penalties, and don’t go beyond death; the real penalty of sin is self-hatred, which lasts until entering the kingdom of heaven.[33]
The Theses are formulated with continual reference to the statements of the indulgence-preachers, and of the Instruction to the Commissaries issued under the name of the Archbishop of Mainz. [34] For this reason there is little logical sequence in the arrangement of the Theses, and none of the attempts to discover a plan or scheme underlying them has been successful.[35] In a general way it may be said that for the positive views of Luther on the subjects discussed, Theses 30-37 and 41-51 are the most vital, while Theses 92-95 are sufficient evidence of the motive which led Luther to make his protest.
The Theses are created with constant reference to the statements made by those promoting indulgences, as well as the Instruction to the Commissaries issued under the name of the Archbishop of Mainz. [34] Because of this, there isn’t a clear logical order in the arrangement of the Theses, and none of the attempts to find a plan or scheme behind them have been successful. [35] Generally speaking, it can be said that for Luther's positive views on the topics discussed, Theses 30-37 and 41-51 are the most important, while Theses 92-95 clearly show the motivation that drove Luther to voice his protest.
5. Conclusion—The editors of this Translation present herewith a new translation of the Theses, together with three letters, which will help the reader to understand the mind of Luther at the time of their composition and his motive in preparing them. The first of these letters is that which was sent, with a copy of the Theses, to Albrecht of Mainz. The second and third are addressed respectively to Staupitz and Leo X., and were written to accompany the "Resolutions," [36] an exhaustive explanation and defense of the Theses, published in 1518, after the controversy had become bitter.
5. Conclusion—The editors of this translation present a new version of the Theses, along with three letters that will help the reader understand Luther's thoughts at the time he wrote them and his reasons for creating them. The first letter was sent, along with a copy of the Theses, to Albrecht of Mainz. The second and third letters are addressed to Staupitz and Leo X., respectively, and were written to accompany the "Resolutions," [36] a detailed explanation and defense of the Theses published in 1518, after the controversy intensified.
6. Literature—(a) Sources. The source material for history of indulgences is naturally widely scattered. The most convenient collection is found in Koehler, Dokumente zum Ablassstreit, Tübingen, 1900. For the indulgences against which Luther protested, see, beside the Editions of Luther's Works, Kapp, Schauplatz des Tetselischen Ablass-Krams, Leipzig, 1720; Sammlung einiger zum päbstlichen Ablass gehörigen Schriften, Leipzig, 1721; Kleine Nachlese zur Erläuterung der Reformationsgeschicte, Leipzig, 1730 and 1733; also Loescher, Vollständige Reformationsacta, I, Leipzig, 1720
6. Literature—(a) Sources. The source material for the history of indulgences is naturally quite diverse. The most useful collection is found in Koehler, Dokumente zum Ablassstreit, Tübingen, 1900. For the indulgences that Luther protested against, see, in addition to the editions of Luther's works, Kapp, Schauplatz des Tetselischen Ablass-Krams, Leipzig, 1720; Sammlung einiger zum päbstlichen Ablass gehörigen Schriften, Leipzig, 1721; Kleine Nachlese zur Erläuterung der Reformationsgeschicte, Leipzig, 1730 and 1733; also Loescher, Vollständige Reformationsacta, I, Leipzig, 1720
(b) Secondary Works. Beside the general works in Church History and History of Doctrine, see the Lives of Luther, in German especially those of Köstlin-Kawerau, Kolde, Berger and Hausrath; in English those of Beard, Jacobs, Lindsay, Smith and McGiffert; also Boehmer, Luther im Lichte der neueren Forschung, ad ed., Leipzig, 1910.
(b) Secondary Works. In addition to the overall works in Church History and the History of Doctrine, check out the biographies of Luther, especially the German ones by Köstlin-Kawerau, Kolde, Berger, and Hausrath; in English, look for those by Beard, Jacobs, Lindsay, Smith, and McGiffert; also consider Boehmer, Luther im Lichte der neueren Forschung, ad ed., Leipzig, 1910.
On the indulgences in their relation to the Sacrament of Penance, H, C. Lea, History of Confession and Indulgence, especially Vol. III, Philadelphia, 1896; Brieger, Das Wesen des Ablasses am Ausgang des Mittelalters, Leizig, 1897, and Article Indulgenzen in PRE.3 IX, pp. 76 ff. (Eng. in Schaff-Herzog v., pp. 485-88); Gottlob, Kreuzablass und Almosenablass, Stuttgart, 1906 (especially valuable for the origin of indulgences).
On the indulgences related to the Sacrament of Penance, H. C. Lea, History of Confession and Indulgence, especially Vol. III, Philadelphia, 1896; Brieger, Das Wesen des Ablasses am Ausgang des Mittelalters, Leipzig, 1897, and Article Indulgenzen in PRE.3 IX, pp. 76 ff. (Eng. in Schaff-Herzog v., pp. 485-88); Gottlob, Kreuzablass und Almosenablass, Stuttgart, 1906 (especially valuable for the origin of indulgences).
On the indulgences and the XCV Theses, Koestlin, Luther's
Theologie, Leipzig, 1883 (Eng. Trans, by Hay, The Theology of
Luther, Philadelphia, 1897); Bratke, Luther's XCV Thesen und
ihre dogmengeschictlichen Voraussetzungen, Göttingen, 1884;
Dieckboff, Der Ablassstreit dogmengeschichtlich dargestellt,
Gotha, 1886; Lindsay, History of the Reformation, I, New York,
1906; Tschackert, Entstehung der lutherischen und reformierten
Kirchenlehre, Göttingen, 1910.
On indulgences and the XCV Theses, Koestlin, Luther's
Theology, Leipzig, 1883 (Eng. Trans. by Hay, The Theology of
Luther, Philadelphia, 1897); Bratke, Luther's XCV Theses and
their Historical Foundations, Göttingen, 1884;
Dieckboff, The Indulgence Controversy from a Historical Perspective,
Gotha, 1886; Lindsay, History of the Reformation, I, New York,
1906; Tschackert, Origins of Lutheran and Reformed
Church Doctrine, Göttingen, 1910.
On the financial aspects of the indulgence-traffic, Schulte, Die
Fugger in Rom, 2 vols., Leipzig, 1904.
On the financial aspects of the indulgence trade, Schulte, Die
Fugger in Rom, 2 vols., Leipzig, 1904.
CHARLES M. JACOBS.
Allentown, PA.
CHARLES M. JACOBS.
Allentown, PA.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Disputato pro declaratione virutis indulgentiarum.
Debate on the value of indulgences.
[2] Luther says, Apud nostros et propter nostros editae aunt. Weimar Ed., I. 528. On the whole subject see Letters to Staupitz and the Pope, below.
[2] Luther says, Published among us and for us. Weimar Ed., I. 528. On the whole subject see Letters to Staupitz and the Pope, below.
[3] Cf. Weimar Ed., I, 229.
[3] Cf. Weimar Ed., I, 229.
[4] The Church of All Saints at Wittenberg was the repository of the great collection of relics which Frederick the Wise had gathered. A catalogue of the collection, with illustrations by Lucas Cranach, was published in 1509. The collection contained 5005 sacred objects, including a bit of the crown of thorns and some of the Virgin Mother's milk. Adoration of these relics on All Saints' Day (Nov. 1st) was rewarded with indulgence for more than 500,000 years. So, Vol Bezold, Die deutsche Reformation (1890), p. 100; see also Barge, Karlstadt, I, 39ff.
[4] The Church of All Saints in Wittenberg was home to the extensive collection of relics that Frederick the Wise had assembled. A catalog of this collection, featuring illustrations by Lucas Cranach, was published in 1509. The collection included 5,005 sacred objects, such as a piece of the crown of thorns and some of the Virgin Mother's milk. Worshipping these relics on All Saints' Day (Nov. 1st) granted indulgence for over 500,000 years. So, Vol Bezold, Die deutsche Reformation (1890), p. 100; see also Barge, Karlstadt, I, 39ff.
[5] Luther had preached a sermon warning against the danger of indulgences on the Eve of All Saints (1516). See below.
[5] Luther gave a sermon warning about the risks of indulgences on the Eve of All Saints (1516). See below.
[6] See below, Letter to Leo X.
[6] See below, Letter to Leo X.
[7] Weimar Ed., I, 230.
[7] Weimar Ed., I, 230.
[8] The Address to the Christian Nobility and the Babylonian Captivity of the Church.
[8] The Address to the Christian Nobility and the Babylonian Captivity of the Church.
[9] Introduction to the Complete Works (1545); above p.10.
[9] Introduction to the Complete Works (1545); above p.10.
[10] See Letter to Staupitz, below.
[10] See Letter to Staupitz, below.
[11] See Letter to Leo X, below.
[11] See Letter to Leo X, below.
[12] Cf. Gottlob, Kreuzablass und Almosenblass, p. I.
[12] Cf. Gottlob, Kreuzablass und Almosenblass, p. I.
[13] See Theses 5, 8, 85.
[13] See Theses 5, 8, 85.
[14] Non solam plenam et largiorem, imo plenissimam omnium suorum concedemus et concedimus veniam peccatorum. Mirbt, Quellen, 2d ed., No. 243.
[14] We grant and grant complete forgiveness for all their sins, not just partially or generously, but fully and completely. Mirbt, Quellen, 2d ed., No. 243.
[15] This custom of putting the Jubilee-indulgences on sale seems to date from the year 1390. Cf. Lea, Hist. of Conf. and Indulg., III, 206.
[15] This practice of selling Jubilee indulgences appears to have started around the year 1390. See Lea, Hist. of Conf. and Indulg., III, 206.
No mention is here made of the indulgences attached to adoration of the relics, etc. On the development of this form of indulgence see Lea, Hist. of Conf. and Indulg., III, 131-194, 234-195, and Gottlog, Kreuzablass und Almosenablass, pp. 195-254.
No mention is made here of the indulgences related to the veneration of relics, etc. For more on the development of this form of indulgence, see Lea, Hist. of Conf. and Indulg., III, 131-194, 234-195, and Gottlog, Kreuzablass und Almosenablass, pp. 195-254.
[16] See Thesis 12.
[16] Refer to Thesis 12.
[17] See Theses 4-6, Note 2.
[17] See Theses 4-6, Note 2.
[18] For Luther's opinion of this distinction, see the Discourse Concerning Confession elsewhere in the present volume.
[18] For Luther's view on this distinction, check out the Discourse Concerning Confession in another part of this volume.
[19] "Not even the poorest part of the penance which is called 'satisfaction,' but the remission of the poorest part of penance." Letter to Staupitz, below.
[19] "Not even the smallest part of the penance known as 'satisfaction,' but the forgiveness of the tiniest portion of penance." Letter to Staupitz, below.
[20] There is ample proof that in practice the indulgences were preached as sufficient to secure the purchaser the entire remission of sin, and the form a culpa et poena was officially employed in many cases (Cf. Brieger, Das Wesen des Abiases am Ausgang des M A. and PRE3 IX. 83 ff., and Lea, History of Confession, etc., III, 54 ff.). "It is difficult to withstand the conclution that even in theory indulgences had been declared to be efficacious for the removal of the guilt of sin in the presence of God," Lindsay, History of the Reformation, I, 226.
[20] There is plenty of evidence that in practice, indulgences were promoted as enough to guarantee the buyer complete forgiveness of sin, and the term a culpa et poena was officially used in many instances (Cf. Brieger, Das Wesen des Abiases am Ausgang des M A. and PRE3 IX. 83 ff., and Lea, History of Confession, etc., III, 54 ff.). "It's hard to argue against the conclusion that even in theory, indulgences were claimed to be effective for removing the guilt of sin in the presence of God," Lindsay, History of the Reformation, I, 226.
[21] It is the basis of this theory that Roman Catholic writers on indulgences declare them to be "extra-sacramental," i. e., outside the Sacrament of Penance. So, e.g., Kent, in The Catholic Encyclopedia, Art. Indulgence.
[21] The foundation of this theory is that Roman Catholic authors on indulgences describe them as "extra-sacramental," meaning they are outside the Sacrament of Penance. For example, Kent, in The Catholic Encyclopedia, Art. Indulgence.
[22] See Theses 56-58.
[22] See Theses 56-58.
[23] The doctrine of the "Treasury of the Church" grew up as a result of the indulgences. It was an attempt to answer the question, How can a "satisfaction," which God demands, be waived? The answer is, By the application of merits earned by Christ and by the Saints who did more than God requires. These merits form the Treasury of the Church. Cf. Seeberg, PRE3 XV, 417; Lea, Hist. of Confession, etc., III, 14-28.
[23] The idea of the "Treasury of the Church" developed from the concept of indulgences. It was an effort to address the question, How can a "satisfaction" that God requires be set aside? The answer is, By using the merits earned by Christ and by the Saints who exceeded God's requirements. These merits make up the Treasury of the Church. Cf. Seeberg, PRE3 XV, 417; Lea, Hist. of Confession, etc., III, 14-28.
[24] See Theses 26.
See Thesis 26.
[25] i. e. A plenary indulgence similar to those granted for pilgrimage to Rome in Jubilee-years. See above, p.18.
[25] i. e. A full indulgence like those given for pilgrimages to Rome during Jubilee years. See above, p.18.
[26] See Theses 53-55.
See Theses 53-55.
[27] See Thesis 75.
See Thesis 75.
[28] See Thesis 35.
See Thesis 35.
[29] See Thesis 27.
[29] See Thesis 27.
[30] Weimar Ed., I, 63 ff.; Erl. Ed., I, 101 ff.
[30] Weimar Ed., I, 63 ff.; Erl. Ed., I, 101 ff.
[31] Weimar Ed., I, 94 ff,; Erl. Ed., I, 171 ff., 177 ff.
[31] Weimar Ed., I, 94 ff,; Erl. Ed., I, 171 ff., 177 ff.
[32] See Thesis 1.
See Thesis 1.
[33] See Thesis 4.
[33] See Thesis IV.
[34] See Letter to Archbishop, below. The text of this Instruction in Kapp, Sammlung, etc. (1721), pp. 117-206. Tschackert has surmised that even the number of the Theses was determined by the number of the paragraphs in this Instruction. There were 94 of these paragraphs, and of the Theses 94 + 1. Enstehung d. luth. u. ref. Kirchenlehre (1910), p. 16, note 1.
[34] See Letter to Archbishop, below. The text of this Instruction can be found in Kapp, Sammlung, etc. (1721), pp. 117-206. Tschackert has suggested that even the number of the Theses was influenced by the number of paragraphs in this Instruction. There were 94 of these paragraphs, and the Theses had 94 + 1. Enstehung d. luth. u. ref. Kirchenlehre (1910), p. 16, note 1.
[35] The following, based on an unpublished manuscript of Th.
Brieger, is an interesting analysis of the contents and subject
matter of the Theses. For the sake of brevity the minor
subdivisions are omitted:
Introduction. The ideas fundamentally involved in the concept
of poenitentia (Th. 1-7).
I. Indulgences for souls in purgatory (Th. 8-29).
1. Canonical Penalties and the pains of purgatory (Th. 8-19).
2. The relation of the Pope to purgatory (Th. 8-19).
II. Indulgences for the living (Th. 30-80).
1. The content and nature of the preaching of indulgences
(Th. 30-55).
2. The treasury of the Church (Th. 56-66).
3. The duty of the regular church-authorities on the
matter (Th. 67-80).
Conclusion (Th. 81-95).
1. The objections of the laity of the indulgence-traffic
(Th. 81-91).
2. The evil motive of the traffic in indulgences, with
special references to the statements of Th. 1-4 (Th.
91-95). H. Hermelink in Krüger's Handbuch der
Kirchengeschicte (1911), III, 66.
[35] The following, based on an unpublished manuscript by Th.
Brieger, is an interesting analysis of the contents and topics
of the Theses. For the sake of brevity, the minor
subdivisions are omitted:
Introduction. The ideas fundamentally involved in the concept
of poenitentia (Th. 1-7).
I. Indulgences for souls in purgatory (Th. 8-29).
1. Canonical penalties and the pains of purgatory (Th. 8-19).
2. The Pope’s relationship to purgatory (Th. 8-19).
II. Indulgences for the living (Th. 30-80).
1. The content and nature of the preaching of indulgences
(Th. 30-55).
2. The treasury of the Church (Th. 56-66).
3. The responsibility of the regular church authorities on the
matter (Th. 67-80).
Conclusion (Th. 81-95).
1. The objections of the laity regarding the indulgence trade
(Th. 81-91).
2. The corrupt motive behind the trade in indulgences, with
special references to the statements of Th. 1-4 (Th.
91-95). H. Hermelink in Krüger's Handbuch der
Kirchengeschichte (1911), III, 66.
[36] Weimar Ed., I, pp. 525 ff.
[36] Weimar Ed., I, pp. 525 ff.
I
LETTER TO THE ARCHBISHOP ALBRECHT OF MAINZ
OCTOBER 31, 1517
To the Most Reverend Father in Christ and Most Illustrious Lord,
Albrecht of Magdeburg and Mainz, Archbishop and Primate of the
Church, Margrave of Brandenburg, etc., his own lord and pastor in
Christ, worthy of reverence and fear, and most gracious.
To the Most Reverend Father in Christ and Most Illustrious Lord,
Albrecht of Magdeburg and Mainz, Archbishop and Primate of the
Church, Margrave of Brandenburg, etc., his own lord and shepherd in
Christ, deserving of respect and admiration, and most gracious.
JESUS[1]
The grace of God be with you in all its fulness and power! Spare me. Most Reverend Father in Christ and Most Illustrious Prince, that I, the dregs of humanity, have so much boldness that I have dared to think of a letter to the height of your Sublimity. The Lord Jesus is my witness that, conscious of my smallness and baseness, I have long deferred what I am now shameless enough to do,—moved thereto most of all by the duty of fidelity which I acknowledge that I owe to your most Reverend Fatherhood in Christ. Meanwhile, therefore, may your Highness deign to cast an eye upon one speck of dust, and for the sake of your pontifical clemency to heed my prayer.
May the grace of God be with you in all its fullness and power! Please spare me. Most Reverend Father in Christ and Most Illustrious Prince, I, the lowest of the low, have had the audacity to think about writing to someone as exalted as you. The Lord Jesus is my witness that, fully aware of my insignificance, I have long put off what I now have the nerve to do—all driven by the duty of loyalty that I recognize I owe to your most Reverend Fatherhood in Christ. Meanwhile, may your Highness take a moment to notice this speck of dust and, for the sake of your pontifical kindness, listen to my plea.
Papal indulgences for the building of St. Peter's are circulating under your most distinguished name, and as regards them, I do not bring accusation against the outcries of the preachers, which I have not heard, so much as I grieve over the wholly false impressions which the people have conceived from them; to wit,—the unhappy souls believe that if they have purchased letters of indulgence they are sure of their salvation;[2] again, that so soon as they cast their contributions into the money-box, souls fly out of purgatory;[3] furthermore, that these graces [i. e., the graces conferred in the indulgences] are so great that there is no sin too great to be absolved, even, as they say—though the thing is impossible—if one had violated the Mother of God;[4] again, that a man is free, through these indulgences, from all penalty and guilt.[5]
Papal indulgences for the construction of St. Peter's are being promoted under your prestigious name, and regarding them, I don't want to criticize the preachers' outbursts, which I haven't witnessed, but I am troubled by the completely misleading ideas people have formed from them; specifically, the unfortunate souls think that if they've bought indulgence letters they are guaranteed salvation; again, they believe that as soon as they drop their donations into the collection box, souls are released from purgatory; furthermore, they think these graces (i.e., the benefits offered in the indulgences) are so enormous that no sin is too great to be forgiven, even, as they claim—though it's impossible—if someone had offended the Mother of God; again, that a person is free, through these indulgences, from all punishment and guilt.
O God, most good! Thus souls committed to your care, good Father, are taught to their death, and the strict account, which you must render for all such, grows and increases. For this reason I have no longer been able to keep quiet about this matter, for it is by no gift of a bishop that man becomes sure of salvation, since he gains this certainty not even by the "inpoured grace" [6] of God, but the Apostle bids us always "work out our own salvation in fear and trembling," [Phil. 2:12] and Peter says, "the righteous scarcely shall be saved." [1 Pet. 4:18, Matt] Finally, so narrow is the way that leads to life, that the Lord, through the prophets Amos and Zechariah, calls those who shall be saved "brands plucked from the burning," [Amos 4:11, Zech. 3:2] and everywhere declares the difficulty of salvation.
O God, most good! So, souls entrusted to your care, good Father, are taught until their death, and the strict account that you must give for all of them keeps growing. For this reason, I can no longer stay quiet about this issue, because it's not through any gifts from a bishop that a person can be sure of salvation. This certainty isn't even obtained through the "inpoured grace" [6] of God, but the Apostle urges us to "work out our own salvation with fear and trembling" [Phil. 2:12], and Peter states, "the righteous will scarcely be saved." [1 Pet. 4:18, Matt] Ultimately, the way that leads to life is so narrow that the Lord, through the prophets Amos and Zechariah, refers to those who will be saved as "brands plucked from the burning" [Amos 4:11, Zech. 3:2] and repeatedly emphasizes the difficulty of salvation.
Why, then, do the preachers of pardons, by these false fables and promises, make the people careless and fearless? Whereas indulgences confer on us no good gift, either for salvation or for sanctity, but only take away the external penalty, which it was formerly the custom to impose according to the canons.[7]
Why, then, do the preachers of indulgences, through these misleading tales and promises, make people indifferent and unafraid? While indulgences offer us no real benefit for salvation or holiness, they only remove the external punishment that was once typically enforced according to the church laws.[7]
Finally, works of piety and love are infinitely better than indulgences,[8] and yet these are not preached with such ceremony or such zeal; nay, for the sake of preaching the indulgences they are kept quiet, though it is the first and the sole duty of all bishops that the people should learn the Gospel and the love of Christ, for Christ never taught that indulgences should be preached. How great then is the horror, how great the peril of a bishop, if he permits the Gospel to be kept quiet, and nothing but the noise of indulgences to be spread among his people![9] Will not Christ say to them, "straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel"? [Matt. 23:34][10]
Finally, acts of faith and love are far better than indulgences, and yet these aren't preached with the same enthusiasm or focus; in fact, to promote indulgences, the former are often ignored, even though it's the primary responsibility of all bishops to ensure that people learn the Gospel and the love of Christ, since Christ never taught that indulgences should be emphasized. How horrifying, then, is the situation for a bishop who allows the Gospel to be silenced, with only the clamor of indulgences shared among his community! Will Christ not say to them, "straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel"? [Matt. 23:34]
In addition to this, Most Reverend Father in the Lord, it is said in the Instruction to the Commissaries[11] which is issued under your name, Most Reverend Father (doubtless without your knowledge and consent), that one of the chief graces of indulgence is that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to God, and all the penalties of purgatory are destroyed.[12] Again, it is said that contrition is not necessary in those who purchase souls [out of purgatory] or buy confessionalia.[13]
In addition to this, Most Reverend Father in the Lord, it's stated in the Instruction to the Commissaries[11] that was issued under your name, Most Reverend Father (likely without your knowledge and consent), that one of the main blessings of indulgence is that priceless gift from God that reconciles people to Him and eliminates all penalties of purgatory.[12] Furthermore, it mentions that contrition isn't required for those who buy souls [out of purgatory] or purchase confessionalia.[13]
But what can I do, good Primate and Most Illustrious Prince, except pray your Most Reverend Fatherhood by the Lord Jesus Christ that you would deign to look [on this matter] with the eye of fatherly care, and do away entirely with that treatise[14] and impose upon the preachers of pardons another form of preaching; lest, perchance, one may some time arise, who will publish writings in which he will confute both them and that treatise, to the shame of your Most Illustrious Sublimity. I shrink very much from thinking that this will be done, and yet I fear that it will come to pass, unless there is some speedy remedy.
But what can I do, good Primate and Most Illustrious Prince, except pray that you, Most Reverend Father, through the Lord Jesus Christ, would kindly look at this issue with a fatherly eye and completely get rid of that treatise[14] and require the preachers of indulgences to adopt a different way of preaching; lest, perhaps, someone may eventually come forward and publish writings that will refute both them and that treatise, bringing shame to your Most Illustrious Sublimity. I'm really hesitant to think this could happen, yet I fear it will, unless we find a quick solution.
These faithful offices of my insignificance I beg that your Most Illustrious Grace may deign to accept in the spirit of a Prince and a Bishop, i. e., with the greatest clemency, as I offer them out of a faithful heart, altogether devoted to you, Most Reverend Father, since I too am a part of your flock.
These humble services from someone as insignificant as me, I hope your Most Illustrious Grace will kindly accept in the manner of a Prince and a Bishop, that is, with the utmost kindness, as I present them from a loyal heart, completely dedicated to you, Most Reverend Father, since I am also a part of your community.
May the Lord Jesus have your Most Reverend Fatherhood eternally in His keeping. Amen.
May the Lord Jesus keep your Most Reverend Fatherhood in His care forever. Amen.
From Wittenberg on the Vigil of All Saints, MDXVII.
From Wittenberg on the Eve of All Saints, 1517.
If it please the Most Reverend Father he may see these my Disputations, and learn how doubtful a thing is the opinion of indulgences which those men spread as though it were most certain.
If it pleases the Most Reverend Father, he may read these Disputations of mine and see how uncertain the belief in indulgences is, which those people promote as if it were absolutely true.
To the Most Reverend Father,
Brother Martin Luther.
To the Most Reverend Father,
Brother Martin Luther.
FOOTNOTES
[1] In the original editions the word Jesus appears at the head of the works, and the present editors have retained the use, which was apparently an act of obedience to the command, "Whatsoever ye do, in word or in deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus" (Col. 3:17).
[1] In the original editions, the name Jesus is at the top of the works, and the current editors have kept this usage, which seems to be a way of following the command, "Whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus" (Col. 3:17).
[2] See Theses 18-24, 32, 52.
[2] See Theses 18-24, 32, 52.
[3] See Thesis 27.
See Thesis 27.
[4] See Thesis 75.
See Thesis 75.
[5] See Theses 5, 6, 20, 21.
[5] See Theses 5, 6, 20, 21.
[6] Gratia infusa, meaning the working of God upon the hearts of men, by means of which their lives become pleasing to God. Cf. Loors' Dogmengeschicte, 4th ed., pp. 562 ff.
[6] Gratia infusa, which means God's influence on people's hearts, allowing their lives to become pleasing to God. See Loors' Dogmengeschicte, 4th ed., pp. 562 ff.
[7] See Thesis 5.
See Thesis 5.
[8] See Theses 41-47.
[8] See Theses 41-47.
[9] See Theses 52-55.
[9] See Theses 52-55.
[10] See Thesis 80.
See Thesis 80.
[11] See above, Introduction, p. 22 f.
[11] See above, Introduction, p. 22 f.
[12] See Theses 21, 33.
[12] See Theses 21, 33.
[13] See Thesis 55, and Introduction, p.22.
[13] See Thesis 55, and Introduction, p.22.
[15] viz., The Instruction to the Commissaries.
[15] namely, The Instruction to the Commissaries.
II
DISPUTATION OF DOCTOR MARTIN LUTHER ON THE POWER AND EFFICACY OF INDULGENCES
OCTOBER 31, 1517
Out of love for the truth and the desire to bring it to light, the following propositions will be discussed at Wittenberg, under the presidency of the Reverend Father Martin Luther, Master of Arts and of Sacred Theology, and Lecturer in Ordinary on the same at that place. Wherefore he requests that those who are unable to be present and debate orally with us, may do so by letter.
Out of love for the truth and the desire to reveal it, the following ideas will be discussed in Wittenberg, led by the Reverend Father Martin Luther, Master of Arts and Sacred Theology, and a regular lecturer there. Therefore, he asks that anyone who cannot be there to discuss in person can participate by sending a letter.
In the Name our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.
In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.
1. Our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, when He said Poenitentiam agite,[1] willed that the whole life of believers should be repentance. [Matt. 4:17]
1. Our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, when He said Repent,[1] intended that the entire lives of believers should be focused on repentance. [Matt. 4:17]
2. This word cannot be understood to mean sacramental penance, i. e., confession and satisfaction, which is administered by the priests.
2. This term shouldn't be interpreted as referring to sacramental penance, meaning confession and atonement, which is given by the priests.
3. Yet it means not inward repentance only; nay, there is no inward repentance which does not outwardly work divers mortifications of the flesh.
3. However, it doesn't just mean inner repentance; in fact, there is no inner repentance that doesn't result in various acts of self-discipline outwardly.
4. The penalty[2] [of sin], therefore, continues so long as hatred of self continues; for this is the true inward repentance, and continues until our entrance into the kingdom of heaven.
4. The penalty of sin, therefore, lasts as long as self-hatred lasts; because this is genuine inner repentance, and it continues until we enter the kingdom of heaven.
5. The pope does not intend to remit, and cannot remit any penalties other than those which he has imposed either by his own authority or by that of the Canons.[3]
5. The pope does not plan to forgive, and cannot forgive any penalties other than those he has imposed by his own authority or according to the Canons.[3]
6. The pope cannot remit any guilt, except by declaring that it has been remitted by God and by assenting to God's remission; though, to be sure, he may grant remission in cases reserved to his judgment. If his right to grant remission in such cases were despised, the guilt would remain entirely unforgiven.
6. The pope can't remove any guilt, except by saying that it has been forgiven by God and agreeing with God's forgiveness; however, he can grant forgiveness in cases that are left to his judgment. If his authority to grant forgiveness in those cases was disregarded, the guilt would remain completely unforgiven.
7. God remits guilt to no one whom He does not, at the same time, humble in all things and bring into subjection to His vicar, the priest.
7. God does not forgive anyone without also humbling them in all things and bringing them under the authority of His representative, the priest.
8. The penitential canons are imposed only on the living, and, according to them, nothing should be imposed on the dying.
8. The penitential canons are applied only to the living, and according to them, nothing should be imposed on those who are dying.
9. Therefore the Holy Spirit in the pope is kind to us, because in his decrees he always makes exception of the article of death and of necessity.[4]
9. So the Holy Spirit in the pope is gracious to us, because in his rulings he always makes exceptions for the matters of death and necessity.[4]
10. Ignorant and wicked are the doings of those priests who, in the case of the dying, reserve canonical penances for purgatory.
10. The actions of those priests are ignorant and wicked who, when someone is dying, hold back canonical penances for purgatory.
11. This changing of the canonical penalty to the penalty of purgatory is quite evidently one of the tares that were sown while the bishops slept. [Matt. 13:25]
11. This shift from the canonical penalty to the penalty of purgatory is clearly one of the weeds that were sown while the bishops were unaware. [Matt. 13:25]
13. In former times the canonical penalties were imposed not after, but before absolution, as tests of true contrition.
13. In the past, the official penalties were given not after, but before forgiveness, as a way to test real remorse.
13. The dying are freed by death from all penalties; they are already dead to canonical rules, and have a right to be released from them.
13. The dying are free from all penalties through death; they are already detached from official rules and have the right to be released from them.
14. The imperfect health [of soul], that is to say, the imperfect love, of the dying brings with it, of necessity, great fear; and the smaller the love, the greater is the fear.
14. The imperfect health of the soul, which means imperfect love, in someone who is dying leads to significant fear; and the less love there is, the greater the fear becomes.
15. This fear and horror is sufficient of itself alone (to say nothing of other things) to constitute the penalty of purgatory, since it is very near to the horror of despair.
15. This fear and horror alone (not to mention other factors) is enough to make up the penalty of purgatory, as it is extremely close to the terror of despair.
16. Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to differ as do despair, almost-despair, and the assurance of safety.
16. Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to be different, just like despair, nearly-despair, and the feeling of safety.
17. With souls in purgatory it seems necessary that horror would grow less and love increase.
17. With souls in purgatory, it seems like the horror would fade and love would grow stronger.
18. It seems unproved, either by reason or Scripture, that they are outside the state of merit, that is to say, of increasing love.
18. It appears unproven, either by reason or Scripture, that they are beyond the state of merit, meaning, the ability to grow in love.
19. Again, it seems unproved that they, or at least that all of them, are certain or assured of their own blessedness, though we may be quite certain of it.
19. Again, it appears unproven that they, or at least all of them, are sure or confident of their own happiness, even though we may be completely certain of it.
20. Therefore by "full remission of all penalties" the pope means not actually "of all," but only of those imposed by himself.
20. So when the pope refers to "full remission of all penalties," he doesn't mean "all" in the absolute sense, but only the ones he has actually imposed.
21. Therefore those preachers of indulgences are in error, who say that by the pope's indulgences a man is freed from every penalty, and saved;
21. So those preachers of indulgences are mistaken when they say that the pope's indulgences free a person from all penalties and guarantee salvation;
22. Whereas he remits to souls in purgatory no penalty which, according to the canons, they would have had to pay in this life.
22. He doesn't remove any penalties for souls in purgatory that, according to the church rules, they would have had to face in this life.
23. If it is at all possible to grant to any one the remission of all penalties whatsoever, it is certain that this remission can be granted only to the most perfect, that is, to the very fewest.
23. If it's possible to completely forgive anyone of all penalties, it's clear that this forgiveness can only be given to the most perfect individuals, meaning very few people.
24. It must needs be, therefore, that the greater part of the people are deceived by that indiscriminate and high-sounding promise of release from penalty.
24. It has to be, therefore, that most people are misled by that vague and grand promise of freedom from punishment.
25. The power which the pope has, in a general way, over purgatory, is just like the power which any bishop or curate has, in a special way, within his own diocese or parish.
25. The pope's authority over purgatory, in general, is similar to the authority that any bishop or parish priest has specifically within his own diocese or parish.
36. The pope does well when he grants remission to souls [in purgatory], not by the power of the keys (which he does not possess),[5] but by way of intercession.
36. The pope acts appropriately when he grants relief to souls [in purgatory], not through the power of the keys (which he does not have),[5] but through intercession.
27. They preach man[6] who say that so soon as the penny jingles into the money-box, the soul flies out [of purgatory]. [7]
27. They preach about people who say that as soon as the coin drops into the donation box, the soul escapes from purgatory.
28. It is certain that when the penny jingles into the money-box, gain and avarice can be increased, but the result of the intercession of the Church is in the power of God alone.
28. It's clear that when the penny drops into the money-box, profit and greed can grow, but the outcome of the Church's intervention is solely in God's hands.
29. Who knows whether all the souls in purgatory wish to be bought out of it, as in the legend of Sts. Severinus and Paschal.[8]
29. Who knows if all the souls in purgatory want to be freed from it, like in the story of Sts. Severinus and Paschal.[8]
30. No one is sure that his own contrition is sincere; much less that he has attained full remission.
30. No one is really sure if their remorse is genuine; even less so that they've achieved complete forgiveness.
31. Rare as is the man that is truly penitent, so rare is also the man who truly buys indulgences, i. e., such men are most rare.
31. Just as rare as a man who is genuinely sorry for his sins is also a man who truly buys indulgences; in other words, such men are very uncommon.
32. They will be condemned eternally, together with their teachers, who believe themselves sure of their salvation because they have letters of pardon.[9]
32. They will be condemned forever, along with their teachers, who think they're guaranteed salvation just because they have pardons. [9]
33. Men must be on their guard against those who say that the pope's pardons are that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to Him;
33. Men should be cautious of those who claim that the pope's pardons are that priceless gift from God through which a person is reconciled to Him;
34. For these "graces of pardon" concern only the penalties of sacramental satisfaction, and these are appointed by man.[10]
34. These "graces of pardon" only relate to the penalties of sacramental satisfaction, and these are determined by people.[10]
35. They preach no Christian doctrine who teach that contrition is not necessary in those who intend to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy confessionalia.[11]
35. They don't preach any Christian teachings if they say that feeling remorse isn't necessary for those who plan to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy confessionalia. [11]
36. Every truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of penalty and guilt, even without letters of pardon.
36. Every genuinely repentant Christian has the right to complete forgiveness of both penalty and guilt, even without a pardon letter.
37. Every true Christian, whether living or dead, has part in all the blessings of Christ and the Church; and this is granted him by God, even without letters of pardon.
37. Every true Christian, whether alive or dead, shares in all the blessings of Christ and the Church; and this is given to them by God, even without any official letters of forgiveness.
38. Nevertheless, the remission and participation [in the blessings of the Church] which are granted by the pope are in no way to be despised, for they are, as I have said,[12] the declaration of divine remission.
38. However, the forgiveness and involvement [in the blessings of the Church] that the pope grants should not be taken lightly, because, as I mentioned,[12] they represent a declaration of divine forgiveness.
39. It is most difficult, even for the very keenest theologians, at one and the same time to commend to the people the abundance of pardons and [the need of] true contrition.
39. It is really challenging, even for the most insightful theologians, to simultaneously encourage people to embrace the richness of forgiveness and the necessity of genuine remorse.
40. True contrition seeks and loves penalties, but liberal pardons only relax penalties and cause them to be hated, or at least, furnish an occasion [for hating them].
40. True remorse seeks and embraces consequences, but generous forgiveness only softens those consequences and makes them resentful, or at least provides a reason to resent them.
41. Apostolic[13] pardons are to be preached with caution, lest the people may falsely think them preferable to other good works of love.
41. Apostolic[13] pardons should be communicated carefully, so that people don’t mistakenly believe they are better than other acts of love.
42. Christians are to be taught that the pope does not intend the buying of pardons to be compared in any way to works of mercy.
42. Christians should be taught that the pope does not intend for the purchase of indulgences to be compared in any way to acts of mercy.
43. Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better work than buying pardons;
43. Christians should be taught that giving to the poor or lending to those in need is a more meaningful act than purchasing pardons;
44. Because love grows by works of love, and man becomes better; but by pardons man does not grow better, only more free from penalty.
44. Because love increases with acts of kindness, and people become better; but through forgiveness, one does not improve, just becomes freer from punishment.
45. Christians are to be taught that he who sees a man in need, and passes him by, and gives [his money] for pardons, purchases not the indulgences of the pope, but the indignation of God.
45. Christians should be taught that if someone sees a person in need and ignores them, giving their money for pardons, they're not buying the pope's indulgences, but earning God's anger.
46. Christians are to be taught that unless they have more than they need, they are bound to keep back what is necessary for their own families, and by no means to squander it on pardons.
46. Christians should understand that unless they have extra resources, they must hold back what is necessary for their own families and definitely should not waste it on indulgences.
47. Christians are to be taught that the buying of pardons is a matter of free will, and not of commandment.
47. Christians should learn that purchasing pardons is a choice, not a requirement.
48. Christians are to be taught that the pope, in granting pardons, needs, and therefore desires, their devout prayer for him more than the money they bring.
48. Christians should understand that the pope, when granting pardons, needs and values their sincere prayers for him more than the money they offer.
49. Christians are to be taught that the pope's pardons are useful, if they do not put their trust in them; but altogether harmful, if through them they lose their fear of God.[14]
49. Christians should be taught that the pope's pardons are beneficial, as long as they don’t rely on them too much; but they can be completely harmful if they cause people to lose their fear of God.[14]
50. Christians are to be taught that if the pope knew the exactions of the pardon-preachers, he would rather that St. Peter's church should go to ashes, than that it should be built up with the skin, flesh and bones of his sheep.
50. Christians should understand that if the pope knew about the demands of the indulgence preachers, he would prefer that St. Peter's church burn down than be constructed from the skin, flesh, and bones of his flock.
51. Christians are to be taught that it would be the pope's wish, as it is his duty, to give of his own money to very many of those from whom certain hawkers of pardons cajole money, even though the church of St. Peter might have to be sold.
51. Christians should be taught that the pope would want, as it is his responsibility, to give his own money to many of those from whom certain sellers of indulgences are tricking money, even if it means selling the church of St. Peter.
53. The assurance of salvation by letters of pardon is vain, even though the commissary,[15] nay, even though the pope himself, were to stake his soul upon it.
53. The guarantee of salvation through letters of pardon is pointless, even if the commissary,[15] or even the pope himself, were to risk his own soul on it.
53. They are enemies of Christ and of the pope, who bid the Word of God be altogether silent in some Churches, in order that pardons may be preached in others.
53. They are enemies of Christ and the pope, who insist that the Word of God should be completely silent in some churches so that pardons can be preached in others.
54. Injury is done the Word of God when, in the same sermon, an equal or a longer time is spent on pardons than on this Word.[16]
54. The Word of God is undermined when, in the same sermon, equal or more time is spent on discussing pardons than on this Word.[16]
55. It must be the intention of the pope that if pardons, which are a very small thing, are celebrated with one bell, with single processions and ceremonies, then the Gospel, which is the very greatest thing, should be preached with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.
55. The pope must intend that if pardons, which are a pretty minor matter, are celebrated with one bell, a single procession, and simple ceremonies, then the Gospel, which is the most important thing, should be preached with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, and a hundred ceremonies.
56. The "treasures of the Church," [17] out of which the pope grants indulgences, are not sufficiently named or known among the people of Christ.
56. The "treasures of the Church," [17] from which the pope grants indulgences, are not well known or recognized among the followers of Christ.
57. That they are not temporal treasures is certainly evident, for many of the vendors do not pour out such treasures so easily, but only gather them.
57. It's obvious that they aren't temporary treasures, since many of the vendors don't readily share these treasures but instead only collect them.
58. Not are they the merits of Christ and the Saints, for even without the pope, these always work grace for the inner man, and the cross, death, and hell for the outward man.
58. They aren't just the merits of Christ and the Saints, because even without the pope, these always bring grace to the inner man, and the cross, death, and hell for the outer man.
59. St. Lawrence said that the treasures of the Church were the Church's poor, but he spoke according to the usage of the word in his own time.
59. St. Lawrence said that the treasures of the Church were the Church's poor, but he spoke based on the meaning of the term in his time.
60. Without rashness we say that the keys of the Church, given by Christ's merit, are that treasure;
60. Without being reckless, we say that the keys of the Church, given by Christ's merit, are that treasure;
61. For it is clear that for the remission of penalties and of reserved cases, the power of the pope is of itself sufficient.
61. It is clear that the pope's authority is sufficient on its own for forgiving penalties and handling special cases.
62. The true treasure of the Church is the Most Holy Gospel of the glory and the grace of God.
62. The real treasure of the Church is the Most Holy Gospel of the glory and grace of God.
63. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be last.
63. But this treasure is incredibly unpleasant, because it makes the first come last.
64. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is naturally most acceptable, for it makes the last to be first.
64. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is obviously appealing, as it allows the last to become first.
65. Therefore the treasures of the Gospel are nets with which they formerly were wont to fish for men of riches.
65. So the treasures of the Gospel are like nets that were once used to catch wealthy people.
66. The treasures of the indulgences are nets with which they now fish for the riches of men.
66. The treasures of indulgences are like nets used to catch people's wealth.
67. The indulgences which the preachers cry as the "greatest graces" are known to be truly such, in so far as they promote gain.
67. The indulgences that preachers call the "greatest graces" are understood to be genuinely so, as far as they lead to profit.
68. Yet they are in truth the very smallest graces compared with the grace of God and the piety of the Cross.
68. Yet they are truly the very smallest blessings compared to the grace of God and the faith of the Cross.
69. Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of apostolic pardons, with all reverence.
69. Bishops and priests are required to welcome the representatives of apostolic pardons with utmost respect.
70. But still more are they bound to strain all their eyes and attend with all their ears, lest these men preach their own dreams instead of the commission of the pope.
70. But they are even more obligated to focus all their attention and listen carefully, so these men don’t end up preaching their own ideas instead of the pope’s message.
71. He who speaks against the truth of apostolic pardons, let him be anathema and accursed!
71. Anyone who speaks out against the truth of apostolic pardons should be considered anathema and cursed!
73. But he who guards against the lust and license of the pardon-preachers, let him be blessed!
73. But those who protect themselves from the desires and excesses of the forgiveness preachers, may they be blessed!
73. The pope justly thunders[18] against those who, by any art, contrive the injury of the traffic in pardons.
73. The pope rightly condemns those who, by any means, cause harm to the sale of indulgences.
74. But much more does he intend to thunder against those who use the pretext of pardons to contrive the injury of holy love and truth.
74. But he really plans to go after those who use forgiveness as an excuse to harm sacred love and truth.
75. To think the papal pardons so great that they could absolve a man even if he had committed an impossible sin and violated the Mother of God—this is madness.[19]
75. To believe that papal pardons are so powerful that they could forgive a person even if he had committed an unthinkable sin and disrespected the Mother of God—this is insane.[19]
76. We say, on the contrary, that the papal pardons are not able to remove the very least of venial sins, so far as its guilt is concerned.[20]
76. We disagree, stating that papal pardons cannot remove even the smallest venial sin in terms of guilt.[20]
77. It is said that even St. Peter, if he were now Pope, could not bestow greater graces; this is blasphemy against St. Peter and against the pope.
77. It is said that even St. Peter, if he were Pope today, could not grant greater blessings; this is disrespectful to St. Peter and to the pope.
78. We say, on the contrary, that even the present pope, and any pope at all, has greater graces at his disposal; to wit, the Gospel, powers, gifts of healing, etc., as it is written in I. Corinthians xii.
78. We argue that even the current pope, and any pope in general, has access to greater blessings, such as the Gospel, miraculous powers, and gifts of healing, as it is stated in I Corinthians xii.
79. To say that the cross, emblazoned with the papal arms, which is set up [by the preachers of indulgences], is of equal worth with the Cross of Christ, is blasphemy.
79. Claiming that the cross, marked with the papal emblem, set up by the indulgence preachers, holds the same value as the Cross of Christ is blasphemy.
80. The bishops, curates and theologians who allow such talk to be spread among the people, will have an account to render.
80. The bishops, priests, and theologians who let this kind of talk circulate among the people will have to answer for it.
81. This unbridled preaching of pardons makes it no easy matter, even for learned men, to rescue the reverence due to the pope from slander, or even from the shrewd questionings of the laity.
81. This rampant preaching of forgiveness makes it challenging, even for knowledgeable individuals, to defend the respect owed to the pope from criticism, or even from the clever inquiries of everyday people.
82. To wit:—"Why does not the pope empty purgatory, for the sake of holy love and of the dire need of the souls that are there, if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a Church? The former reasons would be most just; the latter is most trivial."
82. To put it simply: "Why doesn't the pope clear out purgatory for the sake of holy love and the desperate need of the souls there, if he frees countless souls for the sake of pathetic money to build a Church? The first reasons would be completely justified; the latter is utterly trivial."
83. Again:—"Why are mortuary and anniversary masses for the dead continued, and why does he not return or permit the withdrawal of the endowments founded on their behalf, since it is wrong to pray for the redeemed?"
83. Again:—“Why do we continue to have memorial and anniversary masses for the dead, and why doesn’t he return or allow the withdrawal of the funds set up for them, since it’s wrong to pray for those who are already saved?”
84. Again:—"What is this new piety of God and the pope, that for money they allow a man who is impious and their enemy to buy out of purgatory the pious soul of a friend of God, and do not rather, because of that pious and beloved soul's own need, free it for pure love's sake?"
84. Again:—"What is this new devotion to God and the pope, that for money they let a wicked person and their enemy buy the release of a faithful soul from purgatory, instead of freeing that pious and beloved soul out of genuine love for its own need?"
85. Again:—"Why are the penitential canons,[21] long since in actual fact and through disuse abrogated and dead, now satisfied by the granting of indulgences, as though they were still alive and in force?"
85. Again:—"Why are the penitential canons,[21] which have long been practically abolished and forgotten, now being met with the granting of indulgences, as if they were still active and in effect?"
86. Again:—"Why does not the pope, whose wealth is to-day greater than the riches of the richest, build just this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of poor believers?"
86. Again:—"Why doesn’t the pope, whose wealth today is greater than the riches of the richest, build just this one church of St. Peter with his own money, instead of using the money of poor believers?"
87. Again:—"What is it that the pope remits, and what participation[22] does he grant to those who, by perfect contrition, have a right to full remission and participation?"
87. Again:—"What does the pope forgive, and what participation does he offer to those who, through true remorse, are entitled to full forgiveness and participation?"
88. Again:—"What greater blessing could come to the Church than if the pope were to do a hundred times a day what he now does once,[23] and bestow on every believer these remissions and participations?"
88. Again:—"What greater blessing could come to the Church than if the pope were to do a hundred times a day what he currently does once,[23] and grant every believer these remissions and participations?"
89. "Since the pope, by his pardons, seeks the salvation of souls rather than money, why does he suspend the indulgences and pardons granted heretofore, since these have equal efficacy?" [24]
89. "Since the pope, through his pardons, aims for the salvation of souls instead of money, why does he put a hold on the indulgences and pardons given previously, since these have the same effect?" [24]
90. To repress these arguments and scruples of the laity by force alone, and not to resolve them by giving reasons, is to expose the Church and the pope to the ridicule of their enemies, and to make Christians unhappy.
90. To silence these arguments and concerns of the laypeople through force alone, without addressing them with reasons, is to invite mockery from the Church's and the pope's opponents, and to create unhappiness among Christians.
91. If, therefore, pardons were preached according to the spirit and mind of the pope, all these doubts would be readily resolved; nay, they would not exist.
91. If, then, pardons were promoted in line with the beliefs and intentions of the pope, all these doubts would be easily resolved; in fact, they wouldn't exist at all.
92. Away, then, with all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, "Peace, peace," and there is no peace! [Ezek. 13:10]
92. Enough of those prophets who tell the people of Christ, "Peace, peace," when there is no peace! [Ezek. 13:10]
93. Blessed be all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, "Cross, cross," and there is no cross![25]
93. Blessed are all those prophets who tell the people of Christ, "Cross, cross," and there is no cross!
94. Christians are to be exhorted that they be diligent in following Christ, their Head, through penalties, deaths, and hell;
94. Christians are encouraged to be committed to following Christ, their leader, despite hardships, death, and hell;
95. And thus be confident of altering into heaven rather through many tribulations, than through the assurance of peace. [Acts 14:22]
95. So be sure that you’re entering heaven more through many struggles than through simply feeling safe. [Acts 14:22]
FOOTNOTES
[1] Matt. 4:17. Greek, µeta??e?te; English "repent"; German Bussetun. The Latin and German versions may also be rendered, "Do penance"; the Greek, on the other hand, can only mean "Repent."
[1] Matt. 4:17. Greek, µeta??e?te; English "repent"; German Bussetun. The Latin and German versions may also be translated as "Do penance"; however, the Greek can only mean "Repent."
[2] The Roman theology distinguishes between the "guilt" and the "penalty" of sin. See Introduction, p.19.
[2] Roman theology makes a distinction between the "guilt" and the "penalty" of sin. See Introduction, p.19.
[3] Decrees of the Church, having the force of law. The canons referred to here and below (Cf. Theses 8, 85) are the so-called penitential Canons. See Introduction, p.17.
[3] Church decrees that hold the weight of law. The canons mentioned here and below (See Theses 8, 85) are the penitential Canons. Refer to the Introduction, p.17.
[4] Commenting on this Thesis in the Resolutions, Luther distinguishes between "temporal" and "eternal" necessity. "Necessity knows no law." "Death is the necessity of necessities" (Weimar Ed., I, 549; Erl. Ed. op. var. arg., II, 166).
[4] Commenting on this Thesis in the Resolutions, Luther distinguishes between "temporal" and "eternal" necessity. "Necessity knows no law." "Death is the necessity of necessities" (Weimar Ed., I, 549; Erl. Ed. op. var. arg., II, 166).
[5] This is not a denial of the power of the keys, i. e., the power to forgive and retain sin, but merely that the power of the keys extends to purgatory.
[5] This does not deny the authority of the keys, meaning the ability to forgive and hold onto sin, but simply states that the authority of the keys also applies to purgatory.
[6] i. e., Merely human doctrine.
[6] i. e., Just human belief.
[7] An alleged statement of indulgence-vendors. See Letter to Mainz and Introduction.
[7] A supposed statement from indulgence sellers. See Letter to Mainz and Introduction.
[8] Luther refers again to this story in the Resolutions (Weimar Ed., I, p.586). The story is that these saints preferred to remain longer in purgatory that they might have greater glory in heaven. Luther adds, "Whoever will, may believe in these stories; it is no concern of mine."
[8] Luther refers again to this story in the Resolutions (Weimar Ed., I, p.586). The story is that these saints chose to stay longer in purgatory so they could have greater glory in heaven. Luther adds, "Anyone who wants to can believe these stories; it's not my concern."
[9] Luther uses the terms "pardon" and "indulgence" interchangeably.
[9] Luther uses the terms "pardon" and "indulgence" interchangeably.
[10] For meaning of the term "satisfaction," see Introduction, p. 19f.
[10] For the meaning of the term "satisfaction," see Introduction, p. 19f.
[11] Privileges entitling their holder to choose his own confessor and relieving him of certain satisfactions. See Introduction, p. 22.
[11] Privileges that allow the holder to select their own confessor and free them from certain obligations. See Introduction, p. 22.
[12] See above, Thesis 6.
See above, Thesis 6.
[13] i. e., "Papal."
"Papacy."
[14] Cf. Thesis 32.
[14] See Thesis 32.
[15] The commissioner who sold the letters of indulgence.
[15] The commissioner who sold the indulgence letters.
[16] The best texts read illi, "on it," i. e., the Word of God. The Erl. Ed. has a variant verbis evangelics, "the words of the Gospel" (op. var. arg., I, 289).
[16] The best texts read illi, "on it," meaning the Word of God. The Erl. Ed. includes a variant verbis evangelics, "the words of the Gospel" (op. var. arg., I, 289).
[17] See Introduction, p. 20, note 2.
[17] See Introduction, p. 20, note 2.
[18] i. e., Threatens with "thunder-bolt" of excommunication.
[18] i. e., Threatens with the "lightning strike" of excommunication.
[19] See Letter to Mainz, above p. 26. For repetition and defense of the statement against which Luther here protests, see Disp. I. Jo Tetzelii, Th. 99-101; Loescher. I, 513.
[19] See Letter to Mainz, above p. 26. For a restatement and defense of the claim that Luther is protesting against here, see Disp. I. Jo Tetzelii, Th. 99-101; Loescher. I, 513.
[20] Cf. Thesis 6.
[20] See Thesis 6.
[21] Cf. Thesis 5 and note.
[21] See Thesis 5 and note.
[22] Cf. Theses 36, 37.
[22] See Theses 36, 37.
[23] The letter of indulgence entitled its possessor to absolution "once in life and in the article of death."
[23] The letter of indulgence allowed its holder to receive forgiveness "once in life and at the time of death."
[24] During the time when the Jubilee-indulgences were preached, other Indulgences were suspended.
[24] During the time when the Jubilee indulgences were promoted, other indulgences were put on hold.
[25] In a letter to Michael Dressel, 22 June, 1516, Luther had written: "It is not that man, therefore whom no one disturbs who has peace—which is indeed, the peace of the world—but he whom all men and all things harass and who bears all quietly with joy. You say with Israel: 'Peace, peace,' and there is no peace; say rather with Christ, 'Cross, cross' and there is no cross. For the cross ceases to be a cross as soon as you say joyfully: 'Blessed cross, there is no tree like you'" (Preserved Smith, Luther, p. 32).
[25] In a letter to Michael Dressel, June 22, 1516, Luther wrote: "It isn't the person who isn't bothered by anyone who has real peace—which is just the peace of the world—but the one who is troubled by everyone and everything and still remains calm and joyful. You cry out with Israel: 'Peace, peace,' but there's no peace; instead, say with Christ, 'Cross, cross' and there's no cross. The cross stops being a cross as soon as you can say joyfully: 'Blessed cross, there's no tree like you'" (Preserved Smith, Luther, p. 32).
III
LETTER TO JOHN STAUPITZ ACCOMPANYING THE "RESOLUTIONS" TO THE XCV THESES
1518
1518
To his Reverend and Dear Father
To his Reverend and Dear Father
JOHN STAUPITZ,
Professor of Sacred Theology, Vicar of the Augustinian Order,
Professor of Sacred Theology, Vicar of the Augustinian Order,
Brother Martin Luther,
Brother Martin Luther,
his pupil,
his student,
sendeth greeting.
send greetings.
I remember, dear Father, that once, among those pleasant and wholesome talks of thine, with which the Lord Jesus ofttimes gives me wondrous consolation, the word poenitentia[1] was mentioned. We were moved with pity for many consciences, and for those tormentors who teach, with rules innumerable and unbearable, what they call a modus confitendi.[2] Then we heard thee say as with a voice from heaven, that there is no true penitence which does not begin with love of righteousness and of God, and that this love, which others think to be the end and the completion of penitence, is rather its beginning.
I remember, dear Father, that once, during one of those enjoyable and uplifting conversations of yours, which often bring me amazing comfort from the Lord Jesus, the term poenitentia[1] came up. We felt deep sympathy for many troubled souls and for the harsh teachers who impose countless and unbearable rules about what they call a modus confitendi.[2] Then we heard you say, as if it were a voice from heaven, that true repentance only begins with a love for righteousness and for God, and that this love, which others see as the goal and completion of repentance, is in fact just its starting point.
This word of thine stuck in me like a sharp arrow of the mighty, [Ps. 120:4] and from that time forth I began to compare it with the texts of Scripture which teach penitence. Lo, there began a joyous game! The words frollicked with me everywhere! They laughed and gamboled around this saying. Before that there was scarcely a word in all the Scriptures more bitter to me than "penitence," though I was busy making pretences to God and trying to produce a forced, feigned love; but now there is no word which has for me a sweeter or more pleasing sound than "penitence." For God's commands are sweet, when we find that they are to be read not in books alone, but in the wounds of our sweet Saviour.
This word of yours pierced me like a sharp arrow from the powerful, [Ps. 120:4] and from that moment on, I started to compare it with the scriptures about repentance. Suddenly, a joyful game began! The words danced with me everywhere! They laughed and played around this saying. Before that, "repentance" was one of the most bitter words in all the scriptures for me, even though I was busy pretending to God and trying to create a forced, fake love; but now, there’s no word that sounds sweeter or more pleasing to me than "repentance." God's commands are sweet when we realize they aren't just found in books, but also in the wounds of our beloved Savior.
After this it came about that, by the grace of the learned men who dutifully teach us Greek and Hebrew, I learned that this word is in Greek metanoia and is derived from meta and noun, i. e., post and mentem,[3] so that poenitentia or metanoia is a "coming to one's senses," and is a knowledge of one's own evil, gained after punishment has been accepted and error acknowledged; and this cannot possibly happen without a change in our heart and our love. All this answers so aptly to the theology of Paul, that nothing, at least in my judgment, can so aptly illustrate St. Paul.
After this, I learned from the knowledgeable teachers who guide us in Greek and Hebrew that this word is Greek metanoia, which comes from meta and noun, meaning post and mentem,[3] so that poenitentia or metanoia refers to a "coming to one's senses." It's an awareness of one’s own wrongdoings, achieved after accepting punishment and acknowledging mistakes; this cannot happen without a change in our hearts and our love. All of this aligns so well with Paul's theology that, in my opinion, nothing could better illustrate St. Paul.
Then I went on and saw that metanoia can be derived, though not without violence, not only from post and mentem, but also from trans and mentem, [4] so that metanoia signifies a changing[5] of the mind and heart, because it seemed to indicate not only a change of the heart, but also a manner of changing it, i. e., the grace of God. For that "passing over of the mind," [6] which is true repentance, is of very frequent mention in the Scriptures. Christ has displayed the true significance of that old word "Passover"; and long before the Passover, [Ex. 19:11] Abraham was a type of it, when he was called a "pilgrim," [1 Cor. 5:7] i. e., a "Hebrew," [7] that is to say, one who "passed over" into Mesopotamia, as the Doctor of Bourgos[8] learnedly explains. With this accords, too, the title of the Psalm [Ps. 39] in which Jeduthun, i. e., "the pilgrim," [9] is introduced as the singer.
Then I continued and saw that metanoia can be derived, though not without some difficulty, not only from post and mentem, but also from trans and mentem, [4] so that metanoia signifies a changing[5] of the mind and heart, because it seemed to indicate not only a change of the heart, but also a way of changing it, i.e., the grace of God. For that "passing over of the mind," [6] which is true repentance, is mentioned very frequently in the Scriptures. Christ has revealed the true meaning of that old word "Passover"; and long before the Passover, [Ex. 19:11] Abraham was a foreshadowing of it when he was called a "pilgrim," [1 Cor. 5:7] i.e., a "Hebrew," [7] that is to say, one who "passed over" into Mesopotamia, as the Doctor of Bourgos[8] skillfully explains. This also aligns with the title of the Psalm [Ps. 39] in which Jeduthun, i.e., "the pilgrim," [9] is introduced as the singer.
Depending on these things, I ventured to think those men false teachers who ascribed so much to works of penitence that they left us scarcely anything of penitence itself except trivial satisfactions[10] and laborious confession, because, forsooth, they had derived their idea from the Latin words poenitentiam agere,[11] which indicate an action, rather than a change of heart, and are in no way an equivalent for the Greek metanoia.
Depending on these things, I dared to believe those men were false teachers who emphasized works of penance so much that they left us with hardly anything of actual repentance, except for meaningless satisfactions and tedious confessions. This is because they based their idea on the Latin phrase poenitentiam agere, which signifies an action, rather than a change of heart, and is not at all equivalent to the Greek metanoia.
While this thought was boiling in my mind, suddenly new trumpets of indulgences and bugles of remissions began to peal and to bray all about us; but they were not intended to arouse us to keen eagerness for battle. In a word, the doctrine of true penitence was passed by, and they presumed to praise not even that poorest part of penitence which is called "satisfaction," [12] but the remission of that poorest part of penitence; and they praised it so highly that such praise was never heard before. Then, too, they taught impious and false and heretical doctrines with such authority (I wished to say "with such assurance") that he who even muttered anything to the contrary under his breath, would straightway be consigned to the flames as a heretic, and condemned to eternal malediction.
While this thought was swirling in my mind, suddenly new trumpets of indulgences and bugles of remissions started sounding all around us; but they weren't meant to inspire us to a fierce eagerness for battle. In short, the idea of true repentance was ignored, and they didn't even bother to praise the simplest aspect of repentance known as "satisfaction," [12] but instead celebrated the removal of that simplest aspect of repentance; and they praised it so highly that such acclaim had never been heard before. Additionally, they taught impious, false, and heretical doctrines with such confidence (I meant to say "with such certainty") that anyone who even whispered anything to the contrary under their breath would immediately be thrown into the flames as a heretic and condemned to eternal damnation.
Unable to meet their rage half-way, I determined to enter a modest dissent, and to call their teaching into question, relying on the opinion of all the doctors and of the whole Church, that to render satisfaction is better than to secure the remission of satisfaction, i. e., to buy indulgences. Nor is there anybody who ever taught otherwise. Therefore, I published my Disputation;[13] in other words, I brought upon my head all the curses, high, middle and low, which these lovers of money (I should say "of souls") are able to send or to have sent upon me. For these most courteous men, armed, as they are, with very dense acumen, since they cannot deny what I have said, now pretend that in my Disputation I have spoken against the power of the Supreme Pontiff.[14]
Unable to meet their anger halfway, I decided to express my modest disagreement and question their teachings, relying on the opinions of all the doctors and the entire Church that making amends is better than securing a release from making amends, meaning buying indulgences. No one has ever taught otherwise. Therefore, I published my Disputation; in other words, I brought upon myself all the curses, high, middle, and low, that these money-loving (I should say "soul-loving") individuals can send or have sent against me. These very courteous men, armed with their sharp intellects, since they cannot deny what I have said, now pretend that in my Disputation I have spoken against the authority of the Supreme Pontiff.
That is the reason. Reverend Father, why I now regretfully come out in public. For I have ever been a lover of my corner, and prefer to look upon the beauteous passing show of the great minds of our age, rather than to be looked upon and laughed at. But I see that the bean must appear among the cabbages,[15] and the black must be put with the white, for the sake of seemliness and loveliness.
That’s the reason, Father. That's why I now reluctantly speak out publicly. I’ve always been someone who enjoys my own space, preferring to observe the beautiful spectacle of the great thinkers of our time rather than being the one people look at and laugh at. But I realize that the bean has to stand among the cabbages, and the black must mix with the white, for the sake of appearance and beauty.
I ask, therefore, that thou wilt take this foolish work of mine and forward it, if possible, to the most Excellent Pontiff, Leo X, where it may plead my cause against the designs of those who hate me. Not that I wish thee to share my danger! Nay, I wish this to be done at my peril only. Christ will see whether what I have said is His or my own; and without His permission there is not a word in the Supreme Pontiff's tongue, nor is the heart of the king in his own hand. [Ps. 138:4 (Vulgate), Prov. 21:1] He is the Judge whose verdict I await from the Roman See.
I ask, then, that you take this silly work of mine and send it, if you can, to the most Excellent Pontiff, Leo X, so that it can advocate for me against those who wish me harm. Not that I want you to face my risk! No, I want this to be done solely at my own risk. Christ will determine whether what I’ve said is from Him or just me; and without His approval, there’s not a word in the Supreme Pontiff's mouth, nor is the heart of any king in his own control. [Ps. 138:4 (Vulgate), Prov. 21:1] He is the Judge whose decision I’m waiting for from the Roman See.
As for those threatening friends of mine, I have no answer for them but that word of Reuchlin's—"He who is poor fears nothing; he has nothing to lose." Fortune I neither have nor desire; if I have had reputation and honor, he who destroys them is always at work; there remains only one poor body, weak and wearied with constant hardships, and if by force or wile they do away with that (as a service to God), they will but make me poorer by perhaps an hour or two of life. [John 16:2] Enough for me is the most sweet Saviour and Redeemer, my Lord Jesus Christ, to Whom I shall always sing my song; [Ps. 104:33] if any one is unwilling to sing with me, what is that to me? Let him howl, if he likes, by himself.
As for those threatening friends of mine, I have no response for them except for Reuchlin's saying—"He who is poor fears nothing; he has nothing to lose." I neither have nor want wealth; even if I had reputation and honor, there’s always someone trying to destroy them. All that’s left is this poor body, weak and worn out from constant struggles, and if they manage to take that away (as a supposed service to God), they'll only make me poorer by maybe an hour or two of life. Enough for me is the most sweet Savior and Redeemer, my Lord Jesus Christ, to whom I will always sing my song; if anyone refuses to sing with me, that’s their choice. They can howl by themselves if they want.
The Lord Jesus keep thee eternally, my gracious Father!
The Lord Jesus keep you forever, my gracious Father!
Wittenberg, Day of the Holy Trinity, MDXVIII
Wittenberg, Day of the Holy Trinity, 1518
FOOTNOTES
[1] "Penitence," "repentance," "penance," are all translations of this word. See above, p.29, note 1.
[1] "Penitence," "repentance," and "penance" all translate to this word. See above, p.29, note 1.
[2] The modus confitendi, or "way of confession" is the teaching of what sins are to be confessed to the priest and how they are to be confessed. The subject is discussed fully by Luther in his Discussion of Confession, below, pp. 81-102.
[2] The modus confitendi, or "method of confession," is the guidance on which sins should be confessed to the priest and how they should be confessed. Luther covers this topic in detail in his Discussion of Confession, below, pp. 81-102.
[3] Gr. µet?, Lat., post. Eng., "after"; Gr. ????, Lat., mens, Eng., "mind."
[3] Gr. µet?, Lat., post. Eng., "after"; Gr. ????, Lat., mens, Eng., "mind."
[4] The Greek µet? can also be translated by the Latin trans, which, in compounds, denotes movement from one place, or thing, or condition, to another.
[4] The Greek µet? can also be translated by the Latin trans, which, in compounds, indicates movement from one location, object, or state to another.
[5] Lat. transmutatio, "the act or process of changing," not simply "a change" (mutatio).
[5] Lat. transmutatio, "the act or process of changing," not just "a change" (mutatio).
[6] Transitus mentis.
Mind transition
[7] The derivative of the term "Hebrew" is still disputed (v. PRE3 VII, p.507). Luther conceives it to mean transitor, "one who passes through tor across the land," "a pilgrim." Cf. Genesis 12:6.
[7] The origin of the term "Hebrew" is still debated (v. PRE3 VII, p.507). Luther interprets it to mean transitor, "one who passes through or across the land," "a traveler." Cf. Genesis 12:6.
[8] Burgenesis, i. e. Paul of Bourgos (1353-1435).
[8] Burgenesis, meaning Paul of Bourgos (1353-1435).
[9] Another bit of Mediæval philology.
[9] Another piece of Medieval philology.
[10] See Introduction, p. 19.
See Intro, p. 19.
[11] Cf. Thesis 1, and foot-note.
[11] See Thesis 1, and footnote.
[12] Here again, as above, we have the double sense of poentitentia. Satisfaction is a part of sacramental penance. Luther's charge is that in preaching the remission of this part of the Sacrament the doctrine of true penitence (cf. Thesis 1) is passed by.
[12] Here again, as mentioned above, we have the dual meaning of poentitentia. Satisfaction is one aspect of sacramental penance. Luther's accusation is that when preaching the forgiveness of this part of the Sacrament, the teaching of genuine repentance (cf. Thesis 1) is overlooked.
[13] The Ninety-five Theses.
The Ninety-Five Theses.
[14] Tetzel's reply to the Theses (Disputatio II, Jo. Tetzelli), 1517. Loescher, I, pp. 517 ff.
[14] Tetzel's response to the Theses (Disputatio II, Jo. Tetzelli), 1517. Loescher, I, pp. 517 ff.
[15] A Latin adage, chorcorus inter olern.
[15] A Latin adage, chorcorus inter olern.
IV
LETTER TO POPE LEO X, ACCOMPANYING THE "RESOLUTIONS" TO THE XCV THESES 1518
To the
To the
Most Blessed Father,
Most Gracious Father,
LEO X.
Martin Luther,
Martin Luther,
Augustinian Friar,
Augustinian Monk,
wisheth everlasting welfare.
wishes everlasting well-being.
I have heard evil reports about myself, most blessed Father, by which I know that certain friends have put my name in very bad odor with you and yours, saying that I have attempted to belittle the power of the keys and of the Supreme Pontiff. Therefore I am accused of heresy, apostasy, and perfidy, and am called by six hundred other names of ignominy. My ears shudder and my eyes are astounded. But the one thing in which I put my confidence remains unshaken—my clear and quiet conscience. Moreover, what I hear is nothing new. With such like decorations I have been adorned in my own country by those same honorable and truthful men, i. e., by the men whose own conscience convicts them of wrong-doing, and who are trying to put their own monstrous doings off on me, and to glorify their own shame by bringing shame to me. But you will deign, blessed Father, to hear the true case from me, though I am but an uncouth child. [Jer. 2:6]
I’ve heard some awful things about myself, most blessed Father, and I know that certain friends have really tarnished my name with you and yours, claiming that I’ve tried to undermine the power of the keys and the Supreme Pontiff. Because of this, I’m accused of heresy, apostasy, and betrayal, and I’m called by six hundred other shameful names. My ears are shocked, and my eyes are wide with disbelief. But the one thing I rely on remains strong—my clear and peaceful conscience. Besides, what I’m hearing isn’t new. I’ve been labeled like this before in my own country by those so-called honorable and honest men, meaning the ones whose own conscience tells them they’ve done wrong, and who are trying to shift their own monstrous actions onto me, attempting to cover their shame by bringing shame to me. But you will kindly listen to my side of the story, blessed Father, even though I’m just an unsophisticated child. [Jer. 2:6]
It is not long ago that the preaching of the Jubilee indulgences[1] was begun in our country, and matters went so far that the preachers of indulgences, thinking that the protection of your name made anything permissible, ventured openly to teach the most impious and heretical doctrines, which threatened to make the power of the Church a scandal and a laughing-stock as if the decretals De abusionibus quaestorum[2] did not apply to them.
It wasn't long ago that the preaching of Jubilee indulgences[1] started in our country, and things went so far that the indulgence preachers, believing that your name provided them with immunity, boldly taught the most immoral and heretical ideas, which risked turning the Church's authority into a joke and a source of shame, as if the decretals De abusionibus quaestorum[2] didn’t apply to them.
Not content with spreading this poison of theirs by word of mouth, they published tracts and scattered them among the people. In these books—to say nothing of the insatiable and unheard of avarice of which almost every letter in them vilely smells—they laid down those same impious and heretical doctrines, and laid them down in such wise that confessors were bound by their oath to be faithful and insistent in urging them upon the people. I speak the truth, and none of them can hide himself from the heat thereof [Ps. 19:6]. The tracts are extant and they cannot disown them. These teachings were so successfully carried on, and the people, with their false hopes, were sucked so dry that, as the Prophet says, "they plucked their flesh from off their bones"; [Mic. 3:2] but they themselves meanwhile were fed most pleasantly on the fat of the land.
Not satisfied with spreading their poison by word of mouth, they published pamphlets and spread them among the people. In these texts—just to mention the insatiable and outrageous greed that practically drips from every letter—they set forth the same impious and heretical teachings, and presented them in such a way that confessors were obligated by their oaths to faithfully and insistently promote them to the people. I'm speaking the truth, and none of them can escape the consequences of it [Ps. 19:6]. The pamphlets exist, and they can't deny them. These teachings were disseminated so effectively, and the people, with their false hopes, were drained so dry that, as the Prophet says, "they plucked their flesh from off their bones" [Mic. 3:2]; meanwhile, those who spread the teachings were comfortably feasting on the abundance of the land.
There was just one means which they used to quiet opposition, to wit, the protection of your name, the threat of burning at the stake, and the disgrace of the name "heretic." It is incredible how ready they are to threaten, even, at times, when they perceive that it is only their own mere silly opinions which are contradicted. As though this were to quiet opposition, and not rather to arouse schisms and seditions by sheer tyranny!
There was only one way they used to silence opposition: by protecting your name, threatening to burn you at the stake, and labeling you a "heretic." It's astonishing how eager they are to threaten, even when they realize it's just their own foolish opinions being challenged. As if that would silence dissent instead of sparking divisions and unrest with their outright tyranny!
None the less, however, stories about the avarice of the priests were bruited in the taverns, and evil was spoken of the power of the keys and of the Supreme Pontiff, and as evidence of this, I could cite the common talk of this whole land. I truly confess that I was on fire with zeal for Christ, as I thought, or with the heat of youth, if you prefer to have it so; and yet I saw that it was not in place for me to make any decrees or to do anything in these matters. Therefore I privately admonished some of the prelates of the Church. By some of them I was kindly received, to others I seemed ridiculous, to still others something worse; for the terror of your name and the threat of Church censures prevailed. At last, since I could do nothing else, it seemed good that I should offer at least a gentle resistance to them, i. e., question and discuss their teachings. Therefore I published a set of theses, inviting only the more learned to dispute with me if they wished; as should be evident, even to my adversaries, from the Preface to the Disputation.[3]
Nonetheless, stories about the greed of the priests were spread in the taverns, and people spoke ill of the power of the keys and the Supreme Pontiff. As proof of this, I could point to the general conversation across the land. I honestly admit I was filled with zeal for Christ, or perhaps it was just youthful passion, if you prefer that explanation; and yet I realized it wasn’t my place to make any decrees or take action in these matters. So, I privately warned some of the Church’s prelates. Some received me kindly, others thought I was ridiculous, and some saw me as something worse; for the fear of your name and the threat of Church sanctions loomed large. Ultimately, since I couldn't do anything else, I felt it was best to offer at least a gentle pushback, meaning to question and discuss their teachings. Therefore, I published a set of theses, inviting only the more educated to debate with me if they wanted; as should be clear, even to my opponents, from the Preface to the Disputation.[3]
Lo, this is the fire with which they complain that all the world is now ablaze! Perhaps it is because they are indignant that I, who by your own apostolic authority am a Master of Theology, have the right to conduct public disputations, according to the custom of all the Universities and of the whole Church, not only about indulgences, but also about God's power and remission and mercy, which are incomparably greater subjects. I am not much moved, however, by the fact that they envy me the privilege granted me by the power of your Holiness, since I am unwillingly compelled to yield to them in things of far greater moment, viz., when they mix the dreams of Aristotle with theological matters, and conduct nonsensical disputations about the majesty of God, beyond and against the privilege granted them.
Look, this is the fire they claim is setting the whole world on fire! Maybe it’s because they’re upset that I, as a Master of Theology by your own apostolic authority, have the right to hold public debates, following the tradition of all the Universities and the entire Church, not just about indulgences, but also about God's power, forgiveness, and mercy, which are much bigger issues. I’m not really affected, though, by their jealousy over the privilege given to me by your Holiness, since I’m reluctantly forced to let them have their way in matters of much greater importance, especially when they mix Aristotle's ideas with theology and engage in ridiculous debates about the majesty of God, which goes against the privileges granted to them.
It is a miracle to me by what fate it has come about that this single Disputation of mine should, more than any other, of mine or of any of the teachers, have gone out into very nearly the whole land. It was made public at our University and for our University only, and it was made public in such wise that I cannot believe it has become known to all men. For it is a set of theses, not doctrines or dogmas, and they are put, according to custom, in an obscure and enigmatic way. Otherwise, if I had been able to foresee what was coming, I should have taken care, for my part, that they would be easier to understand.
It amazes me how it happened that this one debate of mine has spread throughout almost the entire country, more than any other of my works or those of the teachers. It was released at our University and only for our University, in such a way that I can hardly believe it became known to everyone. It's just a set of theses, not doctrines or dogmas, and they are presented in the usual obscure and puzzling manner. Otherwise, if I had been able to predict what would happen, I would have made sure they were easier to grasp.
Now what shall I do? I cannot recant them; and yet I see that marvelous enmity is inflamed against me because of their dissemination. It is unwillingly that I incur the public and perilous and various judgment of men, especially since I am unlearned, dull of brain, empty of scholarship; and that too in this brilliant age of ours, which by its achievements in letters and learning can force even Cicero into the corner, though he was no base follower of the public light. But necessity compels me to be the goose that squawks among the swans.
Now what should I do? I can't take back what I've said; and yet I see that there's incredible hostility aimed at me because of it. I reluctantly find myself facing the public's diverse and dangerous judgments, especially since I'm uneducated, slow-witted, and lack knowledge; and all of this in our brilliant age, which, with its achievements in writing and learning, can even overshadow Cicero, who was no unworthy follower of public thought. But necessity forces me to be the one who speaks out among the swans.
And so, to soften my enemies and to fulfil the desires of many, I herewith send forth these trifling explanations of my Disputation; I send them forth in order, too, that I may be more safe under the defense of your name and the shadow of your protection. In them all may see, who will, how purely and amply I have sought after and cherished the power of the Church and reverence for the keys; and, at the same rime, how unjustly and falsely my adversaries have befouled me with so many names. For if I had been such a one as they wish to make me out, and if I had not, on the contrary, done everything correctly, according to my academic privilege, the Most Illustrious Prince Frederick, Duke of Saxony, Imperial Elector, etc., would never have tolerated such a pest in his University, for he most dearly loves the Catholic and Apostolic truth, nor could I have been tolerated by the keen and learned men of our University. But what has been done, I do because those most courteous men do not fear openly to involve both the Prince and the University in the same disgrace with myself.[4]
And so, to ease my enemies and meet the needs of many, I’m releasing these simple explanations of my Disputation; I’m sharing them to be more secure under your name and the protection you provide. In them, everyone can see how sincerely and fully I’ve pursued and valued the authority of the Church and respect for the keys; and, at the same time, how unfairly and falsely my opponents have smeared my name with so many accusations. Because if I were truly the person they claim I am, and if I hadn’t, in fact, acted appropriately according to my academic standing, the Most Illustrious Prince Frederick, Duke of Saxony, Imperial Elector, etc., would never have allowed such a troublemaker in his University, as he holds Catholic and Apostolic truth in high regard, nor would I have been accepted by the sharp and knowledgeable scholars at our University. But what I’ve done is because those very courteous men do not hesitate to drag both the Prince and the University into the same disgrace with me.
Wherefore, most blessed Father, I cast myself at the feet of your Holiness, with all that I have and all that I am. Quicken, kill, call, recall, approve, reprove, as you will. In your voice I shall recognize the voice of Christ directing you and speaking in you. If I have deserved death, I shall not refuse to die. For the earth is the Lord's and the fulness thereof. [Ps. 24:1] He is blessed forever. Amen.
Wherefore, most blessed Father, I humbly lay myself at your feet, with everything I have and everything I am. Please guide me, correct me, call on me, and bring me back as you see fit. In your voice, I will hear the voice of Christ guiding you and speaking through you. If I deserve to die, I will not resist my fate. For the earth belongs to the Lord, and everything in it. [Ps. 24:1] He is blessed forever. Amen.
May He have you too forever in His keeping. Amen.
May He keep you safe forever. Amen.
ANNO MDXVIII.
FOOTNOTES
[1] See Introduction, pp. 18, 21.
[1] See Introduction, pp. 18, 21.
[2] i. e. The papal laws regulating the methods of collectors of church-funds.
[2] i. e. The church laws that govern how fundraisers for the church collect money.
[3] The Ninety-five Theses.
The Ninety-Five Theses.
[4] See Tetzel's II. Disputation, Theses 47, 48. Loescher, I, p. 522.
[4] See Tetzel's II. Disputation, Theses 47, 48. Loescher, I, p. 522.
A TREATISE ON THE HOLY SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM 1529
A TREATISE ON THE HOLY SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM 1529
INTRODUCTION
This treatise is not a sermon in the ordinary acceptation of the term. It was not preached, but, according to the Latin usage of the word "sermo," was rather "a discourse," "a discussion," "a disputation" concerning baptism. Even in popular usage, the term "sermon" implies careful preparation and the orderly arrangement of thought. Here, therefore, we have a carefully prepared statement of Luther's opinion of the real significance of baptism. Published in November, 1519, and shortly afterward in a Latin translation,[1] it shows that the leading features of his doctrine on this subject were already fixed. With it should be read the chapter in the Large Catechism (1519), and the treatise Von der Wiedertaufe (1538).[2] The treatment is not polemical, but objective and practical. The Anabaptist controversy was still in the future. No objections against Infant Baptism or problems that it suggested were pressing for attention. Nothing more is attempted than to explain in a very plain and practical way how every one who has been baptised should regard his baptism. It commits to writing in an entirely impersonal way a problem of Luther's own inner life, for the instruction of others similarly perplexed.
This essay isn't a sermon in the usual sense. It wasn’t delivered from a pulpit; instead, in the Latin sense of the word "sermo," it’s more like "a discourse," "a discussion," or "a debate" about baptism. Even in everyday language, a "sermon" suggests careful preparation and a structured flow of ideas. Here, we have a well-prepared exposition of Luther's views on the true meaning of baptism. Published in November 1519, and soon after in a Latin translation,[1] it demonstrates that the main aspects of his doctrine on this topic were already established. It should be read alongside the chapter in the Large Catechism (1519) and the treatise Von der Wiedertaufe (1538).[2] The discussion is not confrontational but rather objective and practical. The Anabaptist controversy was still to come. There were no pressing objections to Infant Baptism or the issues it raised at that time. The goal is simply to clarify, in a straightforward and practical manner, how anyone who has been baptized should understand their baptism. It records in an entirely impersonal way a concern from Luther’s own inner life, aimed at helping others who might be equally confused.
He is confronted with a rite universally found in Christendom and nowhere else, the one distinctive mark of a Christian, the seal of a divine covenant. What it means is proclaimed by its very external form. But it is more than a mere object-lesson pictorially representing a great truth. With Luther, Word and Spirit, sign and that which is signified, belong together. Wherever the one is present, there also is the efficacy of the other. The sign is not limited to the moment of administration, and that which is signified is not projected far into the distant future of adult years.
He faces a rite that is found only within Christianity and nowhere else, a unique identifier of a Christian, the mark of a divine promise. Its meaning is expressed through its very appearance. But it’s more than just a visual lesson illustrating a significant truth. With Luther, the Word and Spirit, the sign and what it signifies, go hand in hand. Wherever one is present, the effectiveness of the other is also there. The sign isn’t confined to the moment it’s given, and what it signifies isn’t pushed far into the distant future of adulthood.
The emphatic preference here shown for immersion may surprise those not familiar with Luther's writings. He prefers it as a matter of choice between non-essentials. To quote only his treatise of the next year on the Babylonian Captivity: "I wish that those to be baptised were entirety sunken in the water; not that I think it necessary, but that of so perfect and complete a thing, there should be also an equally complete and perfect sign." [3] It was a form that was granted as permissible in current Orders approved by the Roman Church, and was continued in succeeding Orders.[4] Even when immersion was not used, the copious application of the water was a prominent feature of the ceremony. No one is better qualified to speak on this subject than Prof. Rietschel, himself formerly a Wittenberger: "The form of baptism at Wittenberg is manifest from the picture by L. Cranach on the altar of the Wittenberg Pfarrkirche, in which Melanchthon is administering baptism. At Melanchthon's left hand lies the completely naked child over the foot. With his right hand he is pouring water upon the child's head, from which the water is copiously flowing." [5]
The strong preference for immersion shown here may surprise those who aren't familiar with Luther's writings. He sees it as a matter of choice between non-essentials. To quote his treatise from the following year on the Babylonian Captivity: "I wish that those to be baptized were completely submerged in the water; not that I think it's necessary, but that such a perfect and complete action should also have a similarly complete and perfect sign." [3] This was a practice that was allowed in current Orders approved by the Roman Church and continued in subsequent Orders.[4] Even when immersion wasn't used, the abundant application of water was a key part of the ceremony. No one is better qualified to discuss this than Prof. Rietschel, who was previously a Wittenberger: "The form of baptism at Wittenberg is clear from the painting by L. Cranach on the altar of the Wittenberg Pfarrkirche, where Melanchthon is performing a baptism. To Melanchthon's left, there's a completely naked child over his feet. With his right hand, he is pouring water on the child's head, from which the water is flowing abundantly." [5]
Nor should it be forgotten that the immersion which Luther had in mind was not that of adults, almost unknown at the time, and as he himself says, practically unknown for about a thousand years,[6] but that of infants. In the immersion of infants, he finds two things: first, the sinking of the child beneath the water, and, then, its being raised out, the one signifying death to sin and all its consequences, and the other, the new life into which the child is introduced. Four years later Luther introduced into the revised Order of Baptism which he prepared, the Collect of ancient form, but which the most diligent search of liturgical scholars has thus far been unable to discover in any of the prayers of the Ancient or Mediæval Church, expressing in condensed form this thought. We quote the introduction, as freely rendered by Cranmer in the First Prayer Book of Edward VI: "Almighty and Everlasting God, Which, of Thy justice, didst destroy by floods of water the whole world for sin, except eight persons, whom of Thy mercy Thou didst save, the same time, in the ark; and when Thou didst drown in the Red Sea wicked King Pharaoh with all his army, yet, the same time, Thou didst lead Thy people, the children of Israel, safely through the midst thereof; whereby Thou didst figure the washing of Thy holy baptism, and by the baptism of Thy well-beloved Son, Jesus Christ, didst sanctify the flood of Jordan, and all other waters, to the mystical washing away of sin," etc.[7]
Nor should it be forgotten that the immersion Luther had in mind wasn't for adults, which was quite rare at the time—and as he himself mentions, practically unknown for about a thousand years—but for infants. In the immersion of infants, he sees two things: first, the child going under the water, and then, being lifted out, with the first symbolizing death to sin and all its consequences, and the second representing the new life the child is brought into. Four years later, Luther included in the revised Order of Baptism he created, the ancient Collect, which, despite the thorough efforts of liturgical scholars, has yet to be found in any of the prayers of the Ancient or Medieval Church, expressing this thought concisely. We quote the introduction, as freely rendered by Cranmer in the First Prayer Book of Edward VI: "Almighty and Everlasting God, who, by Your justice, destroyed the whole world with floods of water because of sin, except for eight people whom, out of Your mercy, You saved in the ark; and when You drowned wicked King Pharaoh and his entire army in the Red Sea, yet at the same time, You led Your people, the children of Israel, safely through it; thereby You foreshadowed the washing of Your holy baptism, and by the baptism of Your beloved Son, Jesus Christ, You sanctified the flood of Jordan, and all other waters, for the mystical washing away of sin," etc.
The figure is to him not that of an act, but of a process extending throughout the entire earthly life of the one baptised. Sin is not drowned at once, or its consequences escaped in a moment. It is a graphic presentation in epitome of the entire work of grace with this subject.[8] Life, therefore, in the language of this treatise, is "a perpetual baptism." As the mark of our Christian profession, as the sacramental oath of the soldier of the cross, it is the solemn declaration of relentless warfare against sin, and of life-long devotion to Christ our Leader. As the true bride is responsive to no other love than that of her husband, so one faithful to his baptism is dead to all else. It is as though all else had been sunk beneath the sea.
The figure represents not just an action, but a process that lasts throughout the entire life of the person being baptized. Sin isn’t washed away all at once, nor are its consequences avoided in a single moment. It vividly illustrates the whole journey of grace for this individual. Therefore, in the context of this discussion, life is described as "a continuous baptism." As a hallmark of our Christian faith, and as the sacramental commitment of a soldier of the cross, it is a serious pledge of ongoing battle against sin, and of lifelong loyalty to Christ our Leader. Just as a true bride only responds to her husband’s love, someone faithful to their baptism is turned away from everything else. It’s almost as if everything else has been submerged beneath the sea.
In the distinction drawn between the sacramental sign and the sacramental efficacy in paragraphs seven and eight, the Protestant distinction between justification and sanctification is involved. The one baptised, becomes in his baptism, wholly dead to the condemning power of sin; but so far as the presence of sin is concerned, the work of deliverance has just begun. This is in glaring contrast with the scholastic doctrine that original sin itself is entirely eradicated in baptism.[9] For baptism but begins the constant struggle against sin that ends only with the close of life. Hence the warning against making of baptism a ground for presumption, and against relaxing the earnestness of the struggle upon the assumption that one has been baptised. For unless baptism be the beginning of a new life, it is without meaning.
In the distinction made between the sacramental sign and the sacramental efficacy in paragraphs seven and eight, the Protestant differentiation between justification and sanctification is addressed. The person who is baptized becomes completely dead to the condemning power of sin through their baptism; however, regarding the presence of sin, the process of deliverance has only just started. This sharply contrasts with the scholastic belief that original sin is totally removed in baptism.[9] Baptism only initiates the ongoing battle against sin that continues until the end of life. Therefore, there’s a warning against treating baptism as a reason for complacency and against easing the effort in the struggle, assuming that being baptized is sufficient. Because if baptism isn’t the start of a new life, it’s meaningless.
Nor is the error less fatal which resorts to satisfactions, self-chosen or ecclesiastically appointed, for the forgiveness of sin committed after baptism. For as every sin committed after baptism is a falling away from baptism, all repentance is a return to baptism. No forgiveness is to be found except upon the terms of our baptism. Never changing is God's covenant. If broken on our part, no new covenant is to be sought. We must return to the faith of our childhood or be lost. The Mediæval Church had devised a sacrament of penance to supplement and repair the alleged broken down and inoperative sacrament of baptism. Baptism, so ran the teaching, blotted out the past and put one on a plane to make a new beginning; but, then, when he fell, there was this new sacrament, to which resort could be taken. It was the "second plank," wrote Jerome, "by which one could swim out of the sea of his sins." "No," exclaimed Luther, in the Large Catechism, "the ship of our baptism never goes down. If we fall out of the ship, there it is, ready for our return." [10]
Nor is the mistake any less serious when people turn to personal or church-designated methods for forgiveness of sins committed after baptism. Since every sin committed after baptism represents a departure from baptism, true repentance means returning to baptism. Forgiveness can only be found on the basis of our baptism. God's covenant remains unchanged. If we break it, we shouldn't be looking for a new covenant. We must return to the faith we had as children or we will be lost. The Medieval Church created a sacrament of penance to fix and support what they claimed was a broken and ineffective sacrament of baptism. According to their teaching, baptism wiped away the past and allowed someone to start fresh; however, when someone sinned again, they could turn to this new sacrament for help. It was the "second plank," Jerome wrote, "by which one could swim out of the sea of his sins." "No," Luther declared in the Large Catechism, "the ship of our baptism never sinks. If we fall out of the ship, it’s still there, ready for our return." [10]
There are, then, no vows whatever that can be substitutes for our baptism, or can supplement it. The baptismal vow comprehends everything. Only one distinction is admissible. While the vow made in baptism is universal, binding all alike to complete obedience to God, there are particular spheres in which this general vow is to be exercised and fulfilled. Not all Christians have the same office at the same calling. When one answers a divine call directing him to some specific form of Christian service, the vow made in response to such call is only the re-affirmation and application to a peculiar relation of the one obligatory vow of baptism.[11]
There are no vows that can replace our baptism or add to it. The baptismal vow covers everything. There’s only one distinction that can be made. While the vow made during baptism is universal and requires everyone to fully obey God, there are specific areas where this general vow should be practiced and fulfilled. Not all Christians have the same role or calling. When someone responds to a divine call guiding them to a specific form of Christian service, the vow made in response to that call is simply a reaffirmation and application of the one essential vow of baptism.[11]
While the divine institution and Word of God in baptism are of prime importance, the office of faith must also be made prominent. Faith is the third element in baptism. Faith does not make the sacrament; but faith appropriates and applies to self what the sacrament offers. Non sacramentum, sed fides sacramenti justificat. Nor are we left in doubt as to what is here meant by the term "faith." In paragraph fourteen it is explicitly described. Faith, we are then taught, is nothing else than to look away from self to the mercy of God, as He offers it in the word of His grace, whereof baptism is the seal to every child baptised.
While the divine institution and Word of God in baptism are incredibly important, the role of faith also needs to be emphasized. Faith is the third key element in baptism. Faith doesn’t create the sacrament, but it takes what the sacrament offers and makes it personal. Non sacramentum, sed fides sacramenti justificat. We aren’t left guessing about what is meant by “faith.” In paragraph fourteen, it’s clearly defined. We are taught that faith is simply looking away from oneself and focusing on the mercy of God, as He offers it in the word of His grace, with baptism serving as the seal for every baptized child.
Luther's purpose, in this discussion, being to guard against the Mediæval theory of any opus operatum[12] efficacy in the sacrament, he would have wandered from his subject, if he had entered at this place into any extended discussion of the nature of the faith that is required. A few years later (1528), the Anabaptist reaction, which over-emphasised the subjective, and depreciated the objective side of the sacraments, necessitated a much fuller treatment of the peculiar office of faith with respect to baptism. To complete the discussion, the citation of a few sentences from his treatise, Von der Wiedertaufe, may, therefore, not be without use. Insisting that, important as faith is, the divine Word, and not faith, is the basis of baptism, he shows how one who regards faith, on the part of the candidate for baptism, essential to its validity, can never, if consistent, administer baptism; since there is no case in which he can have absolute certainty that faith is present. Or if one should have doubts as to the validity of his baptism in infancy, because he has no evidence that he then believed, and, for this reason, should ask to be baptised in adult years, then if Satan should again trouble him as to whether, even when baptised the second time, he really had faith, he would have to be baptised a third, and a fourth time, and so on ad infinitum, as long as such doubts recurred.[13] "For it often happens that one who thinks that he has faith, has none whatever, and that one who thinks that he has no faith but only doubts, actually believes. We are not told: 'He who knows that he believes,' or 'If you know that you believe,' but: 'He that believeth shall be saved.' [14] In other words, it is not faith in our faith that is asked, but faith in the Word and institution of God. Again: "Tell me: Which is the greater, the Word of God or faith? Is not the Word of God the greater? For the Word does not depend upon faith, but it is faith that is dependent on God's Word. Faith wavers and changes; but the Word of God abides forever."[15] "The man who bases his baptism on his faith, is not only uncertain, but he is a godless and hypocritical Christian; for he puts his trust in what is not his own, viz., in a gift which God has given him, and not alone in the Word of God; just as another builds upon his strength, wisdom, power, holiness, which, nevertheless, are gifts which God has given us." [16] Even though at the time of baptism there be no faith, the baptism, nevertheless, is valid. For if at the time of marriage, a maiden be without love to the man whom she marries, when, two years later, she has learned to love her husband, there is no need of a new betrothal and a new marriage; the covenant previously made is sufficient.[17]
Luther's goal in this discussion is to protect against the Medieval idea of any opus operatum[12] effectiveness in the sacrament. He would stray off-topic if he dove into a detailed discussion about the nature of the faith required. A few years later (1528), the Anabaptist reaction, which overly stressed the subjective and downplayed the objective aspect of the sacraments, required a much more thorough examination of the specific role of faith regarding baptism. To wrap up the discussion, it may be helpful to quote a few lines from his treatise, Von der Wiedertaufe. He emphasizes that while faith is important, the divine Word—not faith—is what forms the foundation of baptism. He explains that anyone who sees faith as essential for the validity of baptism can never consistently administer it, since there's no scenario where they can be absolutely sure that faith is present. If someone doubts the validity of their infant baptism because they have no proof of belief at that time, and therefore requests to be baptized as an adult, if they continue to question whether they truly had faith upon being baptized a second time, they would need to be baptized again and again ad infinitum as long as those doubts persist.[13] "For it often happens that someone who thinks they have faith actually has none, while someone who believes they have no faith but only doubts, actually believes. We are not told: 'He who knows that he believes,' or 'If you know that you believe,' but: 'He that believeth shall be saved.' [14] In other words, it’s not faith in our faith that’s required, but faith in the Word and institution of God. Again: "Tell me: Which is greater, the Word of God or faith? Isn't the Word of God the greater? Because the Word does not rely on faith; instead, faith relies on God's Word. Faith can fluctuate and change, but the Word of God lasts forever."[15] "A person who bases their baptism on their faith is not only uncertain, but they are a godless and hypocritical Christian, because they place their trust in something that isn’t their own—specifically, in a gift given by God—not solely in the Word of God; similar to someone who relies on their strength, wisdom, power, or holiness, which are also gifts from God." [16] Even if there is no faith present at the time of baptism, the baptism is still valid. For instance, if at the time of marriage a woman lacks love for the man she marries, once she learns to love him two years later, there’s no need for a new engagement or marriage; the original covenant is enough.[17]
In harmony with the stress laid in this treatise upon the fact that baptism is a treasury of consolation offered to the faith of every individual baptised, is the great emphasis which Luther, in other places, was constrained to lay upon personal as distinguished from vicarious faith. Neither the faith of the sponsors, nor that of the Church, for which, according to Augustine, the sponsors speak, avails more than simply to bring the child to baptism, where it becomes an independent agent, with whom God now deals directly. Thus the Large Catechism declares: "We bring the child in the purpose and hope that it may believe, and we pray God to grant it faith, but we do not baptise it upon that, but solely upon the command of God." [18] Still more explicit is a sermon on the Third Sunday after Epiphany; "The words, Mark 16:16, Romans 1:17, and John 3:16, 18 are clear, to the effect that every one must believe for himself, and no one can be helped by the faith of any me else, but only by his own faith." "It is just as in the natural life, no one can be born for me, but I must be born myself. My mother may bring me to birth, but it is I who am born, and no me else." "Thus no one is saved by the faith of another, but solely by his own faith." [19]
In line with the focus of this text on the idea that baptism is a source of comfort offered to the faith of each individual being baptized, there's also a strong emphasis that Luther had to place on personal faith as distinct from vicarious faith. The faith of the sponsors or that of the Church, which sponsors represent according to Augustine, only serves to bring the child to baptism. After baptism, the child becomes an independent entity, and God interacts with the child directly. Therefore, the Large Catechism states: "We bring the child with the intention and hope that it may believe, and we ask God to grant it faith, but we do not baptize it based on that alone, but only on God's command." [18] A sermon on the Third Sunday after Epiphany is even clearer: "The words, Mark 16:16, Romans 1:17, and John 3:16, 18 clearly indicate that everyone must believe for themselves, and no one can benefit from someone else's faith, but only from their own faith." "It's just like in life: no one can be born for me; I must be born myself. My mother may give me life, but it's me who is born, and no one else." "Thus, no one is saved by someone else's faith, but solely by their own faith." [19]
The treatise is found in Weimar Ed., II, 724-737; Erlangen
Ed., XXI, 229-244; St. Louis Ed., X, 2113-2116; Clemen and
Leitzmann, Luthers Werke, I, (1912), 185-195.
The treatise is found in Weimar Ed., II, 724-737; Erlangen
Ed., XXI, 229-244; St. Louis Ed., X, 2113-2116; Clemen and
Leitzmann, Luthers Werke, I, (1912), 185-195.
HENRY E. JACOBS.
Mount Airy, Philadelphia.
Mount Airy, Philly.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Erl. Ed., op. var. arg., III, 394-410.
[1] Erl. Ed., op. var. arg., III, 394-410.
[2] Erl. Ed., XXVI, 256-294.
[2] Erl. Ed., XXVI, 256-294.
[3] Erl. Ed., op. var. arg., V. 66. For an exhaustive treatment of Luther's attitude to immersion, sprinkling, and pouring, see Krauth, Conservative Reformation, 519-544.
[3] Erl. Ed., op. var. arg., V. 66. For a comprehensive analysis of Luther's views on immersion, sprinkling, and pouring, check out Krauth, Conservative Reformation, 519-544.
[4] For formulas, see Höfling, Das Sacrament der Taufe, II. 40.
[4] For formulas, see Höfling, The Sacrament of Baptism, II. 40.
[5] Riechschel, Lehrbuch der Liturgik, II, 67 f.
[5] Riechschel, Textbook of Liturgics, II, 67 f.
[6] "If Infant Baptism were not right, then for one thousand years there was no baptism and no Christian Church," Erl. Ed., XXVI, 287.
[6] "If Infant Baptism isn't right, then for a thousand years there was no baptism and no Christian Church," Erl. Ed., XXVI, 287.
[7] More literally, but with no great difference, in the Lutheran Church Book, p. 323. The Book of Common Prayer, following the II. Prayerbook of Edward VI, has abbreviated it.
[7] More literally, but with no significant difference, in the Lutheran Church Book, p. 323. The Book of Common Prayer, following the II. Prayerbook of Edward VI, has shortened it.
[8] Small Catechism: "Baptism signifies that the old Adam in us is to be drowned and destroyed by daily sorrow and repentance, together with all sins and evil lusts; and that again the new man should daily come forth and rise, that shall live in the presence of God, in righteousness and purity for ever."
[8] Small Catechism: "Baptism means that the old self in us is to be drowned and destroyed through daily sorrow and repentance, along with all sins and harmful desires; and that the new self should emerge and rise every day, so that we can live in the presence of God, in righteousness and purity forever."
[9] Decrees of Trent, Session V, 5: "If any one asserts that the whole of that which has the proper nature of sin is not taken away, but only evaded or not imputed, let him be accursed."
[9] Decrees of Trent, Session V, 5: "If anyone claims that the entire essence of sin is not removed, but only overlooked or not counted, let them be cursed."
[10] Book of Concord, Eng. Trans., p. 475.
[10] Book of Concord, Eng. Trans., p. 475.
[11] Luther recurs to this subject in a subsequent treatise, the Confitendi Ratio, below pp. 81 ff.
[11] Luther revisits this topic in a later essay, the Confitendi Ratio, below pp. 81 ff.
[12] i. e. The theory of the Roman Church that even without the faith of a recipient, the blessing of the sacrament is bestowed.
[12] i. e. The belief of the Roman Church that even if the recipient lacks faith, the blessing of the sacrament is still given.
[13] Erl. Ed., XXVI, 268.
[13] Erl. Ed., vol. 26, p. 268.
[14] Ibid., 269.
Ibid., 269.
[15] Erl. Ed., XXVI, 292.
[15] Erl. Ed., XXVI, 292.
[16] Ibid., 275.
Ibid., 275.
[17] Ibid., 275.
[Ibid.], 275.
[18] Book of Concord, English Translation, p. 473.
[18] Book of Concord, English Translation, p. 473.
[19] Erl. Ed., XI, 63, 48, 2d Ed., XI, 65, 61. See discussion by writer in Lutheran Church Review, XVIII, 598-657, where passages cited may be found with full context translated, together with other statements of Luther and those who followed him, on the same subject.
[19] Erl. Ed., XI, 63, 48, 2d Ed., XI, 65, 61. See discussion by writer in Lutheran Church Review, XVIII, 598-657, where cited passages can be found with full context translated, along with other statements by Luther and his followers on the same topic.
A TREATISE ON BAPTISM
[Sidenote: Meaning of the Word]
[Sidenote: Definition of the Word]
I. Baptism [German, die Taufe] is called in the Greek language baptismos, in Latin mersio, which means to plunge something entirely into the water, so that the water closes over it. And although in many places it is the custom no longer to thrust and plunge children into the font of baptism, but only to pour the baptismal water upon them out of the font, nevertheless the former is what should be done; and it would be right, according to the meaning of the word Taufe, that the child, or whoever is baptised, should be sunk entirely into the water, and then drawn out again; for even in the German tongue the word Taufe comes undoubtedly from the word tief, and means that what is baptised is sunk deep into the water. This usage is also demanded by the significance of baptism, for baptism signifies that the old man and the sinful birth of flesh and blood are to be wholly drowned by the grace of God, as we shall hear. We should, therefore, do justice to its meaning and make baptism a true and complete sign of the thing it signifies.
I. Baptism [German, die Taufe] is referred to in Greek as baptismos and in Latin as mersio, which means to completely immerse something in water so that the water covers it entirely. While in many places it's no longer customary to fully submerge children in the baptismal font, instead opting to pour water over them, the original practice is what should be upheld; according to the word Taufe, it would be appropriate for the child or anyone being baptized to be fully submerged in water and then brought back up. Even in German, the word Taufe undoubtedly comes from tief, which indicates that what is being baptized is submerged deep in water. This practice is also required by the significance of baptism, which represents the complete drowning of the old self and the sinful nature of humanity through God's grace, as we will discuss. Therefore, we should honor its meaning and ensure that baptism serves as a true and complete sign of what it represents.
[Sidenote: The Sign]
[Sidenote: The Sign]
II. Baptism is an external sign or token, which so divides us from all men not baptised, that thereby we are known as a people of Christ, [Heb. 2:10] our Captain, under Whose banner (i. e., the Holy Cross) we continually fight against sin. Therefore in this Holy Sacrament we must have regard to three things—the sign, the significance thereof, and the faith. The sign consists in this, that we are thrust into the water in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost; but we are not left there, for we are drawn out again. Hence the saying, Aus der Taufe gehoben.[1] The sign must, therefore, have both its parts, the putting in and the drawing out.
II. Baptism is an external sign or symbol that separates us from everyone who isn't baptized, marking us as a people of Christ, [Heb. 2:10] our Leader, under Whose banner (i.e., the Holy Cross) we continually strive against sin. Therefore, in this Holy Sacrament, we need to focus on three things—the sign, its meaning, and our faith. The sign consists of us being immersed in water in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; but we're not left there, as we are brought back up. Hence the saying, Aus der Taufe gehoben.[1] The sign must, therefore, include both parts: the immersion and the emerging.
[Sidenote: The Thing Signified]
[Sidenote: The Signified Thing]
III. The significance of baptism is a blessed dying unto sin and a resurrection in the grace of God, so that the old man, which is conceived and born in sin, is there drowned, and a new man, born in grace, comes forth and rises. Thus St. Paul, in Titus iii, calls baptism a "washing of regeneration," [Tit. 3:5] since in this washing man is born again and made new. As Christ also says, in John iii, "Except ye be born again of water and the Spirit of grace, ye shall not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven." [John 3:5] For just as a child is drawn out of its mother's womb and born, and through this fleshly birth is a sinful man and a child of wrath, [Eph. 2:3] so man is drawn out of baptism and spiritually born, and through this spiritual birth is a child of grace and a justified man. Therefore sins are drowned in baptism, and in place of sin, righteousness comes forth.
III. The significance of baptism is a blessed dying to sin and a rising in the grace of God, so that the old self, which is conceived and born in sin, is drowned, and a new self, born in grace, emerges. Thus St. Paul, in Titus 3, refers to baptism as a "washing of regeneration," [Tit. 3:5] since in this washing a person is born again and made new. As Christ also says in John 3, "Unless you are born again of water and the Spirit of grace, you will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven." [John 3:5] Just as a child is drawn out of its mother's womb and born, and through this physical birth is a sinful person and a child of wrath, [Eph. 2:3] so a person is brought out of baptism and spiritually reborn, and through this spiritual birth is a child of grace and a justified person. Therefore, sins are drowned in baptism, and in place of sin, righteousness emerges.
[Sidenote: Its Incompleteness]
[Sidenote: Its Incompleteness]
IV. This significance of baptism, viz., the dying or drowning of sin, is not fulfilled completely in this life, nay, not until man passes through bodily death also, and utterly decays to dust. The sacrament, or sign, of baptism is quickly over, as we plainly see. But the thing it signifies, viz., the spiritual baptism, the drowning of sin, lasts so long as we five, and is completed only in death. Then it is that man is completely sunk in baptism, and that thing comes to pass which baptism signifies. Therefore this life is nothing else than a spiritual baptism which does not cease till death, and he who is baptised is condemned to die; as though the priest, when he baptises, were to say, "Lo, thou art sinful flesh; therefore I drown thee in God's Name, and in His Name condemn thee to thy death, that with thee all thy sins may die and be destroyed." Wherefore St. Paul says, in Romans vi, "We are buried with Christ by baptism into death"; [Rom. 6:4] and the sooner after baptism a man dies, the sooner is his baptism completed; for sin never entirely ceases while this body lives, which is so wholly conceived in sin that sin is its very nature, as saith the Prophet, "Behold I was conceived in sin, and in iniquity did my mother bear me"; [Ps. 51:5] and there is no help for the sinful nature unless it dies and is destroyed with all its sin. So, then, the life of a Christian, from baptism to the grave, is nothing else than the beginning of a blessed death, for at the Last Day God will make him altogether new.
IV. The importance of baptism, which means the death or drowning of sin, isn't fully realized in this life, not until a person goes through physical death and completely returns to dust. The act of baptism, or the symbol of it, is over quickly, as we can see. But what it represents, which is spiritual baptism, the drowning of sin, lasts as long as we live and is finished only in death. That's when a person is completely immersed in baptism, and what baptism represents is fulfilled. Therefore, this life is nothing but a spiritual baptism that continues until death, and whoever is baptized is destined to die; as if the priest, when he baptizes, were to say, "Look, you are sinful flesh; so I drown you in God's Name, and in His Name, I condemn you to death, so all your sins may die and be destroyed with you." This is why St. Paul says in Romans 6, "We are buried with Christ by baptism into death"; [Rom. 6:4] and the sooner someone dies after baptism, the sooner their baptism is complete; because sin never fully stops while this body lives, which is so inherently sinful that sin is part of its very nature, as the Prophet says, "Behold, I was conceived in sin, and in iniquity did my mother bear me"; [Ps. 51:5] and there is no remedy for this sinful nature unless it dies and is destroyed along with all its sin. So, the life of a Christian, from baptism to the grave, is just the start of a blessed death, for on the Last Day, God will make him entirely new.
[Sidenote: Its Completion]
[Sidenote: Its Completion]
V. In like manner the lifting up out of baptism is quickly done, but the thing it signifies, the spiritual birth, the increase of grace and righteousness, though it begins indeed in baptism, lasts until death, nay, even until the Last Day. Only then will that be finished which the lifting up out of baptism signifies. Then shall we arise from death, from sins and from all evil, pure in body and in soul, and then shall we live forever. Then shall we be truly lifted up out of baptism and completely born, and we shall put on the true baptismal garment of immortal life in heaven. As though the sponsors when they lift the child up out of baptism,[2] were to say, "Lo, now thy sins are drowned; we receive thee in God's Name into an eternal life of innocence." For so will the angels at the Last Day raise up all Christians, all pious baptised men, and will there fulfil what baptism and the sponsors signify; as Christ says in Matthew xxiv, "He shall send forth His angels, and they shall gather unto Him His elect from the four places of the winds, and from the rising to the setting of the sun." [Matt 24:31]
V. In the same way, the act of lifting someone out of baptism happens quickly, but what it represents—spiritual birth, the growth of grace and righteousness—though it starts in baptism, continues until death, and even until the Last Day. Only then will what is symbolized by the lifting out of baptism be complete. We will rise from death, from sin, and from all evil, pure in body and soul, and we will live forever. Then we will truly be lifted out of baptism and fully born, and we will wear the true baptismal garment of eternal life in heaven. It's as if the sponsors, when they lift the child out of baptism, are saying, "Look, now your sins are washed away; we welcome you in God's Name into a life of eternal innocence." For on the Last Day, the angels will raise up all Christians, all devout baptized individuals, and fulfill what baptism and the sponsors signify; as Christ says in Matthew 24, "He will send out His angels, and they will gather His chosen ones from the four corners of the earth, from the east to the west." [Matt 24:31]
VI. Baptism was presaged of old in Noah's flood, when the whole world was drowned, save Noah with three sons and their wives, eight souls, who were kept in the ark. That the people of the world were drowned, signifies that in baptism sins are drowned; but that the eight in the ark, with beasts of every sort, were preserved, signifies that through baptism man is saved, as St. Peter explains, [1 Pet. 3:20 f.] Now baptism is by far a greater flood than was that of Noah. For that flood drowned men during no more than one year, but baptism drowns all sorts of men throughout the world, from the birth of Christ even till the Day of Judgment. Moreover, it is a flood of grace, as that was a flood of wrath, as is declared in Psalm xxviii, "God will make a continual new flood." [3] [Ps. 29:10] For without doubt many more people are baptised than were drowned in the flood.
VI. Baptism was foretold long ago in Noah's flood, when the entire world was submerged, except for Noah, his three sons, and their wives—eight people in total—who were saved in the ark. The drowning of the world represents how sins are washed away in baptism; however, the eight individuals in the ark, along with various animals, signify that through baptism, people are saved, as St. Peter explains [1 Pet. 3:20 f.]. Now, baptism is a much greater flood than Noah's. That flood only drowned people for a year, but baptism washes away all kinds of people across the world, from the birth of Christ until the Day of Judgment. Additionally, it is a flood of grace, while Noah's was a flood of wrath, as stated in Psalm 28, "God will create a continual new flood." [3] [Ps. 29:10] Undoubtedly, many more people are baptized than those who were drowned in the flood.
[Sidenote: The Continuance of Sin]
[Sidenote: Continuing Sin]
VII. From this it follows that when a man comes forth out of baptism, he is pure and without sin, wholly guiltless. But there are many who do not rightly understand this, and think that sin is no more present, and so they become slothful and negligent in the killing of their sinful nature, even as some do when they have gone to Confession. For this reason, as I said above,[4] it should be rightly understood, and it should be known that our flesh, so long as it lives here, is by nature wicked and sinful. To correct this wickedness God has devised the plan of making it altogether new, even as Jeremiah shows. The potter, when the pot "was marred in his hand," thrust it again into the lump of clay, and kneaded it, and afterwards made another pot, as it seemed good to him. "So," says God, "are ye in My hands." [Jer. 18:4 f.] In the first birth we are marred; therefore He thrusts us into the earth again by death, and makes us over at the Last Day, that then we may be perfect and without sin.
VII. This means that when someone comes out of baptism, they are pure and free of sin, completely blameless. However, many people don’t fully grasp this and think that sin no longer exists, leading them to become lazy and careless about combating their sinful nature, just like some do after going to Confession. For this reason, as I mentioned earlier,[4] it should be clearly understood that our flesh, as long as it lives here, is inherently wicked and sinful. To fix this wickedness, God has come up with a plan to make it entirely new, as Jeremiah illustrates. The potter, when the pot "was damaged in his hands," put it back into the lump of clay, kneaded it, and then shaped another pot as he desired. "So," says God, "are you in My hands." [Jer. 18:4 f.] In the first birth, we are damaged; therefore He puts us back into the earth through death and recreates us on the Last Day, so that we may be perfect and free from sin.
This plan He begins in baptism, which signifies death and the resurrection at the Last Day, as has been said.[5] Therefore, so far as the sign of the sacrament and its significance are concerned, sins and the man are both already dead, and he has risen again, and so the sacrament has taken place; but the work of the sacrament has not yet been fully done, that is to say, death and the resurrection at the Last Day are yet before us.
This plan starts with baptism, which represents death and resurrection on the Last Day, as mentioned. Therefore, in terms of the act of the sacrament and its meaning, both sins and the person are already dead, and he has risen again, so the sacrament has occurred; however, the full work of the sacrament is not yet complete, meaning that death and resurrection on the Last Day are still ahead of us.
[Sidenote: Sins after Baptism]
[Sidenote: Sins After Baptism]
VII. Man, therefore, is altogether pure and guiltless, but sacramentally, which means nothing else than that he has the sign of God, i. e., baptism, by which it is shown that his signs are all to be dead, and that he too is to die in grace, and at the Last Day to rise again, pure, sinless, guiltless, to everlasting life. Because of the sacrament, then, it is true that he is without sin and guilt; but because this is not yet completed, and he still lives in sinful flesh, he is not without sin, and not in all things pure, but has begun to grow into purity and innocence.
VII. Therefore, humanity is completely pure and guiltless, but sacramentally, which means that they bear the sign of God, i.e., baptism. This shows that their signs are all meant to be dead, and that they too should die in grace, and on the Last Day, rise again—pure, sinless, and guiltless—to everlasting life. Because of the sacrament, it is true that they are without sin and guilt; however, since this is not yet fulfilled and they still live in sinful flesh, they are not without sin and not completely pure, but have started to grow into purity and innocence.
Therefore when a man comes to mature age, the natural, sinful appetites—wrath, impurity, lust, avarice, pride, and the like—begin to stir, whereas there would be none of these if all sins were drowned in the sacrament and were dead. But the sacrament only signifies that they are to be drowned through death and the resurrection at the Last Day. [Rom. 7:18] So St. Paul, in Romans vii, and all saints with him, lament that they are sinners and have sin in their nature, although they were baptised and were holy; and they so lament because the natural, sinful appetites are always active so long as we live.
Therefore, when a man reaches adulthood, the natural sinful desires—anger, impurity, lust, greed, pride, and others—start to arise, whereas there would be none of these if all sins had been washed away in the sacrament and were completely dead. But the sacrament only represents that they are to be washed away through death and resurrection on the Last Day. [Rom. 7:18] So St. Paul, in Romans 7, and all the saints with him, express their sorrow that they are sinners and have sin within them, even though they were baptized and considered holy; they lament this because the natural sinful desires are always active as long as we live.
[Sidenote: Baptism a Covenant]
[Sidenote: Baptism is a Covenant]
IX. But you ask, "How does baptism help me, if it does not altogether blot out and put away sin?" This is the place for the right understanding of the sacrament of baptism. The holy sacrament of baptism helps you, because in it God allies Himself with you, and becomes one with you in a gracious covenant of comfort.
IX. But you ask, "How does baptism help me if it doesn't completely erase my sins?" This is where we need to properly understand the sacrament of baptism. The sacred act of baptism benefits you because through it, God unites with you, forming a gracious covenant of comfort.
[Sidenote: Man's Pledge]
[Note: Man's Pledge]
First of all, you give yourself up to the sacrament of baptism and what it signifies, i. e., you desire to die, together with your sins, and to be made new at the Last Day, as the sacrament declares, and as has been said.[6] This God accepts at your hands, and grants you baptism, and from that hour begins to make you a new man, pours into you His grace and Holy Spirit, Who begins to slay nature and sin, and to prepare you for death and the resurrection at the Last Day.
First of all, you commit yourself to the sacrament of baptism and what it means, which is that you want to die along with your sins and be made new on the Last Day, as the sacrament states, and as has been previously mentioned. This is accepted by God, who grants you baptism, and from that moment, He starts to transform you into a new person, fills you with His grace and the Holy Spirit, who begins to overcome your nature and sin, and prepares you for death and resurrection on the Last Day.
Again, you pledge yourself to continue in this, and more and more to slay your sin as long as you live, even until your death. This too God accepts, and trains and tries you all your life long, with many good works and manifold sufferings; whereby He effects what you in baptism have desired, viz., that you may become free from sin, may die and rise again at the Last Day, and so fulfil your baptism. Therefore, we read and see how bitterly He has let His saints be tortured, and how much He has let them suffer, to the end that they might be quickly slain, might fulfil their baptism, die and be made new. For when this does not happen, and we suffer not and are not tried, then the evil nature overcomes a man, so that he makes his baptism of none effect, falls into sin, and remains the same old man as before.
Once again, you commit to continuing this journey and to increasingly overcoming your sins for the rest of your life, even until your death. God accepts this commitment and guides you throughout your life with many good deeds and various sufferings; through these, He brings about what you desired in baptism: to be freed from sin, to die and rise again on the Last Day, and to fulfill your baptism. Therefore, we read and see how harshly He has allowed His saints to be tested and how much they have endured, all so that they might quickly overcome, fulfill their baptism, die, and be made new. Because when this doesn’t happen, and we don’t suffer or face trials, then our sinful nature wins out, leading a person to nullify their baptism, fall into sin, and remain the same old person as before.
[Sidenote: God's Pledge]
[Side Note: God's Promise]
X. So long, now, as you keep your pledge to God, He, in turn, gives you His grace, and pledges Himself not to count against you the sins which remain in your nature after baptism, and not to regard them or to condemn you because of them. He is satisfied and well-pleased if you are constantly striving and desiring to slay these sins and to be rid of them by your death. For this cause, although the evil thoughts and appetites may be at work, nay, even although you may sin and fall at times, these sins are already done away by the power of the sacrament and covenant, if only you rise again and enter into the covenant, as St. Paul says in Romans viii. No one who believes in Christ is condemned by the evil, sinful inclination of his nature, if only he does not follow it and consent to it; [Rom. 8:1] and St. John, in his Epistle, writes, "If any man sin, we have an Advocate with God, even Jesus Christ, Who has become the forgiveness of our sins." [1 John 2:2 f.] All this takes place in baptism, where Christ is given us, as we shall hear in the remainder of the treatise.
X. As long as you keep your promise to God, He, in turn, gives you His grace and promises not to hold against you the sins that still exist in your nature after baptism, and not to judge you because of them. He is happy and pleased if you are always trying and wanting to overcome these sins and be free of them by your death. For this reason, even though bad thoughts and desires might arise, and even if you might occasionally sin and stumble, these sins are already forgiven through the power of the sacrament and covenant, as long as you get back up and renew the covenant, as St. Paul says in Romans 8. No one who believes in Christ is condemned by the sinful tendencies of their nature, as long as they don’t give in to them; [Rom. 8:1] and St. John, in his Epistle, writes, "If anyone sins, we have an Advocate with God, Jesus Christ, Who is the forgiveness for our sins." [1 John 2:2 f.] All of this happens in baptism, where Christ is given to us, as we will discuss in the rest of this treatise.
[Sidenote: The Comfort of the Covenant]
[Sidenote: The Comfort of the Covenant]
XI. Now if this covenant did not exist, and God were not so merciful as to wink at our sins, there could be no sin so so small but it would condemn us. For the judgment of God can endure no sin. Therefore there is on earth no greater comfort than baptism, for through it we come under the judgment of grace and mercy, which does not condemn our sins, but drives them out by many trials. There is a fine sentence of St. Augustine, which says, "Sin is altogether forgiven in baptism; not in such wise that it is no longer present, but in such wise that it is not taken into account." As though he were to say, "Sin remains in our flesh even until death, and works without ceasing; but so long as we do not consent thereto or remain therein, it is so overruled by our baptism that it does not condemn us and is not harmful to us, but is daily more and more destroyed until our death."
XI. If this agreement didn’t exist, and God weren’t so merciful as to overlook our sins, even the smallest sin would condemn us. God’s judgment cannot tolerate any sin. Therefore, there’s no greater comfort on earth than baptism, which brings us under grace and mercy that doesn’t condemn our sins but drives them away through various trials. There’s a great saying from St. Augustine that goes, "Sin is completely forgiven in baptism; not in the sense that it’s no longer present, but in the sense that it isn’t counted against us." It’s like saying, "Sin remains in our flesh until death and keeps acting out; but as long as we don’t agree with it or stay in it, our baptism overrules it so that it doesn’t condemn us or harm us, and each day it’s gradually destroyed until our death."
For this reason no one should be terrified if he feel evil lust or love, nor should he despair even if he fall, but he should remember his baptism, and comfort himself joyfully with it, since God has there bound Himself to slay his sin for him, and not to count it a cause for condemnation, if only he does not consent to sin or remain in sin. Moreover, these wild thoughts and appetites, and even a fall into sin, should not be regarded as an occasion for despair, but rather as a warning from God that man should remember his baptism and what was there spoken, that he should call upon God's mercy, and exercise himself in striving against sin, that he should even be desirous of death in order that he may be rid of sin.
For this reason, no one should be scared if they feel evil desires or love, nor should they lose hope even if they stumble. Instead, they should remember their baptism and find joy in it, since God has promised to defeat their sin and not use it as a reason for condemnation, as long as they don’t agree to sin or stay in it. Furthermore, these disturbing thoughts and urges, and even falling into sin, shouldn’t be seen as a cause for despair but as a reminder from God to reflect on their baptism and the promises made there. They should call on God’s mercy and work on fighting against sin, even wanting death to escape from sin.
[Sidenote: The Office of Faith]
[Note: The Office of Faith]
XII. Here, then, is the place to discuss the third thing in the sacrament, i. e., faith, to wit, that a man should firmly believe all this; viz., that this sacrament not only signifies death and the resurrection at the Last Day, by which man is made new for an everlasting, sinless life; but also that it assuredly begins and effects this, and unites us with God, so that we have the will to slay sin, even till the time of our death, and to fight against it; on the other hand, that it is His will to be merciful to us, to deal graciously with us, and not to judge us with severity, because we are not sinless in this life until purified through death. Thus you understand how a man becomes in baptism guiltless, pure and sinless, and yet continues full of evil inclinations, that he is called pure only because he has begun to be pure, and has a sign and covenant of this purity, and is always to become more pure. Because of this God will not count against him the impurity which still cleaves to him, and, therefore, he is pure rather through the gracious imputation of God than through anything in his own nature; as the Prophet says in Psalm xxxii, "Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven; blessed is the man unto whom the Lord imputeth not iniquity." [Ps. 52:1 f.]
XII. Here’s the place to talk about the third aspect of the sacrament, which is faith. Specifically, a person should firmly believe all of this; namely, that this sacrament not only symbolizes death and resurrection on the Last Day, through which a person is renewed for an everlasting, sinless life, but also that it truly initiates and accomplishes this and connects us with God. This gives us the determination to overcome sin, even until our death, and to fight against it. On the other hand, it is God's will to be merciful to us, to treat us kindly, and not to judge us harshly, because we are not without sin in this life until we are purified through death. Thus, you can see how a person becomes innocent, pure, and sinless in baptism, yet still has evil inclinations. They are called pure only because they have begun to be pure and have a sign and covenant of this purity, constantly working towards becoming more pure. Because of this, God will not hold against them the impurity that still clings to them, and therefore, they are considered pure more through God’s graciousness than anything inherent in themselves; as the Prophet says in Psalm 32, "Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven; blessed is the man to whom the Lord does not impute iniquity." [Ps. 52:1 f.]
This faith is of all things the most necessary, for it is the ground of all comfort. He who has not this faith must despair in his sins. For the sin which remains after baptism makes it impossible for any good works to be pure before God. For this reason we must hold boldly and fearlessly to our baptism, and hold it up against all sins and terrors of conscience, and humbly say, "I know full well that I have not a single work which is pure, but I am baptised, and through my baptism God, Who cannot lie, has bound Himself in a covenant with me, not to count my sin against me, but to slay it and blot it out."
This faith is the most essential of all, as it is the source of all comfort. Without this faith, one is bound to despair in their sins. The sin that lingers after baptism makes it impossible for any good deeds to be acceptable to God. Therefore, we must confidently and fearlessly cling to our baptism, using it as a shield against all sins and the anxieties of our conscience, and humbly declare, "I know very well that I don't have a single pure action, but I am baptized, and through my baptism, God, who cannot lie, has made a promise to me not to hold my sins against me, but to destroy and erase them."
XIII. So, then, we understand that the innocence which is ours by baptism is so called simply and solely because of the mercy of God, which has begun this work in us, bears patiently with sin, and regards us as though we were sinless, This also explains why Christians are called in the Scriptures the children of mercy, a people of grace, and men of God's good-will. [Eph. 5:1, 9] It is because in baptism they have begun to become pure, [Luke 2:14] and by God's mercy are not condemned with their sins that still remain, until, through death and at the Last Day, they become wholly pure, as the sign of baptism shows.
XIII. So, we understand that the innocence we receive through baptism is called so simply because of God’s mercy, which has initiated this work in us, patiently tolerates our sins, and views us as if we were sinless. This also explains why Christians are referred to in the Scriptures as children of mercy, a grace-filled people, and individuals of God’s goodwill. [Eph. 5:1, 9] It is because through baptism they have started to become pure, [Luke 2:14] and by God’s mercy are not condemned for the sins that still exist until, through death and on the Last Day, they are made completely pure, as signified by baptism.
Therefore they greatly err who think that through baptism they have become wholly pure. They go about in their unwisdom, and do not slay their sin; they will not admit that it is sin; they persist in it, and so they make their baptism of no effect; they remain entangled in certain outward works, and meanwhile pride, hatred, and other evils of their nature are disregarded and grow worse and worse. Nay, not so! Sin and evil inclination must be recognized as truly sin; that it does not harm us is to be ascribed to the grace of God, Who will not count it against us if only we strive against it in many trials, works, and sufferings, and slay it at last in death. To them who do this not, God will not forgive their sins, because they do not live according to their baptism and covenant, and hinder the work which God and their baptism have begun.
Therefore, they are greatly mistaken who think that baptism makes them completely pure. They go about in their ignorance, failing to confront their sins; they won’t acknowledge that it's sin; they cling to it, which renders their baptism ineffective. They remain caught up in certain outward actions, while pride, hatred, and other negative traits are ignored and only get worse. No, that’s not right! Sin and harmful tendencies must be recognized as real sin; if they don’t harm us, it’s due to God’s grace, who won’t hold it against us as long as we fight against it through various trials, actions, and suffering, ultimately conquering it in death. For those who do not do this, God will not forgive their sins because they do not live according to their baptism and covenant and obstruct the work that God and their baptism have begun.
[Sidenote: Baptism and Repentance]
Baptism and Repentance
XIV. Of this sort are they also who think to blot out and put away their sin by "satisfaction," [7] and even regard their baptism lightly, as though they had no more need of it after they had been baptised,[8] and do not know that it is in force all through life, even until death, nay, even at the Last Day, as was said above.[9] For this cause they think to find some other way of blotting out sin, viz., their own works; and so they make, for themselves and for all others, evil, terrified, uncertain consciences, and despair in the hour of death; and they know not how they stand with God, thinking that by sin they have lost their baptism and that it profits them no more.
XIV. There are also those who believe they can erase and get rid of their sin through "satisfaction" [7] and even take their baptism lightly, as if they no longer need it after being baptized [8]. They don't realize that it remains valid throughout their entire life, even until death, and even on the Last Day, as mentioned above [9]. Because of this, they think they can find another way to erase sin, specifically through their own actions. This leads them to create for themselves and for others troubled, fearful, and uncertain consciences, and they live in despair when facing death. They don't understand how they stand with God, believing that their sin has caused them to lose their baptism and that it no longer benefits them.
Guard yourself, by all means, against this error. For, as has been said, if any one has fallen into sin, he should the more remember his baptism, and how God has there made a covenant with him to forgive all his sins, if only he has the will to fight against them, even until death. Upon this truth, upon this alliance with God, a man must joyfully dare to rely, and then baptism goes again into operation and effect, his heart becomes again peaceful and glad, not in his own work or "satisfaction," but in God's mercy, promised him in baptism, and to be held fast forever. This faith a man must hold so firmly that he would cling to it even though all creatures and all sins attacked him, since he who lets himself be forced away from it makes God a liar in His covenant, the sacrament of baptism.
Protect yourself, in every way possible, from this mistake. As has been noted, if someone has sinned, they should remember their baptism even more and how God made a promise to forgive all their sins there, as long as they are willing to fight against them, even until death. On this truth, on this relationship with God, a person must confidently rely, and then baptism becomes active and effective again; their heart becomes peaceful and joyful, not because of their own efforts or "satisfaction," but because of God's mercy, promised to them in baptism and to be held onto forever. This faith must be held so strongly that one would cling to it even if all beings and all sins came against them, because anyone who allows themselves to be swayed from it makes God a liar in His promise, the sacrament of baptism.
[Sidenote: Baptism and Penance]
Baptism and Penance
XV. It is this faith that the devil most attacks. If he overthrows it, he has won the battle. For the sacrament of penance also (of which we have already spoken)[10] has its foundation in this sacrament, since sins are forgiven only to those who are baptised, i. e., to those whose sins God has promised to forgive. The sacrament of penance thus renews and points out again the sacrament of baptism, as though the priest, in the absolution, were to say, "Lo, God hath now forgiven thee thy sin, as He long since hath promised thee in baptism, and as He hath now commanded me, by the power of the keys,[11] and now thou comest again into that which thy baptism does and is. Believe, and thou hast it; doubt, and thou art lost." So we find that through sin baptism is, indeed, hindered in its work, i. e., in the forgiveness and the slaying of sin; yet only by unbelief in its operation is baptism brought to naught. Faith, in turn, removes the hindrance to the operation of baptism. So much depends on faith.
XV. It's this faith that the devil attacks the most. If he can destroy it, he has won the battle. The sacrament of penance, which we've already discussed,[10] is built on this sacrament, since sins are only forgiven to those who are baptized, meaning to those whose sins God has promised to forgive. The sacrament of penance therefore renews and reiterates the sacrament of baptism, as if the priest, during the absolution, were to say, "Look, God has now forgiven you your sin, just as He promised you in baptism, and as He has now commanded me, by the power of the keys,[11] and now you return to what your baptism does and is. Believe, and you have it; doubt, and you are lost." We see that through sin, baptism can indeed be obstructed in its work, meaning in the forgiveness and eradication of sin; yet it is only by unbelief that baptism's effectiveness is nullified. Faith, in turn, removes the obstacles to baptism’s action. So much depends on faith.
[Sidenote: Forgiveness and Sanctification]
[Sidenote: Forgiveness and Growth]
To speak quite plainly, it is one thing to forgive sins, and another thing to put them away or drive them out. The forgiveness of sins is obtained by faith, even though they are not entirely driven out; but to drive out sins is to exercise ourselves against them, and at last it is to die; for in death sin perishes utterly. But both the forgiveness and the driving out of sins are the work of baptism. Thus the Apostle writes to the Hebrews, [Heb. 12:1] who were baptised, and whose sins were forgiven, that they shall lay aside the sin which doth beset them. For so long as I believe that God is willing not to count my sins against me, my baptism is in force and my sins are forgiven, though they may still, in a great measure, remain. After that follows the driving out of my sins through sufferings, death, etc. This is what we confess in the article [of the Creed], "I believe in the Holy Ghost, the forgiveness of sins, etc." Here there is special reference to baptism, for in it the forgiveness takes place through God's covenant with us; therefore we must not doubt this forgiveness.
To be straightforward, forgiving sins is one thing, and actually removing them is another. We receive forgiveness for our sins through faith, even if we're not fully free from them; but removing sins means actively working against them, and ultimately, it requires dying; because in death, sin completely disappears. However, both forgiveness and the removal of sins are part of baptism. The Apostle writes to the Hebrews, [Heb. 12:1] who were baptized and had their sins forgiven, instructing them to lay aside the sin that clings to them. As long as I believe that God is willing to overlook my sins, my baptism is valid, and my sins are forgiven, even if they still largely remain. Following that, we work on ridding ourselves of our sins through suffering, death, and so on. This is what we affirm in the article [of the Creed], "I believe in the Holy Ghost, the forgiveness of sins, etc." Here, there's a specific reference to baptism because forgiveness occurs through God's covenant with us; therefore, we must not doubt this forgiveness.
[Sidenote: Baptism and Suffering]
[Sidenote: Baptism and Suffering]
XVI. It follows, therefore, that baptism makes all sufferings and especially death, profitable and helpful, since these things can only serve baptism in the doing of its work, i. e., in the slaying of sin. For he who would fulfil the work and purpose of his baptism and be rid of sin, must die. It cannot be otherwise. Sin, however, does not like to die, and for this reason it makes death so bitter and so horrible. Such is the grace and power of God that sin, which has brought death, is driven out again by its own work, viz., by death.[12]
XVI. Therefore, baptism makes all sufferings, especially death, meaningful and beneficial, as these experiences only serve to fulfill the purpose of baptism, which is to eliminate sin. To truly achieve the goal of baptism and be free from sin, one must die. There's no other way. However, sin resists death, making it feel painful and frightening. Yet, because of God's grace and power, sin, which leads to death, is ultimately expelled by its own means—death.
You find many people who wish to live in order that they may become righteous, and who say that they would like to be righteous. Now there is no shorter way or manner than through baptism and the work of baptism, i. e., through suffering and death, and so long as they are not willing to take this way, it is a sign that they do not rightly intend or know how to become righteous. Therefore God has instituted many estates in life in which men are to learn to exercise themselves and to suffer. To some He has commanded the estate of matrimony, to others the estate of the clergy, to others, again, the estate of the rulers, and to all He has commanded that they shall toil and labor to kill the flesh and accustom it to death, because for all such as are baptised their baptism has made the repose, the ease, the plenty of this life a very poison, and a hindrance to its work. For in these things no one learns to suffer, to die with gladness, to get rid of sin, and to live in accordance with baptism; but instead of these things there grows love of this life and horror of eternal life, fear of death and unwillingness to blot out sin.
You find many people who want to live so they can become righteous and say they would like to be righteous. However, there’s no quicker way to achieve this than through baptism and the work of baptism, meaning through suffering and death. As long as they are not willing to take this path, it shows they do not truly intend or know how to become righteous. Therefore, God has established many roles in life where people can learn to practice and endure. To some, He has assigned the role of marriage, to others the role of clergy, and to others, the role of rulers. He has commanded everyone to toil and work to overcome their desires and prepare for death, because for all who are baptized, their baptism makes the comfort, ease, and abundance of this life a real poison and an obstacle to their purpose. In these comforts, no one learns to endure, to die joyfully, to rid themselves of sin, or to live according to their baptism; instead, such things foster a love for this life, a fear of eternal life, a fear of death, and a reluctance to eliminate sin.
[Sidenote: Baptism and Good Works]
Baptism and Good Deeds
XVII. Now behold the lives of men. Many there are who fast and pray and go on pilgrimage and exercise themselves in such things, thinking thereby only to heap up merit, and to sit down in the high places of heaven. But fasting and all such exercises should be directed toward holding down the old Adam, the sinful nature, and accustoming it to do without all that is pleasing for this life, and thus daily preparing it more and more for death, so that the work and purpose of baptism may be fulfilled. And all these exercises and toils are to be measured, not by their number or their greatness, but by the demands of baptism; that is to say, each man is to take upon him so much of these works as is good and profitable for the suppressing of his sinful nature and for fitting it for death, and is to increase or diminish them according as he sees that sin increases or decreases. As it is, they go their heedless way, take upon themselves this, that, and the other task, do now this, now that, according to the appearance or the reputation of the work, and again quickly leave off, and thus become altogether inconstant, till in the end they amount to nothing; nay, some of them so rack their brains over the whole thing, and so abuse nature, that they are of no use either to themselves or others.
XVII. Now look at the lives of people. Many fast, pray, go on pilgrimages, and engage in various activities, thinking they are just building up merit to sit in the highest places in heaven. But fasting and other practices should focus on controlling the old self, the sinful nature, getting it used to doing without all that is enjoyable in this life, and preparing it more and more for death each day, so that the purpose of baptism can be fulfilled. These practices and efforts should be measured not by how many or how great they are, but by the requirements of baptism; in other words, each person should take on enough of these tasks that are beneficial for suppressing their sinful nature and preparing it for death, adjusting them as they notice sin increasing or decreasing. Instead, they blindly rush into various tasks, doing one thing then another, based on how impressive or well-regarded the work seems, and soon abandon them, becoming totally inconsistent, until in the end, their efforts lead to nothing; indeed, some overthink the whole process and push themselves so hard that they’re of no use to themselves or anyone else.
All this is the fruit of that doctrine with which we have been so possessed as to think that after repentance or baptism we are without sin, and that our good works are to be heaped up, not for the blotting out of sin, but for their own sake, or as a satisfaction for sins already done. This is encouraged by those preachers who preach unwisely the legends and works of the blessed Saints, and make of them examples for all. The ignorant fall eagerly upon these things, and work their own destruction out of the examples of the Saints. God has given every saint a special way and a special grace by which to live according to his baptism. But baptism and its significance He has set as a common standard for all men, so that every man is to examine himself according to his station in life, to find what is the best way for him to fulfil the work and purpose of his baptism, i. e., to slay sin and to die. Then Christ's burden grows light and easy, [Matt. 11:30] and it is not carried with worry and care, as Solomon says of it, "The labor of the foolish wearieth every one of them, because he knoweth not how to go to the city." [Eccl. 10:15] For even as they are worried who wish to go to the city and cannot find the way, so it is with these men; all their life and labor is a burden to them, and yet they accomplish nothing.
All this comes from the belief that once we repent or get baptized, we are free of sin, and that our good deeds should pile up, not to erase past sins, but for their own sake or as a way to make up for sins already committed. This idea is pushed by preachers who foolishly promote the stories and deeds of the blessed Saints as examples for everyone to follow. The uneducated eagerly latch onto these notions, leading to their own downfall based on the examples of the Saints. God has given each saint a unique path and grace to live according to his baptism. However, He has set baptism and its meaning as a common standard for everyone, so everyone must reflect on their life situation to determine the best way to fulfill the work and purpose of their baptism, which means to overcome sin and die to themselves. Then, Christ's burden becomes light and manageable, [Matt. 11:30] and it is not carried with stress and anxiety, as Solomon remarks, "The labor of the foolish wearieth every one of them, because he knoweth not how to go to the city." [Eccl. 10:15] Just as those who wish to reach the city but can't find the way are burdened, so it is with these people; their entire lives and efforts become a heavy load, yet they achieve nothing.
[Sidenote: The Vow of Baptism and Other Vows]
[Sidenote: The Vow of Baptism and Other Vows]
XVIII. In this place, then, belongs the question whether baptism and the vow which we there make to God, is something more or something greater than the vows of chastity, of the priesthood, of the clergy, since baptism is common to all Christians, and it is thought that the clergy have taken a special and a higher vow. I answer: From what has been said, this is an easy question to answer. For in baptism we all make one and the same vow, viz., to slay sin and to become holy through the work and grace of God, to Whom we yield and offer ourselves, as clay to the potter [13] and in this no one is better than another. But for a life in accordance with baptism, i. e., for slaying sin, there can be no one method and no special estate in life. Therefore I have said[14] that each man must prove himself, that he may know in what estate he may best slay sin and put a check upon his nature. It is true, then, that there is no vow higher, better, or greater than the vow of baptism. What more can we promise than to drive out an, to die, to hate this life, and to become holy?
XVIII. Here, we should consider whether baptism and the promise we make to God during the ceremony are more significant than the vows of chastity, the priesthood, or the clergy. Baptism is something all Christians share, while it is believed that the clergy make a special and higher pledge. I believe this is a straightforward question to answer. In baptism, we all make the same commitment: to overcome sin and to become holy through God's work and grace, to whom we offer ourselves like clay to a potter, and in this, no one is superior to another. However, living according to baptism—meaning overcoming sin—doesn't follow a single method or require a specific state of life. That's why I say that everyone must find out for themselves the best way to overcome sin and manage their nature. Therefore, it’s true that there is no vow that is higher, better, or greater than the vow of baptism. What more can we promise than to reject sin, to die to our old selves, to disdain this life, and to seek holiness?
Over and above this vow, a man may, indeed, bind himself to some special estate, if it seems to him to be suitable and helpful for the completion of his baptism. It is just as though two men went to the same city, and the one went by the foot-path, the other by the high-way, according as each thought best. So he who binds himself to the estate of matrimony, walks in the toils and sufferings which belong to that estate and lays upon himself its burdens, in order that he may grow used to pleasure and sorrow, avoid sin, and prepare himself for death better than he could do outside of that estate. But he who seeks more suffering, and by much exercise would speedily prepare himself for death and soon attain the work of baptism, let him bind himself to chastity, or the spiritual order; for the spiritual estate,[15] if it is as it ought to be, should be full of torment and suffering, in order that he who belongs to it may have more exercise in the work of his baptism than the man who is in the estate of matrimony, and through such torment quickly grow used to welcome death with joy, and so attain the purpose of his baptism. Now above this estate there is another and a higher, that which rules in the spiritual order, viz., the estate of bishop, priest, etc. And these men should be well practised in sufferings and works, and ready at every hour for death, not only for their own sake, but for the sake of those who are their subjects.
Beyond this vow, a person can choose to commit to a certain way of life if they believe it is appropriate and beneficial for fulfilling their baptism. It's similar to two people traveling to the same city, with one taking a footpath and the other a highway, based on what each thinks is best. So, someone who commits to marriage faces the challenges and struggles that come with it and takes on its responsibilities, aiming to become accustomed to both joy and sorrow, avoid sin, and prepare for death better than they could outside of marriage. On the other hand, if someone desires more suffering and wants to prepare for death more quickly and achieve baptism sooner, they should commit to chastity or a spiritual order; the spiritual life, if lived as it should be, is meant to be filled with trials and hardships so that those who belong to it can have more opportunities to engage in their baptismal purpose than those in marriage. Through such struggles, they can more readily embrace death with joy and fulfill the goal of their baptism. Above this way of life, there's another, higher one that governs the spiritual realm, namely, the life of bishops, priests, etc. These individuals should be well trained in enduring hardships and performing works, and be ready at any moment for death, not only for their own benefit but also for those they serve.
Yet in all these estates the standard, of which we spoke above, should never be forgotten, viz., that a man should so exercise himself only to the end that sin may be driven out, and should not be guided by the number or the greatness of works. But, alas how we have forgotten our baptism and what it means, and what vows we made there, and that we are to walk in its works and attain its purpose! So, too, we have forgotten about the ways to that goal, and about the estates, and do not know to what end these estates were instituted, and how we are in them to keep at the fulfilling of our baptism. They have been made a gorgeous show, and little more remains of them than worldly display, as Isaiah says, "Thy silver is become dross, thy wine mixed with water." [Isa. 1:22] On this may God have mercy! Amen.
Yet in all these roles, the standard we mentioned earlier should never be forgotten: that a person should focus on exercising themselves only to drive out sin and not be influenced by the quantity or significance of their actions. But, sadly, we have forgotten our baptism and what it represents, and the vows we made there, and that we are meant to live out its teachings and achieve its purpose! Likewise, we have lost sight of the pathways to reach that goal, and the roles themselves, and we don't understand why these roles were established, and how we should commit to fulfilling our baptism within them. They have become a lavish display, and little remains of them besides superficial appearances, as Isaiah says, "Your silver has become dross, your wine diluted with water." [Isa. 1:22] May God have mercy on this! Amen.
[Sidenote: The Joy of Baptism]
The Joy of Baptism
XIX. If, then, the holy sacrament of baptism is a thing so great, so gracious and full of comfort, we should pay earnest heed to thank God for it ceaselessly, joyfully, and from the heart, and to give Him praise and honor. For I fear that by our thanklessness we have deserved our blindness and become unworthy to behold such grace, though the whole world was, and still is, full of baptism and the grace of God. But we have been led astray in our own anxious works, afterwards in indulgences and such like false comforts, and have thought that we are not to trust God until we are righteous and have made satisfaction for our sin, as though we would buy His grace from Him or pay Him for it. In truth, he who does not see in God's grace how it bears with him as a sinner, and will make him blessed, and who looks forward only to God's judgment, that man will never be joyful in God, and can neither love nor praise Him. But if we hear and firmly believe that He receives us sinners in the covenant of baptism, spares us, and makes us pure from day to day, then our heart must be joyful, and love and praise God. So He says in the Prophet, "I will spare them, as a man spareth his own son." [Mal. 3:17] Wherefore it is needful that we give thanks to the Blessed Majesty, Who shows Himself so gracious and merciful toward us poor condemned worms, and magnify and acknowledge His work.
XIX. If the holy sacrament of baptism is such a significant, gracious, and comforting thing, we should continually and joyfully thank God for it from our hearts and give Him praise and honor. I worry that our lack of gratitude has caused our blindness and made us unworthy to witness such grace, even though the whole world was, and still is, filled with baptism and God's grace. However, we've been misled by our own anxious efforts, later seeking indulgences and other false comforts, thinking that we can’t trust God until we are righteous and have made up for our sins, as if we could buy His grace or pay for it. In reality, anyone who doesn’t recognize how God's grace supports him as a sinner, and who only anticipates God's judgment, will never experience joy in God, nor can he truly love or praise Him. But if we hear and fully believe that He welcomes us sinners into the covenant of baptism, shows us mercy, and cleanses us daily, then our hearts must be joyful, and we will love and praise God. As it says in the Prophet, "I will spare them, as a man spares his own son." [Mal. 3:17] Therefore, we must give thanks to the Blessed Majesty, who shows Himself so gracious and merciful toward us poor condemned beings, and we should recognize and honor His work.
[Sidenote: The Danger of False Confidence]
[Sidenote: The Danger of False Confidence]
XX. At the same time, however, we must have a care that no false security creeps in and says to itself: "Baptism is so gracious and so great a thing that God will not count our sins against us, and as soon as we turn again from sin, everything is right, by virtue of baptism; meanwhile, therefore, I will live and do my own will, and afterwards, or when about to die, will remember my baptism and remind God of His covenant, and then fulfil the work and purpose of my baptism."
XX. At the same time, though, we need to be careful that we don’t develop a false sense of security that tells us: “Baptism is such a generous and significant thing that God won’t hold our sins against us. As soon as we turn away from sin, everything is okay because of baptism; in the meantime, I can live and do what I want, and later, or when I'm about to die, I’ll remember my baptism, remind God of His promise, and then fulfill the purpose of my baptism.”
Baptism is, indeed, so great a thing that if you turn again from sins and appeal to the covenant of baptism, your sins are forgiven. Only see to it, if you thus wickedly and wantonly sin, presuming on God's grace, that the judgment does not lay hold upon you and anticipate your turning back; and beware lest, even if you then desired to believe or to trust in your baptism, your trial be, by God's decree, so great that your faith is not able to stand. If they scarcely remain who do do sin or who fall because of sheer weakness, where shall your wickedness remain, which has tempted and mocked God's grace? [1 Pet. 4:18]
Baptism is truly such a significant thing that if you turn away from your sins and seek the promise of baptism, your sins will be forgiven. Just be careful, because if you sin deliberately and take God's grace for granted, the judgment may come upon you before you have a chance to repent; and be cautious that, even if you want to believe in your baptism later on, your test may be, by God's will, so overwhelming that your faith might not be able to endure. If those who stumble due to genuine weakness barely make it, where will your wrongdoing go, which has challenged and disrespected God's grace? [1 Pet. 4:18]
Let us, therefore, walk with carefulness and fear, that with a firm faith we may hold fast the riches of God's grace, and joyfully give thanks to His mercy forever and ever. Amen. [Eph. 5:15]
Let us, then, walk with caution and respect, so that with strong faith we can hold on to the treasures of God's grace and joyfully express our gratitude for His mercy forever. Amen. [Eph. 5:15]
FOOTNOTES
[1] Literally, "lifted or raised out of baptism"; in common usage simply "baptised." Cf. "aus der Taufe beben," "to stand sponsor."
[1] Literally, "lifted or raised out of baptism"; in common usage simply "baptized." Cf. "aus der Taufe beben," "to stand as a sponsor."
[2] See above, p.56, note 1.
[2] See above, p.56, note 1.
[3] Luther habitually quoted the Vulgate and quoted from memory; hence the many variations from the familiar test of Scripture.
[3] Luther often quoted the Vulgate and did so from memory; that's why there are so many variations from the well-known text of Scripture.
[4] See above, p. 58.
See above, p. 58.
[5] See above, p. 57.
Refer to p. 57 above.
[6] See above, p. 57.
See above, p. 57.
[7] Good works prescribed as "penances" upon confession to the priest.
[7] Good deeds assigned as "penances" after confessing to the priest.
[8] Literally, "lifted up out of it." See above, p. 57, note 1.
[8] Literally, "lifted up out of it." See above, p. 57, note 1.
[9] See above, p.58.
See above, p.58.
[10] Luther here refers to his Treatise on the Sacrament of Penance, which was published just before the present treatise on baptism, in 1519. See Weimar Ed., II, pp. 709 ff and p. 724.
[10] Luther is referencing his Treatise on the Sacrament of Penance, which was published just before this current treatise on baptism, in 1519. See Weimar Ed., II, pp. 709 ff and p. 724.
[11] The power to forgive and retain sin, belonging, according to Roman teaching, to the priest, and normally exercised in the sacrament of penance.
[11] The ability to forgive and hold onto sins, which according to Roman teaching belongs to the priest, is usually practiced in the sacrament of penance.
[12] Cf. Fourteen of Consolation, Part II, ch. II; below, pp. 146 ff.
[12] Cf. Fourteen of Consolation, Part II, ch. II; below, pp. 146 ff.
[13] See above, p. 59.
See above, p. 59.
[14] See above, p. 67.
[14] See above, p. 67.
[15] The "spiritual estate" or "spiritual order" includes all those who have deserted the world and worldly pursuits for the religious life. It includes monks and friars and nuns, as well as priests, etc.
[15] The "spiritual estate" or "spiritual order" includes everyone who has left behind the world and its pursuits for a religious life. This includes monks, friars, nuns, and priests, among others.
A DISCUSSION OF CONFESSION (CONFITENDI RATIO) 1520
A DISCUSSION OF CONFESSION (CONFITENDI RATIO) 1520
The Confitendi Ratio is the culmination of a series of tracts published by Luther after the memorable October 31st, 1517, and before his final breach with Rome.[1] In them is clearly traceable the progress that he was making in dealing with the practical problems offered by the confessional, and which had started the mighty conflict in which he was engaged. They open to us an insight into his own conscientious efforts during the period, when, as a penitent, he was himself endeavoring to meet every requirement which the Church imposed, In order to secure the assurance of the forgiveness of sins, as well as to present the questions which as a father confessor and spiritual adviser he asked those who were under his pastoral care. First of all, we find, therefore, tables of duties and sins, reminding us of the lists of cardinal sins and cardinal virtues in which Roman Catholic books abound. The main effort here is to promote the most searching self-examination and the most complete enumeration of the details of sins, since, from the Medieval standpoint, the completeness of the absolution is proportioned to the exhaustiveness of the confession. Although the first of these briefer tracts closes with its note of warning that the value of the confession is not to be estimated by the enumeration of details, but that it rests solely in the resort that is had to the Grace of God and the word of His promise, the transition from the one mode of thought to the other is very apparent.
The Confitendi Ratio is the result of a series of writings published by Luther after the significant date of October 31st, 1517, and before his final break with Rome.[1] These writings clearly show the progress he was making in addressing the practical issues related to confession, which sparked the major conflict he was involved in. They give us insight into his own sincere efforts during the time when he, as a penitent, was trying to meet all the requirements that the Church imposed to gain assurance of forgiveness for his sins, as well as the questions he posed as a confessor and spiritual guide to those under his pastoral care. Initially, we find lists of duties and sins, reminiscent of the lists of cardinal sins and virtues found in many Roman Catholic texts. The main goal here is to encourage thorough self-examination and a complete account of sins, since, from the Medieval perspective, the thoroughness of the absolution depends on the exhaustiveness of the confession. Although the first of these shorter texts ends with a warning that the value of confession shouldn't be judged by the detailed enumeration of sins but rather rests solely on turning to the Grace of God and His promise, the shift from one way of thinking to another is very clear.
In the Kurze Untetweisung wie man beichten soll of 1519, of which this is a Latin re-elaboration, and, therefore, intended more for the educated man than as a popular presentation, he has advanced so far as to warn against the attempt to make an exhaustive enumeration of sins. He advises that the confession be made in the most general terms, covering sins both known and unknown. "If one would confess all mortal sins, it may be done in the following words; 'Yea, my whole life, and all that I do, act, speak, and think, is such as to be deadly and condemnable.' For if one regard himself as being without mortal sin, this is of all mortal sins the most mortal." [2] According to this maturer view, the purpose of the most searching self-examination is to exhibit the utter impossibility of ever fathoming the depth of corruption that lies beneath the surface. The reader of the Tessaradecas will recall Luther's statement there, that it is of God's great mercy that man is able to see but a very small portion of the sin within him, for were he to see it in its full extent, he would perish at the sight. The physician need not count every pustule on the body to diagnose the disease as small-pox. A glance is enough to determine the case. The sins that are discovered are the symptoms of the one radical sin that lies beneath them all.[3] The cry is no longer "Mea peccata, mea peccata," as though these recognized sins were the exception to a life otherwise without a flaw, but rather, overwhelmed with confusion, the penitent finds in himself nothing but sin, except for what he has by God's grace alone. Most clearly does Luther enforce this in his exposition of the Fifty-first Psalm, of 1531, a treatise we most earnestly commend to those who desire fuller information concerning Luther's doctrine of sin, and his conception of the value of confession and absolution. He shows that it is not by committing a particular sin that we become sinners, but that the sin is committed because our nature is still sinful, and that the poisonous tree has grown from roots deeply imbedded in the soil. We are sinners not because particular acts of sin have been devised and carried to completion, but before the acts are committed we are sinners; otherwise such fruits would not have been borne. A bad tree can grow from nothing but a bad root.[4]
In the Short Instruction on How to Confess from 1519, which is a Latin reworking meant for educated readers rather than a general audience, he warns against trying to create an exhaustive list of sins. He suggests that confessions should be made in broad terms, including both known and unknown sins. "If someone wants to confess all mortal sins, they can say, 'Yes, my whole life, and everything I do, say, and think, is such that it deserves to be condemned.' For if someone sees themselves as free from mortal sin, this is the most lethal of all mortal sins." [2] According to this more developed perspective, the goal of deep self-examination is to reveal the utter impossibility of fully grasping the depth of corruption beneath the surface. Readers of the Tessaradecas will remember Luther's remark that it is a great mercy from God that a person can only see a tiny fraction of their inner sin, because if they saw it all, they would be overwhelmed. A doctor doesn't need to count every spot on the body to diagnose smallpox; just a glance is enough to see the issue. The sins that are found are the signs of one core sin that underlies them all. [3] The plea is no longer "My sins, my sins," as if these acknowledged sins were exceptions in an otherwise flawless life, but rather, the repentant person is overwhelmed and finds nothing in themselves but sin, except for what they have by God's grace alone. Luther emphasizes this clearly in his commentary on the Fifty-first Psalm from 1531, a work we strongly recommend to those seeking a deeper understanding of Luther's views on sin and the significance of confession and absolution. He explains that we don’t become sinners by committing specific sins; rather, we commit sins because our nature is inherently sinful, and the bad tree grows from roots deeply embedded in the soil. We are sinners not because we have enacted particular sins, but because we are already sinners before any actions take place; otherwise, those bad fruits wouldn't exist. A bad tree can only grow from a bad root. [4]
In his Sermon on Confession and the Sacrament of 1524, he discourages habits of morbid self-introspection, and exposes the perplexities produced by the extractions of the confessional in constantly sinking the probe deeper and deeper into the heart of the already crushed and quivering penitent. He shows how one need not look far to find enough to prompt the confession of utter helplessness and the casting of self unreservedly upon God's mercy. "Bring to the confession only those sins that occur to thee, and say: I am so frail and fallen that I need consolation and good counsel. For the confession should be brief….No one, therefore, should be troubled, even though he have forgotten his sins. If they be forgotten, they are none the less forgiven. For what God considers, is not how thou hast confessed, but His Word and how thou hast believed." [5]
In his Sermon on Confession and the Sacrament of 1524, he discourages unhealthy habits of excessive self-examination and highlights the confusion caused by digging deeper into the confessional with someone who is already feeling crushed and vulnerable. He demonstrates that you don’t have to search far to find enough to acknowledge your complete helplessness and to fully rely on God’s mercy. "Bring only the sins that come to mind in confession, and say: I recognize that I am weak and have fallen, and I need comfort and good advice. Confession should be simple….No one should feel distressed, even if they have forgotten their sins. If they are forgotten, they are still forgiven. What matters to God is not how you confessed, but His Word and how you have believed." [5]
In this is made prominent the radical difference between the Roman Catholic and the Lutheran conception of confession. In the former, it is a part of penance, the second of the three elements of "contrition," "confession," and "satisfaction," an absolute condition of the forgiveness of every sin. In the Roman confessional, sins are treated atomistically. Some are forgiven, while others are still to be forgiven. Every sin stands by itself, and requires separate treatment. No unconfessed sin is forgiven. To be forgiven, a sin must be known and lamented, and confessed in all its details and circumstances to the priest, who, as a spiritual judge, proportions the amount of the satisfaction to be rendered by the penitent to the degree of guilt of the offence, as judged from the facts before him. Thus the debt has to be painfully and punctiliously worked off, sin by sin, as in the financial world a note may be extinguished by successive payments, dollar by dollar. Everything, therefore, is made to depend upon the fulness and completeness of the confession. It becomes a work, on account of which one is forgiven. The absolution becomes simply the stamp of approval that is placed upon the confession.
In this, the significant difference between the Roman Catholic and Lutheran views of confession is highlighted. In the former, it is part of penance, one of the three elements of "contrition," "confession," and "satisfaction," and an essential condition for the forgiveness of any sin. In the Roman confessional, sins are considered individually. Some are forgiven, while others are not yet forgiven. Each sin is treated separately and requires its own examination. No unconfessed sin is forgiven. To be forgiven, a sin must be acknowledged, regretted, and confessed in all its details and circumstances to the priest, who, as a spiritual judge, determines the level of satisfaction required from the penitent based on the severity of the offense according to the facts presented. Thus, the debt must be meticulously and painstakingly repaid, sin by sin, similar to how a financial obligation can be settled through successive payments, dollar by dollar. Therefore, everything relies on the thoroughness and completeness of the confession. It becomes a task that leads to forgiveness. The absolution is merely the approval stamp placed on the confession.
The Lutheran conception is centered upon the person of the sinner, rather than on his sins. It is the person who is forgiven his sins. Where the person is forgiven but one sin, all his sins are forgiven; where the least sin is retained, all sins are retained, and none forgiven, for "there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus" (Rom. 8:1). The value of the confession lies not in the confession itself, but in that, through this confession, we turn to Christ and the word of His promise.[6]
The Lutheran view focuses on the individual sinner rather than just their sins. It’s the person who receives forgiveness for their sins. If a person is forgiven even one sin, then all their sins are forgiven; if even the smallest sin is held against them, then all sins are held against them, and none are forgiven, because "there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus" (Rom. 8:1). The importance of confession isn’t in the act of confessing itself, but in how, through confession, we turn to Christ and His promise.
In Luther's opinion, there are three species of confession.[7] One to God, in one's own heart, which is of absolute necessity, and which the true believer is always making; a second to our neighbor, when we have done him a wrong, which is also of divine command; and, a third to a "brother," "wherein we receive from the mouth of that brother the word of consolation sent from God." [8] This last species, the verbum solatii ex ore fratris, while not commanded in Holy Scripture, is commended because of the great value which it has for those who fed the need of consolation, and the instruction for which it affords the opportunity. It is only by the individualizing of the confession that the comfort to be derived by the individualizing of the promise can be obtained. Hence, as the Augsburg Confession declares (Article XI.): "Private" [i. e., personal] "confession is retained because of the absolution."[9] Not that, without the absolution, there is not forgiveness, but that, through it, the one absolved rejoices all the more in the possession of that which he possessed even before the absolution, and goes forth from it strengthened to meet temptation because of the new assurance that he has of God's love. This form of confession, therefore, instead of being a condition of forgiveness, as is our inner confession to God, is a privilege of the justified man, who, before he has made such confession, has been forgiven, and whose sins that lie still concealed from his knowledge are just as truly forgiven as those over which he grieves.
In Luther's view, there are three types of confession. One is to God, in one's own heart, which is absolutely necessary, and which a true believer is always practicing; the second is to our neighbor when we've wronged them, which is also a divine command; and the third is to a "brother," where we hear words of comfort from that brother that come from God. This last type, the verbum solatii ex ore fratris, while not mandated in the Holy Scriptures, is encouraged because of its great value for those seeking comfort and the teaching it provides. It's only through personal confession that one can fully experience the comfort of the promise. Thus, as the Augsburg Confession states (Article XI): "Private" [i.e., personal] "confession is maintained because of the absolution." Not that forgiveness doesn't exist without absolution, but through it, the forgiven person finds even greater joy in what they had before the absolution and leaves feeling strengthened to face temptation with the new assurance of God's love. Therefore, this form of confession is not a requirement for forgiveness, like our internal confession to God, but a privilege for the justified person, who has already been forgiven even before making such a confession, and whose sins, still hidden from their awareness, are just as truly forgiven as those they mourn.
The confession, therefore, being entirely voluntary and a privilege, penitents are not to be tormented with "the ocean of distinctions" hitherto urged, such, e.g., as those between mortal and venial sins, whereof he says that "there is no doctor so learned as to draw accurately the distinction";[10] and between the inner impulses that may arise without the least consent of the will resulting from than, and those to which the will, in varying measure, may actually consent. On the contrary, it is not well to look too deeply into the abyss. When Peter began to count the waves, he was lost; when he looked away from them to Jesus, he was saved. Thus, while "the good purpose" to amend the life must be insisted upon as an indispensable accompaniment of every sincere confession, tender consciences may search within for such purpose, and be distressed because they cannot find satisfactory evidence of its presence. How excellent then the advice of this experienced pastor, that those thus troubled should pray for this "purpose" which they cannot detect; for no one can actually pray for such purpose without, in the prayer, having the very object he is seeking.
The confession is completely voluntary and a privilege, so people shouldn’t be overwhelmed by "the ocean of distinctions" previously mentioned, like the difference between mortal and venial sins, which he claims "no doctor is so learned as to draw accurately the distinction"; and between the inner urges that may arise without any consent from the will and those that the will might consent to in varying degrees. In fact, it’s not wise to delve too deeply into that abyss. When Peter started counting the waves, he got lost; when he focused on Jesus instead, he was saved. Therefore, while the "good intention" to change one's life must be emphasized as a crucial part of every genuine confession, sensitive souls may search within for that intention and feel distressed when they can’t find clear evidence of it. How wise is the advice from this experienced pastor that those who are troubled should pray for this "intention" they can’t identify; because no one can truly pray for such an intention without, in their prayer, having the very thing they’re seeking.
So also he rules out of the sphere of the confession the violation of matters of purely ecclesiastical regulation. Nothing is to be regarded a sin except that which is a violation of one of the Ten Commandments. To make that a sin which God's law does not make sin, is only the next step to ecclesiastical regulations to the level of divine commands, we lower divine commands to the level of ecclesiastical regulations. Even Private Confession, therefore, useful as it is, when properly understood and practised, since it rests after all upon ecclesiastical rule, is so little to be urged as a matter of necessity that Luther here defends the suggestion of Gerson, that occasionally one should go to the Lord's Supper without having made confession, in order thereby to testify that it is in God's mercy and His promise that we trust, rather than in the value of any particular outward observance.
He also excludes from the scope of confession any violation of purely church rules. Nothing should be considered a sin except for violations of the Ten Commandments. To label something as a sin that God’s law does not identify as such is simply the next step in elevating church rules to the level of divine commandments, which diminishes the significance of divine commands to that of church regulations. Even Private Confession, valuable as it is when understood and practiced correctly, since it ultimately relies on church rules, is not something that should be insisted upon as a necessity. Luther even supports the idea proposed by Gerson that sometimes one should take Communion without having made confession, to demonstrate that our trust lies in God’s mercy and promises rather than in the importance of any specific external practice.
The treatment of "Reserved Cases," with which this tract ends, shows the moderation and caution with which Luther is moving, but, at the same time, how the new wine is working in the old bottles, which soon must break. The principle of "the reservation of cases" he discusses in his Address to the German Nobility.[11] It is critical also in Augsburg Confession, Article XXVIII, 2, 41; Apology of the Augsburg Confession, English Translation, pp. 181, 212. The Roman Catholic dogma is officially presented in the Decrees of Trent, Session XIV, Chapter 7,[12] viz., "that certain more atrocious and more heinous crimes be absolved not by all priests, but only by the highest priests." Thus the power is centralized in the pope, and is delegated for exercise in ordinary cases to each particular parish-priest within the limits by which he is circumscribed, but no farther.[13] The contrast is between delegated and reserved rights. The Protestant principle is that all the power of the Church is in the Word of God which it administers; that wherever all the Word is, there also is all the power of the Church; and hence that, according to divine tight, all pastors have equal authority. For this reason, Luther here declares that in regard to secret sins, i. e., those known only to God and the penitent, no reservation whatever is to be admitted. But there is still a distinction which he is ready to concede. It has to do with public offences where scandal has been given. As "the more flagrant and more heinous crimes," If public, have to do with a wider circle than the members of a particular parish, the reparation for the offence should be as extensive as the scandal which it has created. In the Apology, Melanchthon claims that such reservation should be limited to the ecclesiastical penalties to be inflicted, but that it had not been Intended to comprise also the guilt involved; it was a reservatio poenae, but not a reservatio culpae.[14] Luther suggests the same here, but with more than usual caution.
The section on "Reserved Cases" at the end of this tract displays Luther's careful and moderate approach, yet it also highlights the tension of new ideas emerging within traditional frameworks, which are bound to break. He addresses the principle of "reservation of cases" in his Address to the German Nobility.[11] This concept is also critical in the Augsburg Confession, Article XXVIII, 2, 41; Apology of the Augsburg Confession, English Translation, pp. 181, 212. The Roman Catholic doctrine is officially outlined in the Decrees of Trent, Session XIV, Chapter 7,[12] stating that "certain more serious and more heinous crimes are to be absolved not by all priests, but only by the highest priests." This centralizes authority in the pope, who delegates the power to ordinary parish priests within specific limits, but not beyond.[13] The contrast lies between delegated and reserved rights. The Protestant belief is that all church authority derives from the Word of God that it administers; wherever the Word is present, the full power of the Church is also present, granting equal authority to all pastors by divine right. Therefore, Luther asserts that regarding secret sins—those known only to God and the penitent—no reservations should exist. However, he acknowledges a distinction related to public offenses that have caused scandal. Since "more flagrant and more heinous crimes," when public, affect a broader community than just the local parish, the response to such offenses should match the extent of the resulting scandal. In the Apology, Melanchthon argues that any reservation should be limited to the ecclesiastical penalties imposed but not include the guilt involved; it was a reservatio poenae, but not a reservatio culpae.[14] Luther proposes a similar idea here, but with extra caution.
In the same spirit as in his Treatise on Baptism, he protests against the numerous vows, the binding force of which was a constant subject of treatment in pastoral dealing with souls. The multiplication of vows had caused a depredation of the one all-embracing vow of baptism. Nevertheless the pope's right to give a dispensation he regards as limited entirely to such matters as those concerning which God's Word has given no command. With matters which concern only the relation of the individual to God, the Pope's authority is of no avail.
In the same way he did in his Treatise on Baptism, he argues against the many vows, which were often discussed in pastoral care for souls. The increase in vows had diminished the significance of the one all-important vow of baptism. However, he believes the pope’s ability to grant dispensations is limited strictly to issues where God's Word has provided no specific command. When it comes to matters that only involve the individual's relationship with God, the Pope's authority doesn’t hold any weight.
Literature.—Chemnitz, Martin, Examin Concilii Tridentini, 1578
(Preuss edition), 441-456. Steitz, G. E., Die Privatbeichte und
Privatabsolution d. luth. Kirche aus d. Quellen des XVI. Jahrh.,
1854. Pfeisterrer, G. F. Luthers Lehre von der Beichte, 1857.
Klieftoth, Th. Lit. Abhandlungen, 2: Die Beichte und
Absolution, 1856. Fischer, E., Zur Geschichte der evangelischen
Beichte, 2 vols., 1902-1903. Rietschel, G., Lehrbuch der
Liturgik, vol 2, particularly secs. 44, 45, Luthers Affassung
der Beichte and Luthers Auffassung von der Absolution.
Koestlin, Julius, Luther's Theology (English Translation),
I:357, 360, 400. See also Smalcald Articles, Book of Concord
(English Translation), 326, 899.
Literature.—Chemnitz, Martin, Examen of the Council of Trent, 1578
(Preuss edition), 441-456. Steitz, G. E., The Private Confession and
Private Absolution of the Lutheran Church from the Sources of the 16th Century,
1854. Pfeiffer, G. F. Luther's Doctrine of Confession, 1857.
Klieftoth, Th. Literary Essays, 2: Confession and
Absolution, 1856. Fischer, E., On the History of Evangelical
Confession, 2 vols., 1902-1903. Rietschel, G., Textbook of
Liturgics, vol 2, especially secs. 44, 45, Luther's Understanding
of Confession and Luther's View on Absolution.
Koestlin, Julius, Luther's Theology (English Translation),
I:357, 360, 400. See also Smalcald Articles, Book of Concord
(English Translation), 326, 899.
Henry E. Jacobs.
Mount Airy, Philadelphia.
Henry E. Jacobs.
Mount Airy, Philly.
FOOTNOTES
[1] 1. Decem Praecepta Wittebergenai praedicata populo, 1518, Erl. Ed., op. ex. lat., I, 218. A series of sermons entering into almost minute analyses of sins.
[1] 1. Ten Commandments Preached at Wittenberg, 1518, Erl. Ed., op. ex. lat., I, 218. A collection of sermons that provide detailed examinations of sins.
2. Die zehen Gebote Gottes mit einer kurzen Auslegung ihre Erfüllung und Uebertretung, Weimar Ed., I, 247 ff; Erl. Ed., XXXVI, 145-154. Reduces contents of the sermons to a few pages. A brief handbook for use in the confessional first printed in tabular form, giving a very condensed exposition of each commandment, followed by a catalogue of sins prohibited and virtues enjoined. Written a month before the publication of the Theses, and published the next year.
2. The Ten Commandments of God with a Short Explanation of Their Fulfillment and Violation, Weimar Ed., I, 247 ff; Erl. Ed., XXXVI, 145-154. Condenses the content of the sermons into a few pages. A brief handbook for use in confession, first printed in tabular form, providing a very concise explanation of each commandment, followed by a list of prohibited sins and recommended virtues. Written a month before the publication of the Theses and published the following year.
3. Instructio pro confessione peccatorum abbrevianda secundum decalogum. Latin form of the above, published shortly after the original. Erl. Ed., op. ex. lat., XII, 229-230.
3. Instructions for Shortening Confessions of Sins According to the Decalogue. Latin version of the above, published shortly after the original. Erl. Ed., op. ex. lat., XII, 229-230.
4. Kurze Unterweisung wie man beichten soll. Weimar Ed., II, 57 ff.; Erl. Ed., XXI, 245-253 prepared by request of Spalatin, first in Latin, and then translated, Köstlin thinks by Spalatin, into German. Published 1518. Contains eight introductory propositions, followed by lists of sins against each commandment.
4. Brief instructions on how to confess. Weimar Ed., II, 57 ff.; Erl. Ed., XXI, 245-253 prepared at Spalatin's request, first in Latin, and then translated, Köstlin believes by Spalatin, into German. Published 1518. Includes eight introductory propositions, followed by lists of sins related to each commandment.
5. Confitendi Ratio, published in 1520, a re-elaboration by Luther of the preceding German treatise. Weimar Ed., VI, 159-169; Erl. Ed., IV, 152-170; St. Louis Ed., XIX, 786-806.
5. Confitendi Ratio, published in 1520, is a rework by Luther of the earlier German treatise. Weimar Ed., VI, 159-169; Erl. Ed., IV, 152-170; St. Louis Ed., XIX, 786-806.
[2] "Ja, mein ganzes Leben, und alles, das ich thu, handel, red und gedenk, ist also gethan, das es todlich und vordammlich ist." These are almost the words of the public confessional prayer in the Kirchenbuch of the General Council of the Lutheran Church in America: "Also dans alle meine Natur und Wesensträflich und verdammlich ist."
[2] "Yes, my whole life, and everything I do, act, say, and think, is done in a way that is deadly and damned." These are almost the words of the public confessional prayer in the Kirchenbuch of the General Council of the Lutheran Church in America: "So that all my nature and being is sinful and damned."
[3] Erl. Ed., op. var. arg., IV, 89 aq. "Si enim suum malum sentiret, infernum sentiret, nam infernum in se ipso habet." See this volume, p. 115f.
[3] Erl. Ed., op. var. arg., IV, 89 aq. "If he were aware of his own evil, he would feel hell, for he carries hell within himself." See this volume, p. 115f.
[4] Erl. Ed., op. ex. lat., XIX, 1-154.
[4] Erl. Ed., op. ex. lat., XIX, 1-154.
[5] Erl. Ed. (2d ed.), XI, 173.
[5] Erl. Ed. (2nd ed.), XI, 173.
[6] See the opening paragraph of this treatise.
[6] See the opening paragraph of this document.
[7] Erl. Ed., XI, 166, XXIX, 352-359. Cf. with this, the still fuller treatment by Chemnitz, Examin Concilii Tridentini (Preuss edition), 441-453.
[7] Erl. Ed., XI, 166, XXIX, 352-359. Compare this with the more detailed analysis by Chemnitz, Examin Concilii Tridentini (Preuss edition), 441-453.
[8] Babylonian Captivity, Erl. Ed., op. var. arg., V, 82.
[8] Babylonian Captivity, Erl. Ed., op. var. arg., V, 82.
[9] Cf. Augsburg Confession, Art. XXV; Apology in Book of Concord, English Translation, pp. 133, 173, 185, 188, 196; Smalcald Articles, 330-339; Small Catechism, 371.
[9] Cf. Augsburg Confession, Art. XXV; Apology in Book of Concord, English Translation, pp. 133, 173, 185, 188, 196; Smalcald Articles, 330-339; Small Catechism, 371.
[10] Sermon vom Sacrament der Busse, Erl. Ed., XX, 190. For definition of "mortal and venial," see Introduction to XCV Theses, above, p. 19.
[10] Sermon on the Sacrament of Repentance, Erl. Ed., XX, 190. For the definition of "mortal and venial," see Introduction to XCV Theses, above, p. 19.
[11] See Vol. II. of this edition.
[11] See Vol. II of this edition.
[12] Deninger, Enchridion Symbolorum, soc. 782; Sceaff's Creeds of Christendom.
[12] Deninger, Enchridion Symbolorum, section 782; Sceaff's Creeds of Christendom.
[13] "As though the Word of God cannot forgive sins, except where power derived from the Pope assist it." Chemnitz, Examen Concilii Tridentini (Preuss ed.), p. 456.
[13] "As if the Word of God can’t forgive sins without help from the authority of the Pope." Chemnitz, Examen Concilii Tridentini (Preuss ed.), p. 456.
[14] Apology, p. 212; "There is a reservation of canonical punishments; there is not a reservation of guilt before God in those who are truly converted."
[14] Apology, p. 212; "There are designated canonical punishments; there is not a designation of guilt before God for those who have genuinely changed."
A DISCUSSION OF CONFESSION
(CONFITENDI RATIO)
1520
1520
FIRST
[Sidenote: Need of Faith]
[Side Note: Need for Faith]
In this our age, the consciences of almost all have been led astray by human doctrines into a false trust in their own righteousness and their own works, and knowledge about faith and trust in God has almost ceased. Therefore, for him who is about to go to confession, it is before all things necessary that he should not place his trust in his confession—either the confession which he is about to make or the confession which he has made—but that, with complete fulness of faith, he put his trust only in the most gracious promise of God; to wit, he must be altogether certain that He, Who has promised pardon to the man who shall confess his sins, will most faithfully fulfil His promise. For we are to glory, not because we confess, but because He has promised pardon to those who do confess; that is, not because of the worthiness or sufficiency of our confession (for there is no such worthiness or sufficiency), but because of the truth and certitude of His promise, as says the xxiv. Psalm: "For Thy Name's sake, O Lord, pardon mine iniquity." [Ps. 25:35] It does not say, "for my sake," or "for my worthiness' sake," or "for my name's sake," but "for Thy Name's sake." So it is evident that the work of confession is nothing else than an occasion by which God is called to the fulfilment of His own promise, or by which we are trained to believe that we shall without doubt obtain the promise. It is just as if we were to say: "Not unto us, O Lord, but unto Thy Name give glory, [Ps. 115:1] and rejoice, not because we have blessed Thee, but because Thou hast blessed us, as Thou sayest by Ezekiel." [Ezek. 20:44] Let this be the manner of our confession, that he who glories may glory in the Lord, and may not commend himself, but may glorify the grace of God; and it shall come to pass that "confession and majesty shall be the work of God." [1] Psalm cxi [Ps. 111:3].
In our time, nearly everyone has been misled by human teachings into a false sense of security about their own righteousness and actions, and our understanding of faith and trust in God has nearly disappeared. Thus, for anyone about to go to confession, it’s essential first not to rely on their confession—whether the one they're about to make or the one they've already made—but to have complete faith in God's gracious promise. They must be entirely certain that He, who has promised forgiveness to those who confess their sins, will faithfully keep His promise. We take pride, not in our confession, but in the fact that He has promised forgiveness to those who confess; that is, not because of how worthy or sufficient our confession is (because there’s no such worthiness or sufficiency), but because of the truth and certainty of His promise, as stated in Psalm 24: "For Your Name's sake, O Lord, pardon my iniquity.” [Ps. 25:35] It doesn’t say, "for my sake," or "for my worthiness," or "for my name," but "for Your Name's sake." This makes it clear that the act of confession is simply a way for us to call upon God to fulfill His promise, and it trains us to believe that we will undoubtedly receive the promise. It’s like saying: "Not to us, O Lord, but to Your Name give glory," [Ps. 115:1] and let us rejoice, not because we have praised You, but because You have blessed us, as You say through Ezekiel." [Ezek. 20:44] Let our confession be such that those who take pride can only take pride in the Lord, and not in themselves, but rather glorify the grace of God; and it will be true that "confession and majesty shall be the work of God." [1] Psalm cxi [Ps. 111:3].
SECOND
[Sidenote: God's Promises]
God's Promises
But God, for the glory of His grace and mercy, has promised pardon. And this can be proved from Scripture. First from Psalm xxxii, "I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord, and Thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin." [Ps. 32:5] Then from II. Samuel xii, from which this Psalm is taken. David first said, "I have sinned against the Lord," and Nathan straightway said, "The Lord also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not die." [2 Sam. 12:13] Again, from Jeremiah xviii, "If that nation turn away from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do." [Jer. 18:8] Once more from I. John i, "If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." [1 John 1:9] The true definition of the righteous man is found in Proverbs xviii, "The righteous man is his own first accuser," [2] [Prov.18:17] that is to say, he is righteous because he accuses himself. The verse goes on to say, "His neighbor (i. e., Christ) cometh and searcheth him," that is, He seeketh him, and suffereth him not to perish; He will even find him and bring him back from the depths of hell. Hence Joshua vii. also calls the confessing of sin the glorifying of God, saying to Achan, "My son, give glory to God, and confess, and tell me what thou hast done." [Josh. 7:19] St. Jerome comments on this passage, "Confession of sin is praise of God." No wonder! For he who confesses his own sins speaks truth; but God is truth; therefore he also confesses God. Thus Manasseh, King of Judah, says in his most beautiful Prayer,[3] which is most excellently suited for one who goes to confession, "But Thou, Lord, according to Thy goodness hast promised repentance for the remission of sins, etc." [Prayer of Manasseh, 7] Truly, "according to Thy goodness Thou hast promised," for our confession is nothing unless the promise of God is sure, and it is altogether of His divine goodness that He has promised remission, which could not be obtained by any righteousness, unless He had given the promise. Thus faith in that promise is the first and supreme necessity for one who is about to go to confession, lest, perchance, he may presumptuously think that by his own diligence, his own memory, his own strength, he is provoking God to forgive his sins. Nay, rather it is God Himself Who, with ready forgiveness, will anticipate his confession, and allure and provoke him, by the goodness of His sweet promise, to accept remission and to make confession.
But God, in His glorious grace and mercy, has promised forgiveness. This can be shown through Scripture. First, in Psalm 32, it says, "I said, I will confess my transgressions to the Lord, and You forgave the guilt of my sin." [Ps. 32:5] Then from II Samuel 12, which is where this Psalm originates. David first admitted, "I have sinned against the Lord," and Nathan immediately replied, "The Lord has also removed your sin; you will not die." [2 Sam. 12:13] Again, in Jeremiah 18, it states, "If that nation turns from its evil ways, I will change my mind about the disaster I planned to bring." [Jer. 18:8] Once more in I John 1, it says, "If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." [1 John 1:9] The true definition of a righteous person is found in Proverbs 18, "A righteous person is their own first accuser," [2] [Prov. 18:17] which means they are righteous because they acknowledge their own faults. The verse continues, "His neighbor (i.e., Christ) comes and searches him," meaning He seeks him out and won’t let him perish; He will find him and bring him back from the depths of hell. Thus, Joshua 7 also refers to confessing sin as glorifying God, saying to Achan, "My son, give glory to God, and confess, and tell me what you have done." [Josh. 7:19] St. Jerome comments on this passage, "Confession of sin is praise of God." It's no surprise! Because someone who confesses their own sins speaks the truth; and God is truth; therefore, they also acknowledge God. Thus, Manasseh, King of Judah, says in his beautiful Prayer,[3] which is perfectly suited for anyone going to confession, "But You, Lord, according to Your goodness, have promised repentance for the remission of sins, etc." [Prayer of Manasseh, 7] Truly, "according to Your goodness, You have promised," for our confession means nothing unless God's promise is certain, and it is entirely out of His divine goodness that He has promised forgiveness, something that could not be earned by any righteousness unless He had made that promise. Therefore, faith in that promise is the first and foremost requirement for someone preparing for confession, so that they do not mistakenly think that through their own efforts, memory, or strength, they can compel God to forgive their sins. No, it is God Himself who, with His willingness to forgive, anticipates their confession and leads and encourages them, with the kindness of His sweet promise, to accept forgiveness and to confess.
THIRD
[Sidenote: The Purpose of a Better Life—Its Necessity]
[Sidenote: The Purpose of a Better Life—Its Necessity]
Before a man confesses to the priest, who is the vicar, he ought first to confess to God, Who is the Principal. But he should regard this matter seriously, since nothing escapes and nothing deceives the eye of God. Wherefore he ought here, without pretence, to ponder his purpose to lead a better life and his hatred of sin. For there is scarcely anything which deceives more penitents than that subtle and profound dissimulation by which they oftentime pretend, even to themselves, a violent hatred of sin and a purpose to lead a better life. The unhappy outcome proves their insincerity, for after confession they quickly return to their natural bent, and, as though relieved of the great burden of confession, they live again at ease, careless and unmindful of their purpose; by which one fact they can be convicted of their sad pretending. Wherefore a man ought in this matter to be altogether frank, and to speak of himself within himself just as he feels himself moved to speak, just as he could wish to speak if there were do punishment, no God, no commandment, and just as he would speak in the ear of some familiar friend, to whom he would not be ashamed to reveal everything about himself. As he could wish to speak quite freely to such a one about his faults, so let him speak to God, Who loves us far more than we love ourselves.
Before a man confesses to the priest, who is the vicar, he should first confess to God, who is the ultimate authority. He needs to take this seriously, knowing that nothing escapes and nothing deceives God's sight. Therefore, he should genuinely reflect on his desire to live a better life and his rejection of sin. Few things deceive penitents more than the subtle and deep pretense they maintain, often convincing even themselves of a strong hatred for sin and a commitment to improve their lives. The unfortunate results reveal their insincerity, as after confession they quickly revert to their old ways, living comfortably and carelessly, as if freed from the weight of confession, and ignoring their intentions; this alone shows their sad pretense. For this reason, a person should be completely honest in this matter, expressing himself as he truly feels, just as he would if there were no punishment, no God, no commandments, and as he would speak to a close friend, to whom he wouldn't be ashamed to expose everything about himself. Just as he would wish to speak openly about his faults to such a friend, he should do the same with God, who loves us far more than we love ourselves.
For if there is any one who does not find himself seriously inclined toward a good life, I know not whether it is safe for him to make confession. This I do know, that it were better for him to stay away from confession. For in this matter he need not care for the commandment of the Church, whether it excommunicate him or inflict some lesser punishment. It is better for him not to listen to the Church, than, at his own peril, to come to God with a false heart. In the latter case he sins against God, in the former case only against the Church; if, indeed, he sin at all in such a case by not listening to the Church, seeing that the Church has no right to command anything in which there is peril to the soul, and a case of this kind is always excepted from the commandments of the Church. For whatever the Church commands, she commands for God and for the soul's salvation, presuming that a man is capable of receiving her commandment and able to fulfil it. If this presumption falls, the precept does not hold, since nothing can be decreed contrary to the commandments of God, which bind the conscience.
For if there's anyone who doesn't really feel drawn to a good life, I’m not sure if it's safe for them to confess. What I do know is that it would be better for them to skip confession altogether. In this situation, they shouldn’t worry about the Church’s rules, whether it excommunicates them or gives them a lighter punishment. It’s better for them to ignore the Church than to approach God with a dishonest heart. In that case, they would be sinning against God, while the other case would only be a sin against the Church; if it's even considered a sin at all for not adhering to the Church's rules, given that the Church has no right to command anything that puts the soul in danger, and this type of case is always excluded from the Church's commandments. Because whatever the Church commands, it does so for God and for the salvation of the soul, assuming that a person is capable of receiving and fulfilling its command. If that assumption fails, then the command doesn’t apply, since nothing can be decreed that goes against God’s commandments, which bind the conscience.
[Sidenote: The purpose of a Better Life—Its Difficulty]
[Sidenote: The purpose of a Better Life—Its Difficulty]
It is certainly to be feared that many come to confession out of fear of the commandment of the Church, who in their hearts are still pleased with their former evil life. If, however, a man is entangled in these difficulties, fearing to stay away from confession, and yet perceiving (if the truth were told) that he lacks the disposition toward a better life, let him lay hold of the one thing that remains, and hear the counsel of the Prophet, "Pour out your heart before Him"; [Ps. 62:8] and let him abase himself, and openly confess to God the whole evil of his heart, and pray for and desire a good purpose. Who, indeed, is so proud as to think he does not need this counsel? There is no one whose good purpose is as great as it ought to be. Let a man, therefore, fearlessly seek from God what he knows he cannot find in himself, until the thought of a better life begin seriously and truly to please him, and his own life to displease him. For the doctrines about the forming of a good purpose, which have been handed down to us and are everywhere taught, are not to be understood in the sense that a man should of himself form and work out this good purpose. Such an understanding is death and perdition; as one says, "There is death in the pot, O man of God." [2 Kings 4:40] And yet very many are grievously tormented by this idea, because they are taught to strive after the impossible. But in very despair, and pouring out his heart before God, a man should say, "Lord God, I have not what I ought to have, and cannot do what I ought to do. Give what Thou commandest, and command what Thou wilt." For thus St. Augustine prays in his Confessions. [4]
It’s definitely a concern that many people go to confession out of fear of the Church’s commandments while still secretly enjoying their past bad behavior. However, if someone finds themselves trapped in this struggle, worried about missing confession but realizing (if we’re being honest) that they lack the desire for a better life, they should hold onto the one thing that remains and listen to the advice of the Prophet: “Pour out your heart before Him” [Ps. 62:8]. They should humble themselves and openly confess to God the wickedness in their heart, asking for and longing for a good intention. Who among us is so proud as to think they don’t need this advice? No one has a good intention as strong as it should be. So, a person should boldly ask God for what they know they can’t find in themselves until the idea of a better life genuinely pleases them and their current life no longer satisfies them. The teachings about cultivating a good intention, which have been passed down and are taught everywhere, shouldn’t be understood as if a person should create and shape this good intention by themselves. Such an understanding leads to death and destruction, as it’s said, "There is death in the pot, O man of God" [2 Kings 4:40]. Yet many are deeply troubled by this idea because they are taught to strive for the impossible. In their despair, and while pouring out their heart before God, they should say, "Lord God, I don’t have what I should have, and I can’t do what I should do. Give what You command and command what You will." This is how St. Augustine prayed in his Confessions. [4]
FIFTH
[Sidenote: The Purpose of a Better Life—Its Nature]
[Sidenote: The Purpose of a Better Life—Its Nature]
But what has been said about a good purpose, I wish to have understood with caution. For a good purpose ought to be twofold. First, a purpose with regard to open, mortal sins, such as adultery, homicide, fornication, theft, robbery, usury, slander, etc. The purpose to avoid these sins belongs properly to sacramental Confession, and to confession before God it belongs at any moment after the sins have been committed; according to the word of Ecclesiasticus, "My son, hast thou sinned? Do so no more, but ask pardon for thy former sins," [Ecclus. 21:1] and again, "Make no tarrying to turn to the Lord." [Ecclus. 5:8] In the second place, however, as regards all the sins they call "venial" (of which more below), it is entirely vain to labor after the forming of a good purpose, because if one rightly considers himself, he will find such a purpose altogether impossible, if he wishes henceforth to live in the flesh; since (as Augustine says) this life cannot be lived without such sins as unnecessary and thoughtless laughter, language, imaginations, sights, sounds, etc. As regards such things it is uncertain whether they are sins, or temptations by which merit is increased. And yet it is marvelous how a patent is vexed and worried in these matters by the present wordy manner of confessing. A purpose ought to be certain, and directed toward things which are certain and which can be shunned in common living, like the aforesaid open, mortal sins.
But what has been said about a good intention should be understood with caution. A good intention should have two parts. First, it should relate to serious sins like adultery, murder, fornication, theft, robbery, usury, slander, and so on. The intention to avoid these sins is essential for sacramental Confession and should be made before God at any moment after the sins have been committed; as the book of Ecclesiasticus says, "My son, have you sinned? Do so no more, but ask for forgiveness for your past sins," [Ecclus. 21:1] and again, "Do not delay to turn to the Lord." [Ecclus. 5:8] Secondly, regarding what are called "venial" sins (which I will explain further below), it’s pointless to strive for a good intention, because if someone truly examines themselves, they'll realize that having such an intention is completely impossible if they wish to continue living in this world; for, as Augustine states, this life cannot be lived without certain sins like unnecessary and thoughtless laughter, words, thoughts, sights, sounds, etc. It’s uncertain whether these things are sins or temptations that actually lead to merit. Yet, it’s astonishing how a person feels troubled and stressed about these matters in the current overly wordy style of confession. An intention should be clear and focused on things that are certain and can be avoided in everyday life, like the serious sins mentioned above.
SIXTH
[Sidenote: Hidden Sins—Are They to be Confessed?]
[Sidenote: Hidden Sins—Should They Be Confessed?]
Whether the hidden sins of the heart, which are known only to God and the man who commits them, belong to sacramental confession or not, is more than I can say. I should prefer to say that they do not. For the need of confessing these sins can in no way be proved, either by reason or by Scripture, and I have often suspected that it was all an invention of avaricious or curious or tyrannical prelates, who took this way of bringing the people of Christ to fear them. This is, in my opinion, laying hands on the judgment of God and is a violation of the rights of God, especially if men are forced to it.[5]
Whether the hidden sins of the heart, known only to God and the person who commits them, are part of sacramental confession or not is something I can’t definitively say. I would prefer to argue that they are not. The necessity of confessing these sins cannot be proven by either reason or Scripture, and I've often suspected that it was all a scheme by greedy, intrusive, or oppressive church leaders, who used this method to instill fear in the followers of Christ. In my view, this interferes with God's judgment and violates God's rights, especially when people are compelled to do it.[5]
Here comes in that whole sea of laws and impossible questions about "cases of sin," [6] etc., since it is impossible for a man to know when he has in his heart committed the mortal sins of pride, lust, or envy. Nay, how can the priest know this, when he is set in judgment upon mortal sins alone? Can he know another's heart who does not thoroughly know his own? Hence it comes that many people confess many things, not knowing whether they are sins or not; and to this they are driven by that sentence of Gregory, "A good mind will confess guilt even where there is no guilt." They [i. e., the priests] wish that what is offered to God shall be offered to themselves—so immense is the arrogance of priests and pontiffs, and so haughty the pride of the Pharisees—and they do not see, meanwhile, that if this offering were made to man, the whole of life would be nothing else than confession, and that even this confession would have to be confessed in another confession by the man who fears guilt where there is no guilt, since even good works are not without guilt, and Job is afraid of all his works. [Job 9:28]
Here comes the whole sea of laws and impossible questions about "cases of sin," since it’s impossible for someone to know when they've committed the mortal sins of pride, lust, or envy in their heart. How can the priest know this when he's judging only mortal sins? Can he understand someone else’s heart when he doesn’t fully understand his own? As a result, many people confess a lot of things, not knowing if they are sins or not; and they are pushed into this by Gregory's saying, "A good mind will confess guilt even where there is no guilt." The priests want what is offered to God to be offered to them as well—so great is the arrogance of priests and popes, and so high the pride of the Pharisees—and they fail to see that if this offering were made to people, life would boil down to nothing but confession, and even that confession would need to be confessed in another confession by the person who fears guilt where there is none, since even good deeds aren’t without guilt, and Job is afraid of all his actions. [Job 9:28]
SEVENTH
[Sidenote: Hidden Sins—What Hidden Sins Should be Confessed?]
[Sidenote: Hidden Sins—What Hidden Sins Should be Confessed?]
Let some one else, then, explain this. I am content with this, that not all the sins of the heart are to be confessed. But if some are to be confessed, I say that it is only those which a man clearly knows that he has purposed in his heart against the commandments of God;[7] not, therefore, mere thoughts about a virgin or a woman, nor, on the other hand, the thoughts of a woman about a youth, nor the affections or ardor of lust, that is to say, the inclinations of the one sex toward the other, however unseemly, nor, I would add, even passions of this sort; for these thoughts are frequently passions inspired by the flesh, the world, or the devil, which the soul is compelled unwillingly to bear, sometimes for a long while, even for a whole day, or a week; as the apostle Paul confesses of his thorn in the flesh. [2 Cor. 12:7]
Let someone else explain this. I'm okay with the idea that not all heart sins need to be confessed. But if some do need to be confessed, I believe it's only those that a person clearly knows they have intentionally harbored in their heart against God's commandments; not just random thoughts about a virgin or a woman, nor the thoughts of a woman about a young man, nor the feelings or desires of lust, meaning the inclinations of one sex towards the other, no matter how inappropriate, nor, I should add, even passions of this kind; because these thoughts are often desires triggered by the flesh, the world, or the devil, which the soul is forced to endure, sometimes for a long time, even for an entire day or a week; as the apostle Paul mentions regarding his thorn in the flesh. [2 Cor. 12:7]
The consequence of all this is that a purpose to avoid these things is impossible and vain and deceitful, for the inclinations and desires of the sexes for one another do not cease so long as occasion is given them, and the devil is not quiet, and out whole nature is sin. But those who wish to be without sin and who believe that man is sound and whole, erect these crosses for us that we may not cease to confess (even to the priest) what things soever tickle us never so little. Therefore, if these hidden things of the heart ought to be confessed at all, only those things should be confessed which involve full consent to the deed; and such things happen very rarely or never to those who wish to lead pious lives, even though they are constantly harassed by desires and passions.
The consequence of all this is that trying to avoid these things is futile, deceptive, and impossible because the natural attractions and desires between the sexes continue as long as there's the opportunity, and temptation is ever-present, while our whole nature is inclined toward sin. However, those who want to live without sin and believe that humans are fundamentally good create these burdens for us so we feel we must confess (even to the priest) everything that gives us the slightest pleasure. Therefore, if these hidden aspects of the heart need to be confessed at all, only those things involving full consent to the act should be acknowledged; and such situations occur very rarely, if at all, for those who strive to live piously, even though they are constantly troubled by desires and passions.
EIGHT
[Sidenote: Mortal and Venial Sins]
[Sidenote: Major and Minor Sins]
At this place we should also speak of that race of audacious theologians who are born to the end that the true fear of God may be extinguished in human hearts, and that they may smite the whole world with false terrors. It might seem that Christ was speaking of them when he told of "terrors from heaven." [Luke 21:11 Vulg.] These are the men who have undertaken to distinguish for us between mortal and venial sin. When men have heard that a certain sin is venial, they are careless and wholly leave off fearing God, as if He counted a venial sin for naught; again, if they have heard that the consent of the heart is a mortal sin, and if they have failed to listen to the precepts of the Church, or have committed some other trifling offence, there is no place in their hearts for Christ, because of the confusion made by the roaring sea of a troubled conscience.
At this point, we should also talk about that group of bold theologians whose purpose seems to be to extinguish the genuine fear of God from people’s hearts, and to overwhelm the world with false fears. It might seem like Christ was referring to them when He mentioned "terrors from heaven." [Luke 21:11 Vulg.] These are the individuals who have taken it upon themselves to differentiate between mortal and venial sins for us. When people hear that a certain sin is venial, they become careless and completely stop fearing God, as if He doesn’t consider a venial sin serious at all; on the other hand, if they’ve heard that the consent of the heart is a mortal sin, and if they’ve ignored the teachings of the Church, or made some other minor mistake, there’s no room in their hearts for Christ due to the turmoil of a troubled conscience.
Against these teachers it should be known that a man ought to give up in despair the idea that he can ever confess all his mortal sins, and that the doctrine which is contained in the Decretals[8] and is current in the Church, to wit, that every Christian should once in a year make confession of all his sins (so the words run), is either a devilish and most murderous doctrine, or else is sorely in need of a loose interpretation.
Against these teachers, it's important to understand that a person should give up the hopeless idea that they can ever confess all their sins. The belief found in the Decretals and accepted by the Church—that every Christian should confess all their sins at least once a year—either reflects a cruel and harmful doctrine or is in desperate need of a more flexible interpretation.
Not all sins, I say, either mortal or venial, are to be confessed, but it should be known that after a man has used all diligence in confessing, he has yet confessed only the smaller part of his sins. How do we know this? Because the Scripture says, "Cleanse Thou me from hidden sins, O Lord." [Ps. 19:12] These hidden sins God alone knows. And again it says, "Create in me a clean heart, O God." [Ps. 51:10] Even this holy prophet confesses that his heart is unclean. And all the holy Church prays, "Thy will be done"; [Matt. 6:10] and thus confesses that she does not do the will of God, and is herself a sinner.
Not all sins, whether serious or minor, need to be confessed, but it's important to realize that even after someone has put in a lot of effort to confess, they’ve only covered a small portion of their sins. How do we know this? Because Scripture says, "Cleanse me from my hidden sins, O Lord." [Ps. 19:12] Only God knows these hidden sins. It also says, "Create in me a clean heart, O God." [Ps. 51:10] Even this holy prophet admits that his heart is not pure. And the whole Church prays, "Your will be done"; [Matt. 6:10] which acknowledges that she doesn't fully follow God's will and is herself a sinner.
[Sidenote: Should All Mortal Sins be Confessed?]
[Sidenote: Should All Mortal Sins be Confessed?]
Furthermore, we are so far from being able to know or confess all the mortal sins that even our good works are damnable and mortal, if God were to judge with strictness, and not to receive them with forgiving mercy. If, therefore, all mortal sins are to be confessed, it can be done in a brief word, by saying at once, "Behold, all that I am, my life, all that I do and say, is such that it is mortal and damnable"; according to what is written in the cxliii. Psalm, "Enter not into judgment with Thy servant, for in Thy sight shall no flesh living be justified" [Ps. 143:2]; and in the Epistle to the Romans, Chapter vii, "But I am carnal, sold under sin; I know that in my flesh dwelleth no good thing; the evil that I would not, that I do, etc." [Rom. 7:14, 18, 19]
Furthermore, we are so far from being able to know or confess all the serious sins that even our good deeds are condemnable and deadly if God were to judge us strictly, without receiving them with His forgiving mercy. Therefore, if all serious sins need to be confessed, it can be done simply by saying, "Look, everything I am, my life, everything I do and say, is such that it is deadly and condemnable"; as it says in Psalm 143:2, "Do not enter into judgment with Your servant, for in Your sight no living being will be justified"; and in Romans, Chapter 7, "For I am carnal, sold under sin; I know that in my flesh nothing good dwells; the evil that I do not want, that I practice," etc.
But of all mortal sins, this is the most mortal, not to believe that we are hateful in the sight of God because of damnable and mortal sin. To such madness these theologians, with this rule of theirs, strive zealously and perniciously to drag the consciences of men, by teaching that venial sins are to be distinguished from mortal sins, and that according to their own fashion. For we read in Augustine, Cyprian, and other Fathers that those things which are bound and loosed are not mortal sins, but criminal offences, i. e., those acts of which men can be accused and convicted.
But out of all the serious sins, this is the most serious: not believing that we are disgusting in God's eyes because of terrible and deadly sin. These theologians push this idea zealously and harmfully, trying to pull people's consciences into madness by teaching that minor sins are different from major sins, and that it’s defined in their own way. For we read in Augustine, Cyprian, and other Church Fathers that the things that are bound and loosed are not major sins, but criminal offenses, meaning those actions for which people can be accused and convicted.
Therefore, by the term "all sins" in the Decretal we should understand those things of which a man is accused, either by others or by his own conscience. By "conscience" I mean a right conscience, not a conscience seared and deformed by human traditions, but a conscience which is expert in the commandments of God, and which knows that much more is to be left solely to the goodness of God than is to be committed to its own diligence.
Therefore, when we refer to "all sins" in the Decretal, we should understand it to mean the things a person is accused of, whether by others or by their own conscience. By "conscience," I mean a healthy conscience, not one that's been distorted and damaged by human traditions, but a conscience that is well-versed in the commandments of God and recognizes that far more should be entrusted solely to God's goodness than to its own efforts.
But what if the devil, when a man is dying, raises the obstacle of sins which have not been confessed, as we read in many of the stories?[9] I answer. Let these sins go long with those of which it is said, "Who can understand his faults?" [Ps. 19:12] and with those others of which it is written, "Enter not into judgment with Thy servant." [Ps. 143:2] Whatever stories have been made up contrary to these sayings, have either been invented under some devilish delusion, or are not rightly understood. It is enough that thou hast had the will to confess all things, if thou hadst known them or hadst been able. God wills that His mercy be glorified. But how? In our righteousness? Nay, in our sins and miseries. The Scriptures should be esteemed more highly than any stories.
But what if the devil, when someone is dying, brings up the sins that haven't been confessed, as we've read in many stories?[9] I say, let those sins be included with those about which it is said, "Who can understand his faults?" [Ps. 19:12] and with the others that say, "Enter not into judgment with Thy servant." [Ps. 143:2] Any stories that contradict these statements have either been made up under some kind of devilish illusion or have been misunderstood. It's enough that you had the intention to confess everything, if you had known about them or could have done so. God wants His mercy to be celebrated. But how? In our righteousness? No, in our sins and hardships. The Scriptures should be valued more than any stories.
NINTH
[Sidenote: Distinction between Sins]
[Sidenote: Difference Between Sins]
By thus getting down to the thing itself,[10] the penitent, of whom I have so often spoken, does away entirely with that riot of distinctions; to wit, whether he has committed sin by fear humbling him to evil, or by love inflaming him to evil; what sins he has committed against the three theological virtues of faith, hope, and charity; what sins against the four cardinal virtues; what sins by the five senses; what of the seven mortal sins, what against the seven sacraments, what against the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit, what against the eight beatitudes, what of the nine peccata aliena, what against the twelve Articles of Faith, what of the silent sins, what of the sins crying to heaven; or whether he has sinned by or against anything else.[11] That hateful and wearisome catalogue of distinctions is altogether useless, nay, it is altogether harmful. Some have added to these evils a most troublesome business of "circumstances."
By focusing on the matter at hand,[10] the person seeking forgiveness, whom I've mentioned frequently, completely eliminates that chaotic list of distinctions; for example, whether he has sinned out of fear that led him to wrongdoing, or out of love that drove him to sin; what sins he has committed against the three theological virtues of faith, hope, and charity; what sins against the four cardinal virtues; what sins through the five senses; what about the seven deadly sins, what against the seven sacraments, what against the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit, what against the eight beatitudes, what of the nine peccata aliena, what against the twelve Articles of Faith, what about the unconfessed sins, what of the sins that cry out to heaven; or whether he has sinned by or against anything else.[11] That annoying and exhausting list of distinctions is completely useless, in fact, it is harmful. Some have added to these troubles a very complicated issue of "circumstances."
By all this they have produced two results. First, the penitent makes so much of these trifles that he is not able really to give heed to the thing of chief importance, namely, the desire for a better life. He is compelled to tax his memory with such a mass of details, and so to fill his heart with the business of rightly expressing his cares and anxieties, while seeking out forgotten sins or a way of confessing them, that he entirely loses the present pangs of conscience, and the whole profit and salutary effect of confession. When he is absolved, therefore, he rejoices not so much because he is absolved, as because he has freed himself once for all from the wretched worry of confession; for what he has been seeking has been not the absolution, but rather the end of the laborious nuisance of confessing. Thus, while we sleep secure, everything is upset again. In the second place, such penitents weary the confessor, stealing his time, and standing in the way of other penitents.
By all this, they have created two outcomes. First, the penitent focuses so much on these trivial matters that they can’t truly pay attention to what really matters: the desire for a better life. They have to overload their memory with too many details and fill their heart with the effort of properly expressing their worries and anxieties while digging up forgotten sins or figuring out how to confess them. As a result, they completely lose touch with their current feelings of guilt and miss out on the true benefits and healing effects of confession. When they are absolved, they don’t rejoice as much because they’ve been forgiven, but because they’ve finally freed themselves from the painful hassle of confession. What they’ve really been looking for isn’t absolution, but an end to the exhausting process of confessing. So, while we feel safe, everything gets disrupted again. Secondly, such penitents wear out the confessor, wasting his time and blocking the way for other penitents.
[Sidenote: The Commandments a Guide to Confession]
[Sidenote: The Commandments a Guide to Confession]
We ought, therefore, to look briefly at the Commandments of God, in which, if they are rightly understood, all sins are, without doubt, contained.[12] And not even all of these are to be considered, but the last two Commandments are to be excluded entirely from confession. Confession should be brief, and should be a confession chiefly of those sins which cause pain at the time of confession, and, as they say, "move to confession." For the sacrament of confession was instituted for the quieting, not for the disturbing, of the conscience.
We should briefly examine God's Commandments, which, if understood correctly, encompass all sins. And not all of them need to be considered; the last two Commandments should be completely excluded from confession. Confession should be short and focus mainly on those sins that cause distress at the time of confession and, as they say, "prompt confession." The sacrament of confession was established to soothe the conscience, not to unsettle it.
For example, as regards the Commandment, "Thou shalt not commit adultery," let the penitent quickly say in what manner he has given place to lust, either in act or word, or by consent, just as though he were describing himself entirely, with all his limbs and senses, in that Commandment. Why, then, should he uselessly bring in the five senses, the mortal sins, and the rest of that ocean of distinctions? So in the case of the Commandment, "Thou shalt not kill." Let him quickly say by what kind of wrath he has sinned, whether by hatred, slander or cursing, or by the act of murder itself. And so with the rest; as I have tried to show in my Preceptorium and my writings on the Decalogue.[13]
For example, regarding the Commandment, "You shall not commit adultery," let the person confess quickly how they have given in to lust, whether through actions, words, or consent, as if they were describing themselves completely, with all their limbs and senses, in relation to that Commandment. So why should they unnecessarily bring up the five senses, the deadly sins, and all the other complicated details? Similarly, with the Commandment, "You shall not kill," they should promptly state what type of anger led them to sin, whether it was through hatred, gossip, cursing, or the act of murder itself. The same goes for the other commandments, as I’ve tried to explain in my Preceptorium and my writings on the Ten Commandments.[13]
Let it not disturb anyone that in the Decretals on Penance and in the IV. Book of the Sentences[14] this matter is differently treated. For they all are full of human inventions; and no wonder! They have taken everything they say out of a certain apocryphal and unlearned book called De vera et falsa poenitentia,[15] which is widely circulated, and ascribed, by a lying title, to St. Augustine.
Let no one be troubled that in the Decretals on Penance and in the IV. Book of the Sentences[14] this issue is discussed differently. After all, they are all full of human-made ideas; and it’s no surprise! They have taken everything they claim from a certain apocryphal and uneducated book called De vera et falsa poenitentia,[15] which is widely circulated and falsely attributed to St. Augustine.
TENTH
[Sidenote: Commandments of God and of Man]
[Sidenote: Commandments of God and of Man]
In making confession diligence should be used to distinguish with great care between sins committed against the Commandments of God and sins committed against the statutes of men. I say this because of the mad opinion, which is now prevalent, that sins which are committed against the decretals of the popes are to be noted with wondrous care, but sins committed against God, with little or none.
In making a confession, it's important to be careful to clearly distinguish between sins committed against God's Commandments and those against human laws. I mention this because there's a troubling belief going around that sins against the pope's decrees should be meticulously recorded, while sins against God are often overlooked or ignored.
Let me give you some illustrations:
Let me give you some examples:
You will find priests and monks who are horrified, as at some prodigy, if they stammer, or repeat even a syllable in the Canon of the Mass,[16] though this may be a natural defect of the tongue, or an accident, and is not a sin. Again, there is no priest who does not confess that he was distracted, or failed to read his Preparatoria, or other old-womanish trifles of the kind. There was one who, even when he was at the altar celebrating, called a priest three times and confessed that something had happened. Indeed, I have seen these endless jests of the devil taken by many so seriously that they almost lost their minds. And yet the fact that they cherished hatred or envy in their hearts, that they had cursed before or after Mass, that they had intentionally lied or slandered, all this moved them not at all. Whence this perversity? From the "traditions of men who turn from the truth," [Tit. 1:14] as the Apostle says. Because we have neglected to offer God a confession of true sins, He has given us up to our reprobate sense, [Rom. 1:24] so that we delude ourselves with fictitious sins and deprive ourselves of the benefit of the sacrament,[17] and the more we seem to seek it, the more this is true.
You’ll find priests and monks who are horrified, as if witnessing some miracle, if they stammer or even repeat a syllable during the Canon of the Mass, even though this might just be a natural speech issue or an accident, and is not a sin. Likewise, there isn’t a priest who doesn’t admit that he got distracted or forgot to read his Preparatoria or other trivial things. There was even one who, while celebrating at the altar, called on a priest three times and admitted that something had happened. I’ve seen many take these endless tricks of the devil so seriously that they nearly lost their minds. Yet, the fact that they harbored hatred or envy in their hearts, that they had cursed before or after Mass, or that they had intentionally lied or gossiped—none of this bothered them at all. Where does this distortion come from? From the "traditions of men who turn away from the truth," as the Apostle says. Because we have failed to offer God a confession of real sins, He has allowed us to follow our misguided instincts, so we trick ourselves with imaginary sins and cut ourselves off from the blessing of the sacrament, and the more we seem to seek it, the more this holds true.
[Sidenote: They Tyranny of Ordinances]
[Sidenote: The Tyranny of Rules]
Of this stuff are those who make the neglect of the canonical hours[18] an almost irremissible sin, while they easily remit fornication, which is against the commandments of God, or the neglect of duty toward our neighbor. These are they who so approve of that dream or story about St. Severinus[19] that they think they cannot read their Hours in advance, or afterward make them up without sin, even if they have been hindered at the proper time by the most just cause, such as ministering to the necessities of a neighbor, which is of six hundred times more merit than their worthless and all but damnable prayers. So far do they go in their failure to observe that the commandment of God, in the service of one's neighbor, should be preferred to the commandment of men, in the thoughtless mumbling of the words of the Hours. To this class too belong those who think it a crime to speak or to call a boy during the Canon of the Mass even in case of the greatest necessity or danger. Finally, these men make the fasting of nature one thing, and the fasting of the Church another thing, and if one has thoughtlessly swallowed some drops of liquid, or has taken some medicine, they exclude him utterly from the sacrament, and make it a sin, even the very greatest sin. I wonder whence these men have the authority to set up such laws as these and to trouble consciences with sins of their own invention. By these illustrations other, similar cases may be judged.
There are people who consider neglecting the canonical hours an almost unforgivable sin, while they easily overlook fornication, which goes against God's commandments, or failing to fulfill our responsibilities to our neighbors. They are the ones who are so convinced by the story about St. Severinus that they believe they can’t read their Hours in advance or make them up later without sin, even if they were unavoidably prevented at the right time for the most just reasons, like helping a neighbor in need, which is far more valuable than their pointless and nearly damnable prayers. They disregard the idea that fulfilling God's commandment to serve one’s neighbor should take precedence over the commandment of men, which involves just mindlessly reciting the words of the Hours. This group also includes those who think it’s wrong to speak to or call a boy during the Canon of the Mass, even in cases of extreme necessity or danger. Ultimately, these individuals separate natural fasting from Church fasting, and if someone accidentally swallows a small amount of liquid or takes medication, they completely bar that person from receiving the sacrament and label it as a sin, even the gravest of sins. I wonder where these individuals get the authority to create such laws that burden consciences with sins of their own making. The same judgment can be applied to other similar situations.
Of the laity, one confesses that he has tasted sweets, another that he has listened to jests, smelted perfumes, touched things that were soft.
Of the regular folks, one admits that he has enjoyed sweets, another that he has heard jokes, smelled perfumes, and felt things that were soft.
Let us come to greater things! The common people are persuaded that to eat butter or eggs on fast-days is heretical; so cruelly do the laws of men rave in the Church of God! And we unconcernedly profit by this superstition of the people, nay, by this tyranny of ours, caring nothing that the commandments of God are taken in jest, so long as men tremble and turn pale at our laws. No one calls an adulterer a heretic; fornication is a light sin; schisms and discords, inspired, preserved and increased by the authority and in the name of the Church, are merits; but to eat meat on Friday is the sum of all heresies. Thus we teach the people of Christ, and permit them to be taught! But I am disgusted, wearied, shamed, distressed at the endless chaos of superstitions which has been inflicted upon this most salutary sacrament of confession by the ignorance of true theology, which has been its own tyrant ever since the time that men have been making its laws.
Let’s aim for something better! Ordinary people believe that eating butter or eggs on fasting days is heresy; the laws created by men are incredibly harsh within the Church of God! We selfishly benefit from this superstition among the people, and from our own tyranny, not caring that God’s commandments are treated lightly, as long as people are afraid and scared of our rules. No one labels an adulterer as a heretic; fornication is seen as a minor sin; divisions and conflicts, fueled and maintained by the authority and in the name of the Church, are viewed as good; but eating meat on Friday is the ultimate heresy. This is how we instruct the followers of Christ, and let them be misled! I feel disgusted, tired, embarrassed, and troubled by the endless mess of superstitions that have been placed upon the essential sacrament of confession due to the ignorance of true theology, which has oppressed it ever since people started making its laws.
ELEVENTH
[Sidenote: Communion Without Confession]
[Sidenote: Communion Without Confession]
I advise, therefore, as John Gerson[20] used to advise, that a man shall now and then go to the altar or to the Sacrament "with a scruple of conscience," that is, without confession, even if he has been immoderate in drinking, talking, or sleeping, or has done something else that is wrong, or has not prayed a single one of the Hours. Would you know why this advice is given? Listen! It is in order that a man may learn to trust more in the mercy of God than in his own confession or in his own diligence. For enough cannot be done toward shaking that accursed trust in our own works. It should be done for this reason, too, that if a man is assailed by some necessity, whether temptation or death, and those hidden sins begin to appear which he has never been able to see or to confess, then he may have, ready and prepared, a practice of trusting in the mercy which God offers to the unworthy; according to the word, "His heart is prepared to trust in the Lord." [21] [Ps. 57:7] How shall a man hope, in the face of the sudden inroads of such a great mass of sins, if he has not learned in this life, while there was time, to hope in the Lord against the smallest, nay, against even an imagined sin? If you say, "What if this were despising the sacrament and tempting God?" I answer, It will not be tempting God if it is done for the glory of God; that is, if you do it, not because you despise God's sacrament nor because you want to tempt Him (since you are ready to make the fullest confession), but only in order that you may accustom a troubled conscience to trust in God and not to tremble at the rustling of every falling leaf. Do not doubt that everything pleases God which is done to the end that you may have trust in Him, since it is all His glory that we trust with our whole heart in His mercy.
I recommend, as John Gerson used to say, that a person occasionally approach the altar or take the Sacrament "with a scruple of conscience," which means without confession, even if they have been excessive in drinking, talking, or sleeping, or have done something wrong, or haven't prayed a single one of the Hours. Do you want to know why this advice is given? Listen! It's so that a person can learn to rely more on God's mercy than on their own confession or efforts. It’s important to break that wretched reliance on our own deeds. This is also necessary because if someone is faced with dire circumstances, whether it's temptation or death, and hidden sins start surfacing that they have never recognized or confessed, then they will have already developed a habit of trusting in the mercy that God offers to the unworthy; as it says, "His heart is prepared to trust in the Lord." [Ps. 57:7] How can a person hope when suddenly confronted with such a flood of sins if they haven't learned during their lifetime to hope in the Lord even against the smallest, or even imagined, sins? If you ask, "What if this is disrespecting the sacrament and tempting God?" I reply, it won't be tempting God if done for His glory; that is, if you do it not because you disregard God's sacrament or wish to test Him (since you are prepared to make a complete confession), but simply to help a troubled conscience learn to trust in God and not be anxious over every little concern. Rest assured, everything that is done to foster trust in Him pleases God, since it is all for His glory that we trust wholeheartedly in His mercy.
I do not wish, however, that a man should always go to the altar without confession; but I say that it should be done sometimes, and then only for the arousing of trust in God and the destroying of trust in our own act of confession. For a man will hardly go to mass without guilt, if he thinks his forgiveness sure because he has confessed, rather than because God is merciful; nay, this is altogether an impiety. The summa summarum[22] is, "Blessed are all they that put their trust in the Lord." [Ps. 2:12] When you hear this word, "in the Lord," know that he is unblessed who puts his trust in anything whatsoever that is not the Lord Himself. And such a man those "artists of confession" make; for what has the "art of confession" done except to destroy the art and practice of confiding, until at last we have learned to confess a great deal, to confide not at all.
I don't think a person should always approach the altar without confessing; however, I believe it should happen sometimes, and only to encourage trust in God and to weaken trust in our own act of confession. If someone believes their forgiveness is guaranteed simply because they've confessed, instead of relying on God's mercy, they're missing the point. This attitude is completely inappropriate. The summa summarum[22] is, "Blessed are all those who put their trust in the Lord." [Ps. 2:12] When you hear the phrase "in the Lord," understand that those who trust in anything other than the Lord Himself are not truly blessed. And those "confession experts" create such individuals; because what has the "art of confession" really accomplished other than undermining the true practice of trust, leading us to confess a lot but trust very little.
TWELFTH
[Sidenote: Reserved Cases—No Hidden Sins can be Reserved]
[Sidenote: Reserved Cases—No Hidden Sins can be Reserved]
In the matter of reserved cases,[23] many are troubled. For my own part, because I know that the laws of men to be subject to mercy, and be applied with mildness rather than with severity, I follow the custom and advice of those who think that in hidden sins no case is to be reserved, and therefore all penitents are to be absolved whose sins are hidden, as are the sins of the flesh, that is to say, every form of lust, the procuring of abortion, and the like. For it should not be presumed that any pope would be willing, in matters of hidden sin, to set so many snares and dangers for men's souls. But when a sin has been public, an open reserved case, it should be left entirely to the authorities of the Church, no matter whether they are just or unjust. In such case, however, the confessor may so moderate the power of the keys[24] as not to let the penitent depart without absolution, for those sins at least which he knows to be not reserved. Just now, to be sure, I am in doubt, and have not yet found a place for the proper discussion of it, whether any sin can be reserved, or ever is reserved, so far as the remission of guilt[25] is concerned; that the penalty can be reserved is not doubted; but of this let others judge. But even in the remission of the penalty, neither the confessor nor the penitent should be too much troubled by scruples. The penalty I have especially in mind is excommunication, or any other censure of the Church—what they call their lightnings and thunders. Since excommunication is only penalty and not guilt, and can be laid upon the innocent and allowed to remain upon the man who has returned to his senses, and, furthermore, since it is sometimes necessary to put off satisfaction, because of the length of the journey required or because of poverty; therefore the penitent who is excommunicated or under censure should be absolved from all his sins, if he seeks absolution, and be dismissed to the higher authorities to be loosed from excommunication and to make satisfaction. Thus he should be absolved in the judgment of God and of conscience from guilt and sins, and sent to the judgment of the Church to be freed from the penalty. This is what is meant when it is said that the desire to make satisfaction[26] suffices for the absolving of a sinner.
In the case of reserved sins,[23] many people are concerned. For my part, since I believe that human laws should be guided by mercy and applied gently rather than harshly, I align myself with those who argue that for hidden sins, no case should be reserved. Therefore, all penitents should be absolved of their hidden sins, like those of the flesh, including lust and abortion, among others. It shouldn’t be assumed that any pope would want to create so many traps and dangers for people's souls concerning hidden sins. However, when a sin is public and clearly reserved, it should be entirely left to the Church authorities, regardless of whether they are fair or unfair. In such cases, though, the confessor can use their discretion with the authority of the keys[24] to ensure that the penitent isn’t sent away without absolution, at least for sins they know are not reserved. Right now, I am uncertain and haven’t found the right place for a proper discussion about whether any sin can be reserved or ever is reserved in terms of guilt[25] remission; it’s widely accepted that penalties can be reserved, but that's for others to determine. Even when it comes to penalty remission, neither the confessor nor the penitent should get too caught up in scruples. The penalty I specifically have in mind is excommunication or any other Church censure—what they refer to as their lightning and thunder. Since excommunication is just a penalty, not guilt, it can be imposed on the innocent and remain on someone who has repented. Furthermore, it’s sometimes necessary to postpone satisfaction due to a long journey or because of poverty. Therefore, if the penitent who is facing excommunication or censure seeks absolution, they should be absolved from all their sins and directed to the higher authorities for release from excommunication and to fulfill their obligations. In this way, they should be absolved in God’s judgment and their own conscience from guilt and sins, and sent to the Church's judgment to be freed from the penalty. This is what’s meant when it’s said that the intention to make satisfaction[26] is enough for absolving a sinner.
LAST
[Sidenote: Vows]
[Vows]
The subject of vows should also have consideration, for it is almost the greatest question involved in this whole matter, and gives rise to much more confusion than does the reservation of cases, though this, too, rules its Babylon with great tyranny. If one would wish to speak freely on this subject, "the land would not be able to bear all his words," [Amos 7:10] as the impious Amaziah says of Amos.
The topic of vows should also be taken into account, as it's nearly the most important question in this entire issue and leads to much more confusion than the reservation of cases, though that does dominate its situation with great power. If someone wanted to speak openly about this topic, "the land would not be able to bear all his words," [Amos 7:10] just as the godless Amaziah says about Amos.
[Sidenote: Their Abuse]
[Sidenote: Their Mistreatment]
The first and best plan would be for the pontiffs and preachers to dissuade and deter the people from their proneness to the making of vows, to show them how the visiting of the Holy Land, Rome, Compostella,[27] and other holy places, as well as zeal in fastings, prayers, and works chosen by themselves, are nothing when compared with the works commanded by God and the vows which we have taken in baptism.[28] These vows every one can keep in his own home by doing his duty toward his neighbors, his wife, his children, his servants, his masters, and thereby gain incomparably greater merit than he can find by fulfilling vows to do works chosen by himself and not commanded by God. The foolish opinion of the common people and the ostentation of the Bulls[29] have brought it to pass that these vows of pilgrimages, fastings, prayers, and other works of the kind far outweigh in importance the works of God's Law, although we never have sufficient strength to do these last works. For my part, I could wish that there should not henceforth be any vows among Christian people except those which we take in baptism, and this, indeed, seems formerly to have been the case; and I would wish all to understand what is required of them, namely, that they be obedient to the commandments of God. For the vows of baptism seem to have been altogether cheapened by the too great practice, parade, dispensation, and redemption of these other vows. Let us put all our strength to the task, I say, and we shall find that we have vowed in baptism more than we are ever able to perform.
The first and best plan would be for the religious leaders to discourage people from their tendency to make vows, explaining how visiting the Holy Land, Rome, Compostella, and other sacred places, along with their enthusiasm for fasting, praying, and doing their own chosen works, are nothing compared to the tasks God has commanded and the vows we took in baptism. Everyone can fulfill those vows at home by doing their duty towards their neighbors, spouses, children, servants, and employers, thereby achieving far greater merit than what they could gain by fulfilling personal vows not commanded by God. The misguided beliefs of the common people and the showiness of the Bulls have led to an overemphasis on these vows of pilgrimage, fasting, prayer, and similar acts, making them seem more important than the works of God's Law, even though we often lack the strength to carry out those commandments. Personally, I wish that there would be no vows among Christians other than those taken in baptism, which seems to have been the case in the past. I want everyone to understand what is expected of them: to be obedient to God's commandments. The vows of baptism have been devalued due to the excessive practice, display, granting of exemptions, and redemption of these other vows. Let us put all our effort into this task and recognize that we have committed to more in our baptism than we are ever truly capable of fulfilling.
Some vows, including oaths, are made to men, others to God. Those made to men are admitted to be binding, so far and so long as he may desire, to whom the vow is made. Accordingly, it should be known that, as Gerson correctly thinks, the oaths and vows usually taken in the Universities or to worldly lords[30] ought not to be so rigorously regarded that every violation of them should be regarded as the breaking of a vow or an act of perjury. It is more just not to consider vows of this kind broken unless they are violated out of contempt and obstinate malice. It is otherwise in things that are vowed to God.
Some vows, including oaths, are made to people, while others are made to God. Vows made to people are generally considered binding as long as the person to whom the vow is made desires it. Therefore, as Gerson correctly suggests, the oaths and vows commonly taken at universities or to worldly leaders shouldn’t be regarded so strictly that any breach of them is seen as breaking a vow or committing perjury. It's fairer not to consider these kinds of vows broken unless they are violated out of contempt and stubborn malice. Vows made to God, however, are viewed differently.
[Sidenote: Vows Made to God]
Vows to God
In vows made to God, I see dispensation granted by the pontiffs, but I shall never be persuaded that he is safe to whom such a dispensation is granted. For such a vow is of divine law, and no pontiff, either mediate or supreme, has any more authority in this matter than any Christian brother, though I know that certain of the Decretals and the Glosses on the Decretals venture many statements about it which I do not believe.
In vows made to God, I see permission given by the popes, but I will never be convinced that someone is truly safe if they receive such permission. A vow like that is governed by divine law, and no pope, whether intermediary or supreme, has any more authority in this matter than any other Christian brother, even though I know that some of the Decretals and the commentaries on the Decretals make many claims about it that I do not believe.
This, however, I would readily believe, that a vow of chastity given before puberty, neither holds nor binds, because he who made the vow was ignorant of what he was promising, since he had not yet felt the "thorn of the flesh." [2 Cor. 12:7] It is my pious opinion that such a vow is counted by God as foolish and void, and that the fathers of the monasteries should be forbidden by a general edict of the Church to receive a man before his twentieth, or at least his eighteenth, year, and girls before their fifteenth or sixteenth, if we are really concerned about the care of souls.
This, however, I would easily believe: a vow of chastity made before puberty doesn’t hold or bind, because the person who made the vow didn’t understand what they were promising, as they hadn’t yet experienced the “thorn of the flesh.” [2 Cor. 12:7] In my honest opinion, such a vow is considered by God to be foolish and invalid, and the heads of monasteries should be prohibited by a universal decree from the Church from accepting a man before he turns twenty, or at least eighteen, and girls before they turn fifteen or sixteen, if we truly care about the well-being of souls.
[Sidenote: Commutation of Vows]
[Sidenote: Changing of Vows]
It is also a great piece of boldness, in commuting or remitting vows, to impose what they call "a better work." In the eyes of God there is no difference in works, and He judges works not according to their number or greatness, but according to the disposition of the doer; moreover, "the Lord is the weigher of spirits," [Rom. 8:27] as the Scripture says, and He often prefers the manual labor of the poor artisan to the fasting and prayer of the priest, of which we find an illustration in St. Anthony and the shoemaker of Alexandria.[31] Since these things are so, who shall be so bold and presumptuous as to commute a vow into some "better work"? But these things will have to be spoken of elsewhere, for here we have undertaken to speak of confession only as it concerns the Commandments of God, for the quieting and composing of consciences which are troubled by scruples.
It is also quite bold to change vows by offering what they call "a better work." In God's eyes, there is no distinction between works; He evaluates them not based on their quantity or grandeur, but on the intention of the person doing them. Furthermore, "the Lord is the weigher of spirits," [Rom. 8:27] as the Scripture states, and often values the simple labor of a poor worker more than the fasting and prayers of a priest, which is illustrated in the story of St. Anthony and the shoemaker of Alexandria.[31] Given this, who would be so arrogant as to change a vow into some "better work"? However, such matters will need to be discussed elsewhere, as our focus here is on confession in relation to God's Commandments, aimed at calming and reassuring consciences troubled by doubts.
[Sidenote: Abuses of Penance]
[Sidenote: Penance Misuse]
I shall add but one thing. There are many who set perilous snares for married folk, especially in case of incest; and when any one (for these things can happen, nay, alas! they do happen) has defiled the sister of his wife, or his mother-in-law, or one related to him in any degree of consanguinity, they at once deprive him of the right to pay the debt of matrimony, and nevertheless they suffer him not, nay, they forbid him, to desert his wife's bed. What monstrous thing is this? What new remedy for sin? What sort of satisfaction for sin? Does it not show how these tyrants make laws for other men's infirmity and indulge their own? Show me the law-giver, however penitent and chaste, who would allow such a law to be made for himself. They put dry wood on the fire and say, Do not burn; they put a man in a woman's arms and forbid him to touch her or know her; and they do this on their own authority and without the command of God. What madness! My advice is that the confessor beware of tyrannical decrees or laws, and confidently sentence a sinner to some other penance, or totally abstain from punishing, leaving free to him the right of matrimony which has been given him not by man, but by God. For no angel in heaven, still less any man on earth, has the power to enjoin this penance, which is the burning occasion of continual sin. Wherefore they are not to be heeded who wish such things to be done, and the penitent is to be freed from this scruple and peril.
I want to add one more thing. There are many who set dangerous traps for married people, especially in cases of incest. When someone (because these things can happen, and unfortunately, they do happen) has violated his wife’s sister, his mother-in-law, or anyone related to him by blood, they immediately take away his right to fulfill his marital duties, and yet they do not allow him, in fact, they forbid him, to leave his wife’s bed. What a monstrous situation this is! What new solution for sin is this? What kind of atonement for sin? Doesn’t it show how these tyrants create laws for others' weaknesses while indulging their own? Show me the lawmaker, no matter how regretful and pure, who would allow such a law to apply to himself. They throw dry wood onto the fire and say, "Don’t let it burn"; they force a man into a woman’s arms and forbid him to touch her or know her; and they do this on their own authority without God’s command. What madness! My advice to the confessor is to be cautious of oppressive decrees or laws and confidently assign a different penance to a sinner or completely refrain from punishment, allowing him the right to marry that has been granted to him not by man, but by God. For no angel in heaven, and even less any man on earth, has the authority to impose this penance, which only fuels continual sin. Therefore, those who wish for such things to happen should not be heeded, and the penitent should be freed from this burden and danger.
But who may recount all the tyrannies with which the troubled consciences of penitent and confessing Christians are daily disturbed, by means of death-bringing "constitutions" and customs, administered by silly manikins, who only know how to bind and place on the shoulders of men burdens grievous and heavy to be borne, which they themselves are not willing to move with a finger? [Matt. 23:4] So this most salutary sacrament of penance has become nothing else than a mere tyranny of the great, then a disease, and a means to the increase of sins. Thus in the end it signifies one thing and works another thing for miserable sinners, because priestlings, impious and unlearned in the law of the Lord, administer the Church of God, which they have filled with their laws and their dreams.
But who can list all the ways the troubled consciences of penitent and confessing Christians are daily disturbed by life-threatening "rules" and customs enforced by foolish individuals, who only know how to impose heavy burdens on people that they themselves won’t lift a finger to help with? [Matt. 23:4] So this once helpful sacrament of penance has turned into nothing but a heavy-handed oppression from those in power, then a sickness, and a way to increase sins. In the end, it means one thing and produces another for miserable sinners, because unholy and uneducated priests manage the Church of God, which they have filled with their own laws and fantasies.
Here follows, in the original, a paraphrase of the apocryphal Prayer of Manasseh.
Here is a paraphrase of the apocryphal Prayer of Manasseh.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Luther quotes from the Vulgate and frequently from memory, a fact which should always be remembered in comparing his quotations from the text of Scripture.
[1] Luther quotes from the Vulgate and often from memory, which is something to keep in mind when comparing his quotes from the Scripture text.
[2] Vulgate, Justus prior est accusator.
Vulgate, Justice is the accuser.
[3] The apocryphal Prayer of Manasseh was included by Luther as an appendix to this treatise.
[3] The apocryphal Prayer of Manasseh was added by Luther as an appendix to this work.
[4] Augustine Conf., X, 29.
[4] Augustine Conf., X, 29.
[5] i. e., Forced to confess hidden sins.
[5] i. e., Forced to admit secret wrongdoings.
[6] The so-called "science of casuistry," by which the moral value of an act is determined and the exact degree of guilt attaching to a given sin is estinated.
[6] The so-called "science of casuistry," which determines the moral value of an action and estimates the exact degree of guilt associated with a particular sin.
[7] Cf. Small Catechism, "Of Confession," Ques. "What sins ought we to confess?"
[7] Cf. Small Catechism, "Of Confession," Ques. "What sins should we confess?"
[8] The decrees of the Popes collected in the Canon Law. The decretal here referred to is C. Omnis Utriusque, X. de poententiis et remissionibus.
[8] The rules from the Popes compiled in Canon Law. The decretal mentioned here is C. Omnis Utriusque, X. de poententiis et remissionibus.
[9] Anecdotes illustrating the doctrines of the Church were favorite contents of the sermons in Luther's day. Various collections of these edifying legends are still extant. Cf. p. 224, and note.
[9] Stories that illustrated the teachings of the Church were popular topics in sermons during Luther's time. Several collections of these inspiring tales still exist. Cf. p. 224, and note.
[10] i. e., By thinking of the nature of confession.
[10] i. e., By considering the essence of confession.
[11] The reader of this minute classification of sins, which could be duplicated out of almost any manual of casuistry, may judge for himself whether Luther was correct in calling it a "riot of distinctions."
[11] The reader of this detailed classification of sins, which could be found in almost any book on moral reasoning, can decide for themselves if Luther was right in calling it a "riot of distinctions."
[12] Luther steadily maintained that the Ten Commandments were a complete guide to holy living and that every possible sin his prohibited somewhere in the Decalogue. See, beside the various smaller treatises (Kurze Unterweisung wie man beichten soll (1518), Kurze Form des zehn Gobte (1520), etc.), the large Discourse on Good Works, below, pp. 184 ff.
[12] Luther consistently argued that the Ten Commandments were a comprehensive guide to living a holy life and that every possible sin was prohibited somewhere in the Decalogue. In addition to various smaller treatises (Kurze Unterweisung wie man beichten soll (1518), Kurze Form des zehn Gobte (1520), etc.), there is the larger Discourse on Good Works, found on pages 184 and following.
[13] The writings mentioned are found in the Weimar Ed., Vol I, pp. 250 ff, 258 ff, 398 ff. See above, p. 75, note 1.
[13] The writings mentioned are found in the Weimar Ed., Vol I, pp. 250 ff, 258 ff, 398 ff. See above, p. 75, note 1.
[14] The Sentences of Peter the Lombard was the standard text-book of Medieval theology.
[14] The Sentences by Peter the Lombard was the main textbook for Medieval theology.
[15] "On True and False Penitence," now universally admitted not to have been written by St. Augustine, but passing under his name till after the Reformation.
[15] "On True and False Penitence," now widely recognized as not being written by St. Augustine, but attributed to him until after the Reformation.
[16] That part of the liturgy of the Mass in which the miraculous transformation of the elements into the Body and Blood of Christ is believed to take place.
[16] That part of the Mass where it is believed that the elements are miraculously transformed into the Body and Blood of Christ.
[17] i. e., Of the sacrament of confession.
[17] i. e., About the sacrament of confession.
[18] The fixed hours of daily prayer observed in the monasteries, afterward applied to the liturgy for these services, viz., the Breviary. The daily reading of this breviary at the appointed hours is required of all clergy.
[18] The set times for daily prayer practiced in the monasteries were later used for the liturgy for these services, specifically the Breviary. All clergy are required to read this breviary at the designated hours each day.
[19] An Italian saint, d. 482, noted for the strictness and severity of his ascetic practices.
[19] An Italian saint, d. 482, known for his strict and severe ascetic practices.
[20] Professor of the University of Paris; one of the most popular and famous of the later Scholastics. He died 1429.
[20] Professor at the University of Paris; one of the most well-known and celebrated later Scholastics. He died in 1429.
[21] Vulgate, "Cor ejus paratus est."
[21] Vulgate, "His heart is prepared."
[22] We would say, "the whole thing in a nutshell."
[22] We would say, "the whole thing in a nutshell."
[23] i. e., Sins for which the confessor was not allowed to grant absolution without reference to some higher Church authority, to whose absolution they were "reserved." See Introduction, p. 79.
[23] i. e., Sins for which the confessor couldn't give absolution without checking with a higher Church authority, to whose absolution they were "reserved." See Introduction, p. 79.
[24] The power to "bind and loose" (Matt. 16:19), i. e., to forgive and to retain sins (John 20:23).
[24] The authority to "bind and loose" (Matt. 16:19), meaning to forgive and to hold onto sins (John 20:23).
[25] The Roman Church distinguished between the "guilt" and the "penalty" of sin. It was thought possible to forgive the former and retain the latter. Submission to the penalty is "satisfaction." See Introduction to XCV. Theses, p. 19.
[25] The Roman Church made a distinction between the "guilt" and the "penalty" of sin. It was believed that it was possible to forgive the former while still upholding the latter. Accepting the penalty is referred to as "satisfaction." See Introduction to XCV. Theses, p. 19.
[26] Votum satisfactionis. It was and is the teaching of the Roman Church that, where the actual reception of any sacrament is impossible, the earnest desire to receive it suffices for salvation. The desire is known as the votum sacramenti.
[26] Votum satisfactionis. The Roman Church has always taught that when it's not possible to actually receive a sacrament, a sincere wish to receive it is enough for salvation. This desire is referred to as the votum sacramenti.
[27] In Spain. The shrine of St. James at that place was a famous resort for pilgrims. Cf. below, p. 191, and note.
[27] In Spain. The shrine of St. James at that location was a popular destination for pilgrims. Cf. below, p. 191, and note.
[28] See the Treatise on the Sacrament of Baptism, above, pp. 68 ff.
[28] See the Treatise on the Sacrament of Baptism, above, pp. 68 ff.
[29] Luther doubtless refers to the decrees of the popes by which special rewards were attached to worship at certain shrines.
[29] Luther is certainly talking about the papal decrees that offered special rewards for worship at specific shrines.
[30] The oath of office and the oath of allegiance.
[30] The oath of office and the oath of allegiance.
[31] The story is repeated by Melanchthon in the Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Ch. XIII, Art. xxvii, 38 (Book of Concord, Eng. Trans., p. 288). The "Alexander Coriarius" of text is misleading.
[31] Melanchthon repeats the story in the Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Ch. XIII, Art. xxvii, 38 (Book of Concord, Eng. Trans., p. 288). The reference to "Alexander Coriarius" in the text is misleading.
THE FOURTEEN OF CONSOLATION
FOR SUCH AS LABOR AND ARE HEAVY LADEN
(TESSARADECAS CONSOLATORIA)
1520
1520
INTRODUCTION
1. When Luther's Elector, Frederick the Wise (1486-1525), returned to his residence at Torgau, after participating in the election of Emperor Charles V, at Frankfort-on-the-Main, in the summer of 1519, he was stricken with a serious illness, from which there seemed little hope of his recovery Concerned for his noble patron, and urged by Dr. George Spalatin, his friend at court, to prepare a "spiritual consolation" for the Elector, Luther wrote "The Fourteen of Consolation," one of his finest and tenderest devotional writings, and, in conception and execution, one of the most original of all his works.
1. When Luther's Elector, Frederick the Wise (1486-1525), returned to his residence in Torgau after taking part in the election of Emperor Charles V in Frankfort-on-the-Main during the summer of 1519, he fell seriously ill, and it seemed like there was little hope for his recovery. Worried about his noble patron and encouraged by Dr. George Spalatin, a friend at court, to create a "spiritual consolation" for the Elector, Luther wrote "The Fourteen of Consolation," which is one of his finest and most heartfelt devotional writings and, in terms of concept and execution, one of the most original of all his works.
Its composition falls within the months of August and September of the year 1519. On August 29th, the Day of the Beheading of St. John Baptist, we find him writing in Part I, chapter vi: "Does not the example of St. John Baptist, whom we commemorate on this day as beheaded by Herod, shame and amaze us all?" On September 22d, he sends the completed manuscript (in Latin) to Spalatin, requesting him to make a free translation of it into German and present it to the Elector. By the end of November Spalatin had completed his task (one marvels at the leisureliness of this, in view of the serious condition of the Elector; or was the manuscript translated and administered piecemeal to the noble patient?), and early in December he returned the original, doubtless together with his own translation, to Luther, who had requested its return, "in order to comfort himself therewith."
Its composition took place during August and September of 1519. On August 29th, the Day of the Beheading of St. John the Baptist, we see him writing in Part I, chapter vi: "Doesn't the example of St. John the Baptist, whom we honor on this day as having been beheaded by Herod, shame and amaze us all?" On September 22nd, he sends the completed manuscript (in Latin) to Spalatin, asking him to create a free translation into German and present it to the Elector. By the end of November, Spalatin had finished his task (one wonders at the slowness of this, considering the serious condition of the Elector; or was the manuscript translated and given to the noble patient bit by bit?), and early in December he returned the original, likely along with his own translation, to Luther, who had requested it back, "to comfort himself with it."
The work was, therefore, in the strictest sense, a private writing, and not in the least intended for publication.[1] But the importunities of those who had seen it, particularly of Spalatin, prevailed, and on December 18th Luther writes to the latter that "the Tessaradecas, in both Latin and German, is in the hands of the printer." On February 8th, 1520, he sends Spalatin a printed copy of the Latin, and six days later, one of the German edition. The latter contained a dedicatory letter to the Elector, which, however, by an oversight of the printer, and owing to Luther's absence at the time, was omitted in the Latin edition.
The work was, in the strictest sense, a private writing and not meant for publication at all.[1] However, the requests from those who had read it, especially Spalatin, convinced him otherwise. On December 18th, Luther writes to Spalatin that "the Tessaradecas, in both Latin and German, is with the printer." On February 8th, 1520, he sends Spalatin a printed copy of the Latin version, and six days later, a copy of the German edition. The latter included a letter dedicating it to the Elector, which, unfortunately, was omitted from the Latin edition due to a mistake by the printer and Luther's absence at the time.
In 1535, fifteen years after its first appearance in print, Luther issued his Tessaradecas in a new and final edition, adding a brief prefatory note. He no longer holds many of his former views, and there is much in his little book that he has outgrown and might now correct. But with characteristic unconcern, he lets it all stand, and even restores many passages that had been corrupted or omitted to their original form. It is a revised edition, with the errors, as it were, underscored. It is to be chiefly an historical record, to show the world how far he has progressed since its first writing (1 Tim. 4:15), a mile-post on the road of his inner development.[2] And more than this—and here one fancies he can see the sardonic smile on the battle-scarred face—it is to furnish his enemies with weapons against himself; he desires to show a favor to the hunters of contradictions in his works, "that they may have whereon to exercise their malice."
In 1535, fifteen years after it was first published, Luther released his Tessaradecas in a new and final edition, adding a short preface. He no longer agrees with many of his previous views, and there is a lot in this little book that he has outgrown and could now revise. But true to his usual indifference, he leaves everything as it is and even restores many parts that had been altered or left out to their original form. It is a revised edition, with the mistakes practically highlighted. Its main purpose is to serve as a historical record, showing the world how far he has come since he first wrote it (1 Tim. 4:15), marking a point in his personal growth.[2] Moreover—and one can almost picture a sardonic smile on his battle-worn face—it also provides his critics with ammunition against him; he wants to give those who seek contradictions in his works something to fuel their spite.
2. The plan of the work is in the highest degree original and artificial. The title, Tessaradecas consolatoria, which we have rendered "The Fourteen of Consolation," [3] is explained by Luther in the dedicatory epistle to the Elector, pp. 110 ff. The "Fourteen" were the fourteen patron saints of medieval devotion, called the "Defenders from all evils" (defendores, auxiliatores). Whence the cult arose is not altogether certain. It is said to have become popular in Germany since the vision of a Franconian shepherd, in 1446, to whom there appeared, in the fields, the Christ-child surrounded by the fourteen saints. The Vierzehnheiligenkirche at Staffelstein, a famous shrine for pilgrims, marks the spot. The names of the "Fourteen," each of whom was a defender against some particular disease or danger, are as follows: Achatius (Acacius), Aegidius, Barbara (cf. St. Barbara's cress), Blasius (the "defender" of those afflicted with throat diseases), Catharine (cf. St. Catharine's flower), Christopher (cf. St. Christopher's herb), Cyriacus, Dionysius, Erasmus (Italian: San Elmo; cf. St. Elmo's fire), Eustachius, George the Martyr (cf. St. George's herb), Margaret, Pantaleon, and Vitus (cf. St. Vitus's dance). Luther's Sermons on the First Commandment (1516) may be compared lot references to some of these saints and to many others.
2. The work's layout is highly original and cleverly designed. The title, Tessaradecas consolatoria, which we’ve translated as "The Fourteen of Consolation," [3] is explained by Luther in the dedicatory letter to the Elector, pp. 110 ff. The "Fourteen" refers to the fourteen patron saints of medieval devotion, known as the "Defenders from all evils" (defendores, auxiliatores). The origin of this cult isn't entirely clear. It is said to have gained popularity in Germany after a vision experienced by a Franconian shepherd in 1446, who saw the Christ-child surrounded by the fourteen saints in the fields. The Vierzehnheiligenkirche at Staffelstein, a well-known pilgrimage site, marks the location. The names of the "Fourteen," each of whom was a protector against specific diseases or dangers, are as follows: Achatius (Acacius), Aegidius, Barbara (see St. Barbara's cress), Blasius (the protector of those suffering from throat diseases), Catharine (see St. Catharine's flower), Christopher (see St. Christopher's herb), Cyriacus, Dionysius, Erasmus (Italian: San Elmo; see St. Elmo's fire), Eustachius, George the Martyr (see St. George's herb), Margaret, Pantaleon, and Vitus (see St. Vitus's dance). Luther's Sermons on the First Commandment (1516) may contain references to some of these saints as well as others.
As over against these saints, Luther also invents fourteen defenders or comforters, and arranges them in this writing in the form of an altar tablet; but his is not a tablet such as those found in the churches, representing the fourteen defenders, but it is a spiritual tablet or painting, to uplift and strengthen the pious heart of the Elector, and of all others who are weary and heavy laden. The first division, or panel, of this figurative altar-piece contains the images or paintings of seven evils (maia); the second, those of seven blessings (bona). The contemplation of the evils will comfort the weary and heavy laden by showing them how small their evil is in comparison with the evil that they have within themselves, namely, their sin; with the evils they have suffered in the past, and will have to suffer in the future; with the evils which others, their friends and foes, suffer; and, above all, with those which Christ suffered on the cross. Similarly, the contemplation of the blessings will help them to forget their present sufferings; for they are as nothing compared with the blessing within them, namely, their faith; the blessings they enjoyed in the past, and those that await them in the future, as well as those which arc enjoyed by their friends and foes, and, finally, the highest blessing of all, which is Jesus Christ, risen and glorified.
As opposed to these saints, Luther also creates fourteen defenders or comforters, presenting them in this writing as an altar piece. However, this isn’t a traditional altar piece like those in churches that display the fourteen defenders; instead, it’s a spiritual piece meant to uplift and strengthen the hearts of the Elector and all others who are weary and burdened. The first section, or panel, of this symbolic altar piece shows images or representations of seven evils (maia); the second features seven blessings (bona). Reflecting on the evils will provide comfort to the weary and burdened by highlighting how minor their troubles are in comparison to the more significant evil within them: their sin; the evils they've faced in the past and will face in the future; the hardships that their friends and enemies endure; and, most importantly, the sufferings that Christ experienced on the cross. Likewise, considering the blessings will help them overlook their current pains, as these pains are insignificant compared to the blessing within them: their faith; the blessings they’ve experienced in the past and those that lie ahead, alongside those enjoyed by their friends and adversaries, and ultimately, the greatest blessing of all, which is Jesus Christ, risen and glorified.
We can only conjecture as to the origin of this unique conception of Luther's. Of course, the evils and blessings came to him from the passage in Ecclesiasticus 11:26.[4] The order and arrangement may follow some contemporary altar-picture of the "Fourteen Saints." There was a famous altar-painting of the "Fourteen," by Lucas Cranach, in St Mary's at Torgau, the residence of the Elector. The fact is suggestive.[5]
We can only guess where this unique idea of Luther's came from. Clearly, the good and bad aspects he referred to stem from Ecclesiasticus 11:26.[4] The structure and layout might be inspired by some contemporary altarpiece of the "Fourteen Saints." There was a well-known altarpiece of the "Fourteen" by Lucas Cranach in St. Mary's in Torgau, the home of the Elector. This fact is noteworthy.[5]
3. The Tessaradecas was favorably received by the Elector, was highly praised by Spalatin, who urged its publication, and must have been dear to Luther's own heart, since he desired the return of his manuscript for his own comfort. The little work soon became very popular, and passed through numerous editions, both in Latin and in German. During the first two years five Latin editions were printed, and up to 1525 seven German editions. A translation was published in the Netherlands in 1521, and one in England in 1578. Erasmus commended it to Bishop Christopher of Basle, in 1523; "I am sending your Highness Luther's book of the fourteen pictures, which has won great approbation even from those who oppose his doctrine at every point." Mathesius, Luther's pupil and biographer, judged that there had never before been such words of comfort written in the German language. The Franciscan Lemmens speaks of "the beautiful and Catholic thoughts" in it.
3. The Tessaradecas was well-received by the Elector, received high praise from Spalatin, who encouraged its publication, and must have been special to Luther himself since he wanted his manuscript back for his own peace of mind. The small work quickly became very popular and went through many editions, both in Latin and in German. In the first two years, five Latin editions were printed, and by 1525, there were seven German editions. A translation was published in the Netherlands in 1521, and another in England in 1578. Erasmus recommended it to Bishop Christopher of Basle in 1523: "I’m sending your Highness Luther’s book of the fourteen pictures, which has received great appreciation even from those who disagree with his doctrine at every turn." Mathesius, Luther's student and biographer, believed that such comforting words had never been written in the German language before. The Franciscan Lemmens referred to "the beautiful and Catholic thoughts" found within it.
4. Our translation is made from the Latin text, as found in the Weimar edition of Luther's works, volume vi, with continual reference to the German text, as given in the Berlin edition. We regret our inability to obtain a copy of the old English translation (A right comfortable Treatise conteining sundrye pointes of consolation for them that labour and are laden….Englished by W. Gace. T. Vautrollier, London, 1578, sec. ed. 1580), although the form of the title would seem to indicate that it was made from Spalatin's translation, and not from the original.[6]
4. Our translation is based on the Latin text from the Weimar edition of Luther's works, volume vi, with ongoing reference to the German text from the Berlin edition. We regret that we couldn't obtain a copy of the old English translation (A right comfortable Treatise containing sundry points of consolation for those who labor and are burdened….Translated by W. Gace. T. Vautrollier, London, 1578, 2nd ed. 1580), even though the title seems to suggest it was made from Spalatin's translation, not the original.[6]
The many Scripture quotations, all naturally from the Latin Vulgate, and most of them freely quoted from memory, and sometimes "targumed" and woven into the texture of the treatise, are rendered by us, unless the sense should thereby be affected, in the words of the Authorised Version. Important or interesting variations are indicated in the foot-notes.
The numerous Scripture quotes, mostly from the Latin Vulgate and often recalled from memory and integrated into the text of the treatise, are presented by us in the wording of the Authorized Version, unless it alters the meaning. Any significant or interesting differences are noted in the footnotes.
5. The Tesseradecas deserves to be more widely known and used. Its value is more than merely that of an historical document, representing a transition stage in Luther's reformatory views. It gives us, besides this, a deep insight into the living piety of the man, his great heart so full of the peace of God that passeth all understanding. When we remember that this little work was composed in the midst of a very "tempest" of other writings, chiefly polemical (e.g., the savage onslaughts on Emser), it will appear akin to the little book of Ruth, lying so peacefully between the war-like books of Judges and First Samuel. At the Leipzig Disputation, earlier in the same year, Luther was seen to hold a bouquet of flowers in his hand, and to smell of it when the battle waxed hot. The Tessaradecas is such a bunch of flowers. Its chief glory, however, that of a devotional classic, has been somewhat dimmed by Luther himself, who with the carelessness of genius refused to revise his outworn views in it; and yet, despite its relics of mediævalism, particularly by reason of its firm evangelical foundation, its scriptural warp and woof, its fervent piety, and its fresh and original treatment, it is not less entitled to a high place in the devotional and ascetic literature of the Church than the much better known Imitatio Christi. In this sense it is herewith offered anew to the English reader, with the hope that "the diligent reading and contemplation of these 'images' may minister some slight comfort."
5. The Tesseradecas deserves to be more widely known and used. Its value goes beyond just being a historical document, representing a transitional stage in Luther's reformative views. It also gives us a deep insight into the living faith of the man, his great heart so full of the peace of God that surpasses all understanding. When we remember that this small work was created amidst a "tempest" of other writings, mainly argumentative (e.g., the fierce attacks on Emser), it resembles the book of Ruth, resting so peacefully between the warlike books of Judges and First Samuel. At the Leipzig Disputation, earlier that same year, Luther was seen holding a bouquet of flowers in his hand, smelling it when the battle got intense. The Tesseradecas is like that bunch of flowers. Its main glory, however, as a devotional classic, has been somewhat overshadowed by Luther himself, who, with the carelessness of genius, refused to revise his outdated views in it; and yet, despite its traces of medievalism, especially due to its strong evangelical foundation, its scriptural essence, its passionate faith, and its fresh and original approach, it deserves a significant place in the devotional and ascetic literature of the Church, just as much as the better-known Imitatio Christi. In this sense, it is offered anew to the English reader, with the hope that "the diligent reading and contemplation of these 'images' may provide some slight comfort."
6. Literature.—(1) The literary and historical introductions to the Tessaradecas in the Weimar, Erlangen, and Berlin editions. (2) Köstlin-Kawerau, Martin Luther, sein Leben und seine Schriften. 5th ed., 1903, vol. I, pp. 280, 281. (3) H. Beck, Die Erbauungslit. der evang. Kirche Deutschlands, 1883. (4) On the fourteen Defenders see articles in Wetzer und Welte and the Catholic Encyclopaedia, and especially the article Nothelfer, by Zöckler, in PRE3, where also see further literature.
6. Literature.—(1) The literary and historical introductions to the Tessaradecas in the Weimar, Erlangen, and Berlin editions. (2) Köstlin-Kawerau, Martin Luther, His Life and Writings. 5th ed., 1903, vol. I, pp. 280, 281. (3) H. Beck, The Devotional Literature of the Evangelical Church in Germany, 1883. (4) For the fourteen Defenders, see articles in Wetzer und Welte and the Catholic Encyclopaedia, and especially the article Nothelfer, by Zöckler, in PRE3, where you can also find more literature.
A. T. W. Steinhaeuser
Allentown, PA.
A. T. W. Steinhaeuser
Allentown, PA.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Cf. the first sentence of the Prefatory Note, p. 109 of this volume; also the dedicatory epistle of the Treatise on Good Works, p. 184.
[1] See the first sentence of the Prefatory Note, p. 109 of this volume; also the dedicatory letter of the Treatise on Good Works, p. 184.
[2] We have noted a few of the more glaring relics of mediævalism in the footnotes; the attentive reader will discover and dispose of others for himself.
[2] We've pointed out some of the more obvious leftover elements from the medieval period in the footnotes; the attentive reader will find and address others on their own.
[3] The title furnishes peculiar difficulties to the translator.
Cole has simply transliterated it, "The Consolatory Terradecad."
Spalatin paraphrased it "Ein trostlichs Buchlein," etc. The
Berlin Edition renders it, "Vierzehn Trostmittel," etc.
[3] The title presents unique challenges for the translator.
Cole has just transliterated it as "The Consolatory Terradecad."
Spalatin paraphrased it as "Ein trostlichs Buchlein," etc. The
Berlin Edition translates it as "Vierzehn Trostmittel," etc.
[4] See p. 113.
See p. 113.
[5] Did the comment of Bernard of Clairvaux, on Romans 8:18, perhaps contribute its quota to the general conception? "The sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the past guilt, which is forgiven (remittitur); with the present grace of consolation, which is given (immittitur); with the future glory, which is promised (promittitur)."
[5] Did Bernard of Clairvaux's comment on Romans 8:18 maybe shape the overall understanding? "The sufferings we go through now aren't worth comparing to the past guilt that is forgiven (remittitur); to the current grace of comfort that is given (immittitur); or to the future glory that is promised (promittitur)."
[6] An English translation, with some omissions that Luther himself did not care to make is found in Henry Cole's Select Works of Martin Luther, vol. II, London, 1824.
[6] An English translation, with some omissions that Luther himself didn't mind making, can be found in Henry Cole's Select Works of Martin Luther, vol. II, London, 1824.
THE FOURTEEN OF CONSOLATION
(TESSARADECAS CONSOLATORIA)
1520
1520
PREFATORY NOTE[1]
This book was written, early in my career, for that most excellent prince, Frederick, Duke of Saxony, when he was stricken with a dangerous illness; but many desired that it be printed. After passing through various editions it has now become so sadly corrupted and mutilated that many passages are missing, whose original form I myself have clean forgot. However, I have restored the sense of them, as well as I was able, taking care to set down only such views as I held when the work was first written. I did not care to revise them now, as I might well do. For it is my purpose in this book to put forth a public record of my progress,[2] and also to show a kindness to the "Contradictionists," [3] that they may have whereon to exercise their malice. For me it is enough if I please my Lord Christ and His saints; that I am hated of the devil and his scales, [4] I rejoice with all my heart, and give thanks to God.
This book was written early in my career for the esteemed Prince Frederick, Duke of Saxony, when he was suffering from a serious illness; however, many wanted it to be published. After going through several editions, it has unfortunately become so corrupted and distorted that many parts are missing, and I've completely forgotten their original form. Nevertheless, I've restored their meaning as best as I could, making sure to include only the views I held when the work was first written. I didn't want to revise them now, even though I easily could. My goal with this book is to provide a public record of my progress,[2] and also to show some goodwill to the "Contradictionists," [3] so they have something to fuel their criticism. For me, it's enough if I please my Lord Christ and His saints; being hated by the devil and his followers, [4] I rejoice wholeheartedly and give thanks to God.
DEDICATORY EPISTLE[5]
To the Most Illustrious Prince and Lord, Frederick, Duke of
Saxony, Arch-Marshal and Elector Of the Holy Roman Empire,
Landgrave of THuringia, Margrave of Meissen, his most gracious
Lord.
To the Most Illustrious Prince and Lord, Frederick, Duke of
Saxony, Arch-Marshal and Elector of the Holy Roman Empire,
Landgrave of Thuringia, Margrave of Meissen, his most gracious
Lord.
Our Lord and Saviour Jesus hath left us a commandment, which concerns all Christians alike,—that we should render the duties of humanity, or (as the Scriptures call them) the works of mercy, [Luke 6:36] to such as are afflicted and under calamity; [Matt. 25:34 ff.] that we should visit the sick, endeavor to set free the prisoners, and perform other like acts of kindness to our neighbor, whereby the evils of this present time may in some measure be lightened. And of this command our Lord Jesus Christ hath Himself given us the brightest example, in that, out of infinite love to the race of men. He descended out of the bosom of the Father into our misery and prison-cell, that is, our flesh and life so full of ills, and took upon Him the penalty of our sins, in order that we might be saved; as He saith in Isaiah xliii, "Thou hast made Me to serve with thy sins, and wearied Me with thine iniquities." [Isa. 43:24]
Our Lord and Savior Jesus has given us a command that applies to all Christians: we should fulfill our duties to humanity, also known as the works of mercy, [Luke 6:36] by helping those who are suffering and in need; [Matt. 25:34 ff.] that we should visit the sick, try to free the prisoners, and perform other acts of kindness for our neighbors, in order to alleviate some of the hardships of this present time. And Jesus Himself has provided us with the best example of this command, as, out of His infinite love for humanity, He came down from the Father’s side into our suffering and captivity, which is our life filled with troubles, and took on the consequences of our sins so that we might be saved; as He says in Isaiah xliii, "You have made Me serve with your sins, and have wearied Me with your iniquities." [Isa. 43:24]
Whoever is not moved by so bright an example, and driven by the authority of the divine command, to show forth such works of mercy, he will deservedly hear, in the last judgment, the voice of the angry Judge saying: "Depart from me, thou cursed, into everlasting fire! For I was sick, and thou didst not visit Me; but, basely ungrateful for the many blessings I bestowed on thee and on all the world, thou wouldest not so much as lift a finger to succor thy brethren, nay Me, Christ, thy God and Saviour, in thy brethren." [Matt. 25:41]
Whoever isn't inspired by such a shining example and doesn't feel compelled by the authority of divine command to perform acts of kindness will justly hear, at the final judgment, the voice of the angry Judge saying: "Leave me, you cursed, into eternal fire! Because I was sick, and you didn't visit me; but, shamefully ungrateful for the many blessings I gave you and everyone in the world, you wouldn't even lift a finger to help your fellow human beings, and in doing so, you ignored Me, Christ, your God and Savior, in your fellow humans." [Matt. 25:41]
Since, then, most noble Prince, I perceive that your Lordship has been smitten with a dangerous malady, and that Christ has thus fallen sick in you, I have counted it my duty to visit your Lordship with a little writing of mine. For I cannot pretend to be deaf to the voice of Christ crying to me out of your Lordship's flesh and blood, "Behold, here am I sick." For such ills as sickness and the like are endured, not by us Christians, but by Christ Himself, our Lord and Saviour, in Whom we live. Even as He plainly testifies in the Gospel, "Whatsoever ye have done unto one of the least of these My brethren, ye have done it unto Me." [Matt. 25:40] And while we should visit and console all who are afflicted with sickness, yet we owe this duty specially to those who are of the household of faith. For Paul clearly distinguishes between strangers and those of the household, or those who are bound to us by intimate ties, Galatians vi. [Gal. 6:10]
Since, dear Prince, I see that you’ve been struck by a serious illness and that Christ is suffering in you, I feel it's my duty to reach out to you with a little note of mine. I can’t ignore the voice of Christ calling to me from your suffering, saying, "Look, here I am sick." Illness and suffering aren’t just endured by us Christians; they’re experienced by Christ Himself, our Lord and Savior, in whom we live. As He clearly states in the Gospel, "Whatever you have done to one of the least of these My brothers, you have done it to Me." [Matt. 25:40] While we should visit and comfort everyone who is suffering, we have a special obligation to those who are part of the faith community. Paul makes a clear distinction between strangers and those who are close to us, Galatians vi. [Gal. 6:10]
But I have yet other reasons for performing this my duty. For I consider that, as one of your Lordship's subjects, I must needs share in your Lordship's illness, together with the remainder of your many subjects, and suffer with you as a member with the Head, on which all our fortunes, our safety, and our happiness depend. For we recognize in your Lordship another Naaman [2 Kings, 5:1], by whom God is now giving deliverance to Germany, as in times past He gave deliverance to Syria. Wherefore the whole Roman Empire turns its eyes to your Lordship alone, and venerates and receives you as the Father of the Fatherland, and the bright ornament and protector of the whole Empire, but of the German nation in particular.[6]
But I have more reasons for fulfilling this duty. As one of your Lordship's subjects, I feel I must share in your Lordship's illness, just like the rest of your many subjects, and suffer alongside you as a member of the whole in which our fortunes, safety, and happiness depend on the Head. We see in your Lordship another Naaman [2 Kings, 5:1], through whom God is now bringing deliverance to Germany, just as He did in the past for Syria. Therefore, the entire Roman Empire looks to your Lordship alone, honoring and accepting you as the Father of the Fatherland, and the shining protector and supporter of the whole Empire, especially the German nation.[6]
Nor are we bound only to console your Lordship as much as in us lies, and to make your present sorrow our own, but much more to pray God for your health and safety; which I trust your Lordship's subjects are doing with all diligence and devotion. But as for me, whom your Lordship's many and signal benefactions have made your debtor above all others, I count it my duty to express my gratitude by rendering you some special service. But now, by reason of my poverty both of mind and fortune, it is not possible for me to offer anything of value; therefore I gladly welcomed the suggestion of Doctor George Spalatin, one of your Lordship's court chaplains, that I should prepare a kind of spiritual consolation and present it to your Lordship, to whom, he said, it would be most acceptable. Being unwilling to reject this friendly counsel, I have put together the following fourteen chapters, after the fashion of an altar tablet, and have called them, "The Fourteen." [7] They are to take the place of the fourteen saints whom our superstition has invented and called, "The Defenders against all evil." [8] But this is a tablet not of silver, but of a spiritual sort; nor is it intended to adorn the walls of a church, but to uplift and strengthen a pious heart. I trust it will stand your Lordship in good stead in your present condition. It consists of two divisions; the former containing the images of seven evils, in the contemplation of which your present troubles will grow light; the latter presenting the images of seven blessings, brought together for the same purpose.
We’re not just here to comfort you, my Lord, as much as we can or to share in your sadness, but even more so to pray to God for your health and safety; I hope your subjects are doing this with great care and devotion. As for me, who feels deeply indebted to you because of your many generous gifts, I feel it’s my duty to show my gratitude by offering you some special service. However, due to my lack of both wealth and resources, I can’t provide anything of significant value. That’s why I gladly accepted the suggestion from Dr. George Spalatin, one of your court chaplains, to prepare a kind of spiritual comfort to present to you, which he said you would appreciate. Not wanting to turn down this kind advice, I’ve put together the following fourteen chapters, styled like an altar tablet, and I’ve named them "The Fourteen." They are meant to take the place of the fourteen saints our superstition has created and called "The Defenders against all evil." But this isn’t a silver tablet; it’s of a spiritual kind; it’s not meant to decorate the walls of a church, but to uplift and strengthen a devout heart. I hope it will prove helpful to you in your current situation. It’s divided into two parts: the first contains images of seven evils, which should help lighten your current troubles, while the second presents images of seven blessings, gathered for the same purpose.
May it please your Lordship graciously to accept this little work of mine, and to make such use of it that the diligent reading and contemplation of these "images" may minister some small comfort.
May it please your Lordship to kindly accept this little work of mine and to use it in a way that the careful reading and reflection on these "images" may provide some small comfort.
Your Lordship's humble servant,
Your servant,
Martin Luther, Doctor.
Martin Luther, PhD.
PREFACE
The Apostle Paul, treating in Romans xv. of the consolations of Christians, writes, "Whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope." [Rom. 15:4] In these words he plainly teaches that our consolations are to be drawn from the Holy Scriptures. Now the Holy Scriptures administer comfort after a twofold fashion, by presenting to our view blessings and evils, most wholesomely intermingled; as the wise Preacher saith, "In the day of evil be mindful of the good, and in the day of good be mindful of the evil." [Ecclus. 11:26] For the Holy Spirit knows that a thing has only such meaning and value for a man as he assigns to it in his thoughts; for what he holds common and of no value will move him but little, either to pleasure when he obtains it, or to grief when he loses it. Therefore He endeavors with all His might to draw us away from thinking about things and from being moved by them; and when He has effected this, then all things whatsoever are alike to us. Now this drawing away is best accomplished by means of the Word, Whereby our thoughts are turned from the thing that moves us at the present moment to that which either is absent or does not at the moment move us. Therefore it is true that we shall attain to this state of mind only through the comfort of the Scriptures, which call us, in the day of evil, to the contemplation of good things, either present or to come, and, in the day of good, to the contemplation of evil things.
The Apostle Paul, in Romans 15, discusses the comfort that Christians can find, saying, "Whatever was written in the past was written for our learning, so that through patience and the comfort of the Scriptures we might have hope." [Rom. 15:4] He clearly teaches that our comfort should come from the Holy Scriptures. The Scriptures provide comfort in two ways: by presenting blessings and challenges in a healthy mix. As the wise Preacher says, "In a day of trouble, remember the good, and in a day of good, remember the trouble." [Ecclus. 11:26] The Holy Spirit understands that something has only the meaning and value that we give it in our thoughts; if we regard something as trivial and worthless, it won’t affect us much, whether we have it or lose it. Therefore, He strives to help us detach from our thoughts about things and from being influenced by them; once that’s achieved, everything becomes equal to us. This detachment is best achieved through the Word, which shifts our focus from what currently affects us to what is absent or does not preoccupy us at the moment. Hence, it’s true that we can only reach this mindset through the comfort of the Scriptures, which remind us, in times of trouble, to reflect on good things, whether they are present or future, and, in times of good, to consider the challenges we face.
But let us, for our better understanding of these two series of pictures or images, divide each of them into seven parts. The first series will treat of the evils, and we shall consider (1) the evil within us, (2) the evil before us, (3) the evil behind us, (4) the evil on our left hand, (5) the evil on our right hand, (6) the evil beneath us, and (7) the evil above us.[9]
But let’s break down these two sets of pictures or images into seven parts for a better understanding. The first set will focus on the evils, and we’ll look at (1) the evil inside us, (2) the evil in front of us, (3) the evil behind us, (4) the evil to our left, (5) the evil to our right, (6) the evil beneath us, and (7) the evil above us.[9]
CHAPTER I
THE FIRST IMAGE
THE EVIL WITHIN US
This is most certain and true—we may believe it or not—that no suffering in a man's experience, be it never so severe, can be the greatest of the evils that are within him. So many more and far greater evils are there within him than any that he feels. And if he were to feel those evils, he would feel the pains of hell; for he holds a hell within himself. Do you ask how this can be? The Prophet says, "All men are liars" [Ps. 116:11] and again, "Every man at his best state is altogether vanity." [Ps. 39:6] But to be a liar and vanity, is to be without truth and reality; and to be without truth and reality, is to be without God and to be nothing; and this is to be in hell and damned. Therefore, when God in His mercy chastens us, He reveals to us and lays upon us only the lighter evils; for if He were to lead us to the full knowledge of our evil, we should straightway perish. Yet even this He has given some to taste, and of them it is written, "He bringeth down to hell, and bringeth up." [1 Sam. 2:6] Therefore they say well who call our bodily sufferings the monitors of the evil within. And the Apostle, in Hebrews xii, calls them God's fatherly chastenings, when he says, "He scourgeth every son whom He receiveth." [Heb. 12:6] And He does this, in order by such scourgings and lesser evils to drive out those great evils, that we may never need to feel them; as it is written, "Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him." [Prov. 33:15] Do not loving parents grieve more for their sons when they turn out thieves and evil-doers than when they receive a wound? Nay, they themselves beat them until the blood flows, to keep them from becoming evil-doers.[10]
This is definitely true—whether we believe it or not—that no amount of suffering in a person's life, no matter how intense, can be the worst thing they face inside. There are many more and much greater evils within them than any they actually feel. If they were to experience those evils, they would endure the torments of hell because they carry a hell within themselves. You might wonder how this is possible. The Prophet says, "All men are liars" [Ps. 116:11] and again, "Every man at his best state is altogether vanity." [Ps. 39:6] To be a liar and vanity means to lack truth and reality; to be without truth and reality is to be without God and to be nothing; and this is what it means to be in hell and condemned. Therefore, when God in His mercy punishes us, He only reveals and imposes the lighter evils; because if He were to let us fully realize our evil, we would immediately perish. Yet, some have tasted even this, and it is written, "He bringeth down to hell, and bringeth up." [1 Sam. 2:6] That's why it's accurate to say our physical sufferings highlight the evils within us. The Apostle, in Hebrews xii, refers to them as God's loving discipline when he says, "He scourgeth every son whom He receiveth." [Heb. 12:6] He does this to use these scourges and lesser evils to drive out the greater evils, so we never have to feel them; as it is written, "Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him." [Prov. 33:15] Don't loving parents feel more pain for their kids when they become thieves and wrongdoers than when they get hurt? No, they would actually punish them until they bleed, to prevent them from becoming wrongdoers.[10]
What is it, then, that prevents us from feeling this our true evil? It is, as I have said, so ordered by God, that we may not perish on seeing the evils hidden in the depths of our hearts. For God keeps them hidden, and would have us discern them only by faith, when He points them out to us by means of the evil that we feel. Therefore, "In the day of evil be mindful of the good." [Ecclus. 11:26] Behold, how great a good it is, not to know the whole of our evil! Be mindful of this good, and the evil that you feel will press you less cruelly. Again, "In the day of good be mindful of the evil." That is to say. Whilst you do not feel your true evil, be grateful for this respite; then will the evil that you feel sit lightly upon you. It is clear, then, that in this life a man's freedom from pain is always greater than his pain. Not that his whole evil is not present with him, but he does not think about it and is not moved by it, through the goodness of God, Who keeps it hidden.
What stops us from recognizing our true flaws? As I mentioned, it’s arranged by God so we don’t perish from seeing the evils buried deep in our hearts. God keeps them hidden and wants us to understand them only by faith, as He reveals them to us through the pain we experience. So, "In the day of evil be mindful of the good." [Ecclus. 11:26] Just think about how wonderful it is not to see all our flaws! Remember this good, and the pain you feel will weigh on you less harshly. Again, "In the day of good be mindful of the evil." In other words, while you’re not aware of your true flaws, appreciate this break; then the pain you do feel will be lighter. It’s clear that in this life, a person's relief from suffering is always greater than their suffering. It’s not that their entire flaw is absent, but they don’t dwell on it or let it affect them, thanks to the goodness of God, who keeps it hidden.
How furiously do those men rage against themselves, to whom their true evil has been revealed! How they count as nothing whatever sufferings life may bring, if only they might not feel the hell within! Even so would every one do, who felt or truly believed in the evil within him. Gladly would he call down all external evils on his head, and count them mere child's play; nay, he would never be more sorrowful than when he had no evils to bear, after the manner of certain of the saints, such as David in Psalm vi. [Ps. 6]
How angrily do those men struggle with themselves when they see their true faults! They disregard whatever suffering life may bring, just to escape the torment inside them! Anyone who recognizes or truly believes in their own wrongdoings would do the same. They would gladly accept all external misfortunes, considering them trivial; in fact, they would feel most miserable when they had no troubles to face, similar to certain saints, like David in Psalm vi. [Ps. 6]
Therefore, this is our first image of consolation, that a man should say to himself: "Not yet, O man, dost thou feel thine evil. Rejoice and give thanks that thou dost not need to feel it!" And so the lesser evil grows light by comparison with the greatest evil. That is what others mean when they say, "I have deserved far worse things, yea, hell itself"—a thing easy to say, but horrible to contemplate.
Therefore, this is our first glimpse of comfort, where a person says to themselves: "Not yet, my friend, do you feel your troubles. Celebrate and be grateful that you don’t have to feel it!" And so the lesser evil seems lighter compared to the greatest evil. This is what others mean when they say, "I’ve deserved much worse, even hell itself"—something easy to say, but terrifying to consider.
And this evil, though never so deeply hidden, yet puts forth fruits that are plainly enough perceived. These are the dread and uncertainty of a trembling conscience, when faith is assailed, and a man is not sure, or doubts, whether he have a gracious God. And this fruit is bitter in proportion to the weakness of one's faith. Nay, when rightly considered, this weakness alone, being spiritual, far outweighs every weakness of the body, and renders it, in comparison, light as a feather.
And this evil, no matter how deeply hidden, still produces fruits that are clearly noticeable. These include the fear and uncertainty of a shaky conscience, especially when faith is challenged, leaving a person unsure or doubting whether they have a gracious God. This bitterness is greater the weaker one's faith is. In fact, when you think about it, this spiritual weakness far outweighs any physical weakness, making the latter seem as light as a feather in comparison.
Moreover, to the evils within us belong all those tragic experiences described by the Preacher, when he refers again and again to "vanity and vexation of spirit." [Eccl. 1:2, 14] How many of our plans come to naught! How oft our hopes are deceived! How many things that are not to our liking must we see and bear! And the very things that fall out according to our wish fall out also against our wish! So that there is nothing perfect and complete. Finally, all these things are so much greater, the higher one rises in rank and station;[11] for such a one will of necessity be driven about by far more and greater billows, floods, and tempests, than others who labor in a like case. As it is truly said in Psalm ciii,[12] "In the sea of this world there are things creeping innumerable, both small and great beasts," [Ps. 104:25] that is, an infinite number of trials. And Job, for this reason, calls the life of man a "trial." [13]
Moreover, the evils within us include all those tragic experiences described by the Preacher, who repeatedly refers to "vanity and vexation of spirit." [Eccl. 1:2, 14] How many of our plans end up failing! How often are our hopes dashed! How many things we dislike must we endure! And even the things that happen as we wish can also turn out against our wishes! So nothing is ever perfect or complete. Ultimately, all these challenges become even greater the higher one rises in rank and status;[11] for such a person will inevitably be tossed about by far more and greater waves, floods, and storms than those who face similar struggles. As it is truly stated in Psalm ciii,[12] "In the sea of this world, there are countless creatures, both small and large," [Ps. 104:25] meaning there are an infinite number of trials. And Job, for this reason, calls the life of man a "trial." [13]
These evils do not, indeed, cease to be evils because they are less sharply felt by us; but we have grown accustomed to them from having them constantly with us, and through the goodness of God our thoughts and feelings concerning them have become blunted. That is why they move us the more deeply when we do feel them now and then, since we have not learned through familiarity to despise them. So true is it, therefore, that we feel scarce a thousandth part of our evils, and also that we estimate them and feel them or do not feel them, not as they are in themselves, but only as they exist in our thoughts and feelings.[14]
These problems don't stop being problems just because we don't feel them as intensely; we've gotten used to them because they're always around us, and thanks to God's goodness, our thoughts and feelings about them have dulled. That's why they hit us harder when we do notice them occasionally, since we haven't learned to take them for granted. It's true that we hardly feel even a tiny fraction of our problems, and we evaluate and perceive them, or fail to perceive them, not as they truly are but only as they appear in our thoughts and emotions.[14]
CHAPTER II
THE SECOND IMAGE
THE FUTURE EVIL, OR THE EVIL BEFORE US
It will tend in no small degree to lighten any present evil if a man turn his mind to the evils to come. These are so many, so diverse, and so great, that out of them has arisen one of the strongest emotions of the soul; namely, fear. For fear has been defined by some as the emotion caused by coming evil. Even as the Apostle says in Romans xi, "Be not highminded, but fear." [Rom. 11:30] This evil is all the greater because of our uncertainty in what form and with what force it may come; so that there goes a popular saying, "No age is proof against the itch," although this is but a little children's disease. Even so, no man is safe from the evils that befall any other; for what one has suffered another may suffer also. Here belong all the tragic histories of the ages, and all the lamentations of the world. Here belong the more than three hundred diseases—which some have observed—with which the human body may be vexed. And if there be so many diseases, how great will be the number of other misfortunes that may befall our possessions, our friends, and even our mind itself, that target of all evils, and trysting-place of sorrow and every ill!
It can really help lighten any current troubles if a person focuses on the problems that are yet to come. There are so many of them, they're varied, and they're significant, which has led to one of the strongest feelings we have: fear. Fear is often described as the feeling brought on by impending danger. Just like the Apostle says in Romans 11, "Don’t be arrogant, but fear." [Rom. 11:30] This fear is even worse because we don't know how it will arrive or how severe it might be; hence the saying, "No age is immune to the itch," even if that’s just a minor kid’s illness. In the same way, no one is safe from the troubles that others face; just because someone has experienced something doesn’t mean it won’t happen to someone else. This includes all the tragic stories throughout history and all the cries of despair around the world. It includes the more than three hundred illnesses—according to some—that can trouble the human body. And if there are so many diseases, just imagine how many other misfortunes could strike our belongings, our friends, and even our very minds, which are the true targets of every trouble and the meeting place for sorrow and every kind of suffering!
And these evils increase in power and intensity as a man rises to higher rank and dignity;[15] in which estate he must needs dread every moment the coming of poverty, disgrace, and every indignity, which may indeed swiftly overtake him, for they all hang by but a slender thread, not unlike the sword which the tyrant Dionysius suspended above the head of the guest at his table.
And these troubles grow stronger and more intense as a person gains higher status and respect; in that position, he must constantly fear the arrival of poverty, shame, and every humiliation, which can quickly catch up to him, because they all hang by a thin thread, just like the sword that the tyrant Dionysius hung above the head of his guest at the table.
And if none of these evils befall us, we should count it our gain, and no small comfort in the evil that does befall us; so that we should feel constrained to say with Jeremiah, "It is of the Lord's mercies that we are not consumed." [Lam. 3:22 f.] For when none of them befall us, it is because they have been kept from us by the right hand of the Most High that compasses us about with such mighty power (as we see in Job) that Satan and all evils can but gnash their teeth in helpless rage. [Job 1:10] From this we see how sweetly we ought to love our Lord, whenever any evil comes upon us. For our most loving Father would by that one evil have us see how many evils threaten us and would fall on us, if He did not Himself stand in the way, as though He said, "Satan and the host of evils have desired to have thee, to sift thee as wheat; [Luke:22:31] but I have marked out bounds for the sea, and have said, Hitherto shaft thou come, and here shall thy proud waves be stayed [Job 38:10]," as He saith in Job xxxviii.
And if none of these troubles happen to us, we should see it as a gain and a source of comfort in the difficulties that do arise; so we should feel compelled to say with Jeremiah, "It is because of the Lord's mercies that we aren’t consumed." [Lam. 3:22 f.] For when none of these troubles come our way, it's because they have been kept from us by the strong hand of the Most High that surrounds us with such power (as we see in Job) that Satan and all evil can only gnash their teeth in powerless rage. [Job 1:10] From this, we see how sweetly we ought to love our Lord whenever any trouble comes our way. For our most loving Father would have us recognize through that one trouble how many threats loom over us and would engulf us, if He Himself did not intervene, as though He says, "Satan and the forces of evil have wished to have you, to sift you like wheat; [Luke:22:31] but I have set limits for the sea, and said, Hitherto shall you come, and here shall your proud waves be stopped [Job 38:10]," as He says in Job 38.
And, granted that perchance, if God please, none of these things will come upon you; nevertheless, that which is known as the greatest of terrors, death, is certain to come, and nothing is less certain than the hour of its coming. Truly, this is so great an evil that there are many who would rather live on amid all the above-named evils than to die once and have them ended. With this one thing the Scriptures, which hold all others in contempt, associate fear, saying, "Remember thy end, and thou shalt never do amiss." [Ecclus. 7:40] Behold, how many meditations, how many books, how many rules and remedies have been brought together, in order, by calling to men's minds this one evil, to keep them from sin, to render the world contemptible, to lighten suffering, to comfort the afflicted,—all by a comparison with this great and terrible, and yet so inevitable, evil of death. This evil even the saints dreaded, and Christ submitted to it with trembling and bloody sweat. [Luke 22:44] So that the divine Mercy hath been nowhere more concerned to comfort our little faith than in the matter of this evil, as we shall see below.[16]
And, assuming that perhaps, if God allows, none of these things will happen to you; still, what we know as the greatest fear, death, is definitely coming, and nothing is less predictable than when it will arrive. In fact, this is such a huge issue that many would prefer to endure all the aforementioned troubles rather than die once and have them all end. The Scriptures, which disregard all other things, link fear to this one reality, stating, "Remember your end, and you will never go wrong." [Ecclus. 7:40] Look at how many reflections, how many books, how many guidelines and solutions have been created in order to remind people of this one fear, to prevent them from sinning, to make the world seem insignificant, to lessen suffering, and to comfort those in distress—all by comparing them to this great and terrible, yet unavoidable, fear of death. Even the saints were afraid of this, and Christ faced it with trembling and sweat of blood. [Luke 22:44] Therefore, divine Mercy has been especially concerned with comforting our weak faith regarding this fear, as we will see below.[16]
But all these things are common to all men, even as the blessings of salvation under these evils are common to all. For Christians, however, there is another and a particular reason for dreading the evils to come, which easily surpasses all the evils that have been mentioned. It is that which the Apostle portrays in I. Corinthians x, when he says, "He that standeth, let him take heed lest he fall." [1 Cor. 19:12] So unstable is our footing, and so powerful our foe, armed with our own strength (that is, the weapons of our flesh and all our evil lusts), attended by the countless armies of the world, its delights and pleasures on the right hand, its hardships and the plots of wicked men on the left, and, besides all this, master himself of the art of doing us harm, seducing us, and bringing us down to destruction by a thousand different ways. Such is our life that we are not safe for one moment in our good intentions. Cyprian, who in his De Mortalitate[17] touches on many of these matters, teaches that death is to be desired as a swift means of escape from these evils. And truly, wherever there have been high-hearted men, who brought their minds steadily to bear on these infinite perils of hell, we find them, with contempt of life and death (that is, all the aforesaid evils), desiring to die, that so they might be delivered at one and the same time from this evil of the sins in which they now are (of which we spoke in the previous chapter), and of the sins into which they might fall (of which we are treating now). And these are, indeed, two most weighty reasons why we should not only desire death, but also despise all evils, to say nothing of lightly bearing a single evil; if the Lord grant us to be moved thereby. For it is God's gift that we are moved thereby. For what true Christian will not even desire to die, and much more to bear sickness, seeing that, so long as he lives and is in health, he is in sin, and is constantly prone to fall, yea, is falling every day, into more sins; and is thus constantly thwarting the most loving will of his most loving Father! To such a heat of indignation was St. Paul moved, in Romans vii, when after complaining that he did not the good that he would, but the evil that he would not, [Rom. 7:19] he cried out, "O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me the body of this death? The grace of God," [18] he answers, "through Jesus Christ."
But all these things are common to all people, just like the blessings of salvation amidst these troubles are shared by everyone. However, for Christians, there’s another specific reason to fear the evils that lie ahead, which easily surpasses all the previously mentioned troubles. It's what the Apostle discusses in I Corinthians 10, when he says, "If you think you are standing firm, be careful that you don’t fall." [1 Cor. 10:12] Our stability is so shaky, and our enemy is so strong, using our own strength against us (which means our fleshly desires and all our sinful cravings), supported by the countless forces in the world—the pleasures and delights to our right and the struggles and evil plans of others to our left. Additionally, the enemy is skilled in bringing us harm, seducing us, and leading us to destruction in countless ways. Our lives are such that we aren't safe for even a moment in our good intentions. Cyprian, in his De Mortalitate[17], touches on many of these issues and teaches that death is to be desired as a quick escape from these evils. Indeed, wherever we find brave individuals who focus on these infinite dangers of hell, we see them, disregarding both life and death (meaning all these troubles), wanting to die in order to be freed at the same time from the evil of their current sins (which we discussed in the previous chapter) and from the sins they might fall into (which we are discussing now). These are, without a doubt, two significant reasons why we should not only wish for death but also despise all evils, not to mention taking any single evil lightly; if only the Lord moves us to do so. For it is God's gift that we are stirred in this way. What true Christian wouldn’t desire to die, or even more, to endure illness, knowing that as long as they live and are healthy, they are in sin and are constantly at risk of falling, indeed, falling every day into more sins, thus constantly going against the most loving will of their most loving Father! Saint Paul was similarly moved in Romans 7, where he laments that he does not do the good he wants, but the evil he does not want, [Rom. 7:19] and then cries out, "What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? Thanks be to God," [18] he responds, "who delivers me through Jesus Christ."
That man loves God his Father but little, who does not prefer the evil of dying to this evil of sinning. For God has appointed death, that this evil might come to an end, and that death might be the minister of life and righteousness, of which more below.[19]
That man loves God his Father very little who does not prefer the evil of dying over this evil of sinning. For God has destined death to put an end to this evil, so that death can serve as the gateway to life and righteousness, which will be discussed further below.[19]
CHAPTER III
THE THIRD IMAGE
THE PAST EVIL, OR THE EVIL BEHIND US
In this image, above all others, the sweet mercy of God our Father shines forth, able to comfort us in every distress. For never does a man feel the hand of God more closely upon him than when he calls to mind the years of his past life. St. Augustine says: "If a man were set before the choice either of dying or of living his past life over, it is certain that he would choose to die, seeing the many perils and evils which he had so hardly escaped." This is a very true saying, if it be rightly pondered.
In this image, more than any other, the sweet mercy of God our Father stands out, ready to comfort us in every difficult moment. A man never feels God's presence more strongly than when he reflects on the years of his past. St. Augustine says: "If a man were given the choice between dying or reliving his past life, he would definitely choose to die, considering the many dangers and hardships he barely avoided." This is a very true statement, if we think about it carefully.
Here a man may see how often he has done and suffered many things, without any exertion or care of his own, nay, without and against his wish; of which things he took so little thought before they came to pass, or while they were taking place, that, only after all was over, he found himself compelled to exclaim in great surprise: "Whence have all these things come to me, when I never gave them a thought, or when I thought of something very different?" So that the proverb is true, "Man proposeth, but God disposeth"; [Prov. 16:9] that is, God turns things about, and brings to pass something far different from that which man proposes. Therefore, from this consideration alone, it is impossible for us to deny that our life and all our actions are under the direction, not of our own prudence, but of the wonderful power, wisdom, and goodness of God. Here we see how often God was with us when we knew it not, and with what truth Peter has said, "He careth for us all." [1 Peter 5:7]
Here, a person can see how many things they've done and endured without putting in any effort or even caring, and sometimes against their own wishes. They hardly thought about these things before they happened, or even while they were happening, only to find themselves saying in surprise afterward: "Where did all this come from? I never even considered it, or I was thinking about something completely different!" This shows that the saying is true, "Man proposes, but God disposes"; [Prov. 16:9] meaning God changes things and brings about outcomes very different from what we had planned. So, just from this thought alone, we can’t deny that our lives and actions are guided not by our own wisdom, but by God's amazing power, wisdom, and goodness. Here, we see how often God has been with us even when we didn't realize it, and how true Peter's words are, "He cares for us all." [1 Peter 5:7]
Therefore, even if there were no books or tracts, yet our very life itself, brought through so many evils and dangers, if we will but consider it, abundantly commends to us the ever present and most tender goodness of God, which, far above all that we purposed or perceived, carried us as it were in its bosom. As Moses says in Deuteronomy xxxii, "The Lord kept him as the apple of His eye, and led him about, and bore him on His shoulders." [Deut. 32:10 ff.][20]
Therefore, even if there were no books or pamphlets, our very lives, having gone through so many hardships and dangers, clearly show us the constant and remarkable goodness of God. This goodness, far exceeding anything we intended or recognized, has carried us like a child in its embrace. As Moses says in Deuteronomy 32, "The Lord kept him as the apple of His eye, and led him around, and carried him on His shoulders." [Deut. 32:10 ff.][20]
Hence arose those exhortations in the Psalter: "I remember the days of old; I meditate on all Thy works; I muse on the work of Thy hands." [Ps. 143:5] "Surely I will remember Thy wonders of old." [Ps. 77:11] Again, "I remembered Thy judgments of old, O Lord, and have comforted myself," [Ps. 119:52] These exhortations and the like are intended to teach us that, if God was with us when we thought it not, or when He seemed not to be with us, we should not doubt that He is always with us, even when He appears to be far from us. For He Who, in so many necessities, has sustained us without our aid, will not forsake us in our smaller need, even though He seem to be forsaking us. As He saith in Isaiah, "For a small moment have I forsaken thee; but with great mercies will I gather thee." [Isa. 54:7]
Thus came those encouragements in the Psalms: "I remember the days of old; I reflect on all Your works; I contemplate the work of Your hands." [Ps. 143:5] "Surely I will remember Your wonders of old." [Ps. 77:11] Again, "I remembered Your judgments of old, O Lord, and found comfort," [Ps. 119:52] These encouragements and others like them are meant to teach us that, if God was with us when we didn’t realize it, or when He seemed absent, we should not doubt that He is always with us, even when He feels distant. For He Who has supported us in so many challenges without our help will not abandon us in our lesser needs, even if He seems to be doing so. As He says in Isaiah, "For a brief moment I have forsaken you; but with great compassion I will gather you." [Isa. 54:7]
Moreover, who had the care of us so many a night, while we slept? Who cared for us when we were at work, or at play, or engaged in all those countless things wherein we had no care for ourselves? Indeed, how much of our time is there in which we have the care of ourselves? Even the miser, careful as he is to gain riches, must perforce put by his care in the midst of all his getting and gaining. And so we see that, whether we will or no, all our care falls back on God alone, and we are scarcely ever left to care for ourselves. Still, God does now and again leave us to care for ourselves, in order to bring home to us His goodness, and to teach us how great the difference between His care and ours. Hence, He suffers us now and then to be assailed by some slight malady or other ill, dissembling His care for us (for He never ceases to care), and yet at the same time preventing the many evils that threaten us on every side from bursting in upon us all together. Hereby He tries us as His well-beloved children, to see whether we will not trust His care, which extends through all our past life, and learn how vain and powerless a thing is any care of ours. How little, indeed, do we or can we do for ourselves, throughout our life, when we are not able to stop a small pain in one of our limbs, even for the shortest space of time?[21]
Moreover, who took care of us for so many nights while we slept? Who looked after us when we were working, playing, or engaged in all those countless activities where we didn’t think about ourselves? Truly, how much of our time do we spend caring for ourselves? Even the miser, who is so focused on accumulating wealth, has to set aside his worries while he’s busy getting and gaining. So, we see that, whether we like it or not, all our care ultimately falls on God, and we are almost never left to take care of ourselves. Still, God occasionally allows us to care for ourselves to remind us of His goodness and to show us how great the difference is between His care and ours. Thus, He sometimes lets us be troubled by a minor illness or some other issue, concealing His care for us (for He never stops caring), while at the same time preventing the many dangers surrounding us from overwhelming us all at once. In this way, He tests us as His cherished children to see if we will trust His care, which has been with us throughout our lives, and to help us understand the futility and weakness of our own cares. How little do we actually do for ourselves, throughout our lives, when we can’t even stop a small pain in one of our limbs, not even for a moment?
Why, then, are we so anxious in the matter of a single danger or evil, and do not rather leave our care to Him? For our whole life bears witness to the many evils from which He has delivered us, without our doing. To know this, is indeed to know the works of God, to meditate on His works, [Ps. 143:5, 119:52] and by the remembrance of them to comfort ourselves in our adversities. But they that know this not come under that other word in Psalm xxvii, "Because they regard not the works of the Lord, nor the operations of His hand, He shall destroy them, and not build them up." [Ps. 28:5] For those men are ungrateful toward God for all His care over them during their whole life, who will not, for one small moment, commit their care to Him.
Why are we so anxious about a single danger or problem, and why don’t we just trust Him? Our entire life shows the many troubles He has saved us from, without any effort on our part. To recognize this is truly to see the works of God, to reflect on His actions, [Ps. 143:5, 119:52] and to find comfort in our hardships through remembering them. But those who don’t understand this fall under the warning in Psalm 27, "Because they don’t acknowledge the works of the Lord or the things He has done, He will bring them to ruin and not help them." [Ps. 28:5] Those who are ungrateful to God for His constant protection throughout their lives refuse to trust Him, even for a brief moment.
CHAPTER IV
THE FOURTH IMAGE
THE INFERNAL EVIL, OR THE EVIL BENEATH US
Hitherto we have seen, in all the evils that we endure, naught but the goodness of God, which is so great and so near that of all the countless evils with which we are surrounded in this life, and in which we are shut up as in a prison, but a very few are permitted to approach us, and these never for long together. So that, when we are oppressed by any present evil, it is only to remind us of some great gain with which God is honoring us, in that He does not suffer us to be overwhelmed by the multitude of evils with which we are surrounded. For what wonder that a man, at whom an infinite number of blows is aimed, should be touched by one now and then! Nay, it is a mercy not to be struck by all; it is a miracle to be struck by but a few.
Until now, we have noticed that in all the hardships we face, there is nothing but the goodness of God, which is so immense and so close that out of all the countless struggles surrounding us in this life, as if we were trapped in a prison, only a few ever really get to us, and even those don’t stay for long. So, when we’re weighed down by a current hardship, it serves only as a reminder of some great blessing that God is giving us, as He prevents us from being overwhelmed by the many troubles all around us. After all, what’s surprising about a person sometimes getting hit when there are countless blows aimed at them? In fact, it’s a mercy not to be hit by all of them; it’s a miracle to be hit by just a few.
The first, then, of the evils beneath us is death, and the other is hell.
The first of the evils below us is death, and the second is hell.
If we will but consider the deaths, so diverse and so terrible, with which other sinners are punished, we shall soon see how great a gain is ours in that we suffer far less than we have deserved. How many men are hanged, strangled, drowned or beheaded, who perchance committed less sins than we! And their death and misery are held up to us by Christ as in a mirror, in which we may behold what we have deserved. For it is said in Luke xiii, when they told Him of the Galileans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices, that He replied: "Suppose ye that these Galileans were sinners above all the Galileans, because they suffered these things? I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem? I tell you. Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish." [Luke 13:1 ff.] For we need not expect that we, who have committed the same or even graver sins, shall escape with a lighter punishment. Nor will the justice and truth of God, which hath decreed to render to every man according to his deeds, be turned for our sake into injustice and a lie, unless we hasten to make satisfaction by at least bearing our trifling evil with patience.[22]
If we take a moment to think about the deaths, so varied and so horrific, that punish other sinners, we’ll quickly realize how fortunate we are that we suffer much less than we deserve. How many people are hanged, strangled, drowned, or beheaded, who might have committed fewer sins than we have! Their deaths and suffering are shown to us by Christ as a mirror, where we can see what we deserve. As it says in Luke 13, when they told Him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate mixed with their sacrifices, He replied: "Do you think these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this? I tell you, no; but unless you repent, you will all perish as well. Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them—do you think they were worse offenders than all the others living in Jerusalem? I tell you, no; but unless you repent, you will all perish as well." [Luke 13:1 ff.] We shouldn’t expect that we, who have committed the same or even worse sins, will escape with a lighter punishment. God's justice and truth, which have decided to give everyone according to their actions, will not be twisted into injustice or lies for our benefit unless we hurry to make amends by at least enduring our minor troubles with patience.
And how many thousands are there in hell and everlasting damnation, who have not committed the thousandth part of our sins! How many virgins, youths, and those whom we call innocents, are there! How many monks, priests, and married pairs! These seemed all their life long to be serving God, and, it may be for a single lapse, are now being punished for ever. For, it may not be denied, the justice of God is the same in the case of every sin, whatever it may be, and hates and punishes all sin alike, it matters not in whom it is found. Do we not then see here the inestimable mercy of God, Who hath not condemned us, though we have so many times deserved condemnation? Pray, what are all the sufferings life can bring, compared to eternal punishment, which they indeed justly endure on account of one sin, while we go free and unpunished for our many sins, which God hath covered! [Ps. 32:1] That we take no thought of these benefits of God, or but lightly esteem them, that is ingratitude, and the hardening of our unbelieving heart.
And how many thousands are suffering in hell and eternal damnation who haven't even committed a fraction of our sins! How many virgins, young people, and those we call innocent are there! How many monks, priests, and married couples! They appeared to be serving God their whole lives, and yet, for a single mistake, they are now being punished forever. It cannot be denied that God's justice is the same for every sin, no matter what it is, and He hates and punishes all sin equally, regardless of who commits it. Don't we see here the incredible mercy of God, who has not condemned us, even though we have deserved it countless times? Seriously, what are all the sufferings life can bring compared to eternal punishment, which they justly endure for one sin, while we remain free and unpunished for our many sins that God has forgiven! [Ps. 32:1] To ignore these gifts from God, or to dismiss them lightly, is ingratitude and a sign of a hardened, unbelieving heart.
Moreover, we must include here the many infidels, Gentiles, Jews, and infants, who, if to them had been granted the advantages that we enjoy, would not now be in hell, but rather in heaven, and who would have sinned far less than we. For this mirror also does Christ set before us, when He says in Matthew xi: "Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works, which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment, than for you. And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shalt be brought down to hell: for if the mighty works, which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. But I say unto you. That it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee." [Matt. 11:21 ff.] We see, therefore, what praise and love we owe to our good Lord, in any evil whatsoever of this life; for it is but a tiny drop of the evils which we have deserved, and which Job compares to the sea, and to the sand by the seashore. [Job 6:3]
Moreover, we need to include the many non-believers, Gentiles, Jews, and infants, who, if they had been given the same opportunities we have, would not be in hell today, but rather in heaven, and who would have sinned far less than we have. This is the reflection Christ offers us when He says in Matthew 11: "Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles that were performed in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted to heaven? You will be brought down to hell: for if the mighty works that were done in you had been done in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you." [Matt. 11:21 ff.] Therefore, we see what gratitude and love we owe to our good Lord in any evil we face in this life; it is just a tiny drop of the evils we truly deserve, which Job compares to the sea and the sand by the seashore. [Job 6:3]
CHAPTER V
THE FIFTH IMAGE
THE EVIL ON OUR LEFT HAND
Here we must set before our eyes the whole multitude of our adversaries and wicked men, and consider, first, how many evils they would have inflicted on our bodies, our property, our good name, and on our souls, but could not, being prevented by the providence of God. Indeed, the higher one's station and the wider one's sway,[23] the more is he exposed to the intrigues, slanders, plots, and stratagems of his enemies. In all this we may mark and feel the very present hand of God, and need not wonder if we be touched now and then by one of these evils.
Here, we need to keep in mind all of our enemies and bad people and think about how many harms they would have caused to our bodies, our property, our reputation, and our souls but couldn't due to God's protection. In fact, the higher someone's position and the more power they have, the more they are at risk from the schemes, gossip, plots, and strategies of their foes. In all this, we can see and feel God's current presence, and we shouldn't be surprised if we experience some of these evils from time to time.
Again, let us consider the evils which these men themselves endure; not that we may exult over them, but that we may feel pity for them. For they, too, are exposed to all these same evils, in common with ourselves; as may be seen in the preceding times. Only, they are in a worse plight than we, because they stand outside our fellowship,[24] both as to body and soul. For the evil that we endure is as nothing compared to their evil estate; for they are in sin and unbelief, under the wrath of God, and under the dominion of the devil, wretched slaves to ungodliness and sin, so that, if the whole world were to heap curses on their heads, it could wish them no worse things. If we rightly consider this, we shall see how much more highly favored we are of God, in that we may bear our slight bodily ill in faith, in the kingdom of Christ, and in the service of God; and, indeed, are scarce able to feel it, being so rich in those high blessings. Nay, this wretchedness of theirs must so sorely trouble a pious Christian heart as to make its own troubles seem delights beside them. Thus St. Paul exhorts in Philippians ii, "Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others. Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, took upon Him the form of a servant, etc." [Phil. 2:4 ff.] That is to say, Out of fervent love He took our form upon Himself, bearing Himself amidst our evils as though they were His own, and so completely forgetting Himself and all His goods, and humbling Himself, that He was found in all things to be made in the likeness of men, counting nothing human foreign to Himself, and wholly giving Himself over to our evils.
Again, let's think about the hardships these men face; not to gloat over them, but to feel compassion for them. They, too, endure all these same difficulties, just like we do, as we've seen before. However, their situation is worse than ours because they are outside our community, both physically and spiritually. The struggles we face are nothing compared to their dire state; they are trapped in sin and disbelief, under God’s wrath, and dominated by the devil, miserable slaves to ungodliness and sin. Even if the entire world were to pile curses upon them, it couldn’t wish them anything worse. If we consider this properly, we’ll realize how much more blessed we are by God since we can bear our minor physical sufferings in faith, in the kingdom of Christ, and in God’s service; in fact, we are hardly even able to feel them because we are so rich in those great blessings. This misery they face must deeply trouble a devout Christian heart to the point where its own struggles seem like pleasures in comparison. Thus, St. Paul encourages us in Philippians 2, "Don’t just look out for your own interests, but also for the interests of others. Have the same mindset as Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage" [Phil. 2:4 ff.]. This means, out of deep love, He took on our form, engaging with our hardships as if they were His own, completely forgetting Himself and all He had, humbling Himself to the point of being like us in every way, considering nothing human to be alien to Himself, and fully committing Himself to our struggles.
Animated with this love, and moved by this example, the saints are wont to pray for wicked men, even their enemies, [Luke 6:27 f.] and to do all things for them after the example of Christ; and forgetting their own injuries and rights, to take thought only how they may rescue them from their evils, with which they are far more cruelly tormented than with any evils of the body. Even as St. Peter writes of Lot, that he "dwelt among them who from day to day vexed the just soul with unjust works." [2 Peter 2:8]
Animated by this love and inspired by this example, the saints often pray for wicked people, even their enemies, [Luke 6:27 f.] and strive to do everything for them following Christ's example; they forget their own wrongs and rights, focusing only on how they can save them from their troubles, which torment them far more cruelly than any physical suffering. Just as St. Peter writes about Lot, stating that he "dwelled among those who day by day troubled the righteous soul with their unjust actions." [2 Peter 2:8]
You see, then, how deep an abyss of evils is here discovered, and how great an opportunity for showing mercy and compassion, as well as for overlooking our own trifling ills, if the love of God dwell in us; since that which God permits us to suffer is as nothing to that which those others endure. But the reason why these things affect us so little is, because the eye of our heart is not clear enough to see how great is the squalor and wretchedness of a man lying in sin; that is, separated from God, and in the possession of the devil. For who is there so hard of heart that he must not sicken at the spectacle of those miserable forms lying at our church doors and in our streets, their faces disputed, and all their members hideously consumed with putrifying sores; so that the mind is horror-struck at the thought and the senses recoil from the sight! And what does God intend, through these lamentable specimens of our flesh and brotherhood, but to open the eyes of our mind, that we may see in how much more dreadful a guise the soul of the sinner shows forth its disease and decay, even though he himself go in purple and gold, and tie among lilies and roses, as a very child of paradise! Yet how many sinners are there to one of those wretched creatures? When these evils on the part of our neighbors, so great both in number and degree, are disregarded by us, it follows that our one evil, be it never so trifling, will appear as the sole evil, and the greatest of all.
You can see how deep a pit of evils is revealed here, and how great an opportunity there is to show mercy and compassion, as well as to overlook our own minor troubles, if we truly have the love of God in us. What God allows us to suffer is nothing compared to what others endure. The reason these issues affect us so little is that our hearts aren't clear enough to see the level of squalor and misery of someone trapped in sin; that is, cut off from God and influenced by the devil. Who among us is so callous that they don’t feel sick at the sight of those miserable people lying at our church doors and in our streets, their faces disfigured, and their bodies grotesquely ravaged by rotting sores? The thought is horrifying, and the sight makes our senses recoil! And what does God want us to learn from these pitiful examples of our humanity? It's to open our minds so we can see how much more terrifying the soul of a sinner is in its disease and decay, even if they appear to be living in luxury, adorned in purple and gold, and surrounded by beauty like a child of paradise! Yet, for every one of those wretched souls, there are countless sinners. When we disregard the tremendous evils faced by our neighbors, both in number and severity, it leads us to view our own minor faults as the only evil and the worst of all.
But even in respect of bodily evils, the wicked are of necessity in a worse plight than we. For what sweet and pure joy can be theirs, so long as their conscience can find no peace? Or can there be a more terrible evil than the unrest of a gnawing conscience? Isaiah says, "The wicked are like the troubled sea, when it cannot rest, whose waters cast up mire and dirt. There is no peace, saith my God, to the wicked." [Isaiah 57:20 f.] This also, in Deuteronomy xxviii, applies to them: "The Lord shall give thee a trembling heart, and failing of eyes, and sorrow of mind: and thy life shall hang in doubt before thee; and thou shalt fear day and night, and shalt have none assurance of thy life; in the morning thou shalt say, Would God it were even! and at even thou shalt say, Would God it were morning! for the fear of thine heart wherewith thou shalt fear, and for the sight of thine eyes which thou shalt see." [Deut. 28:65 ff.] In a word, if one regarded all the evils of the wicked in the right spirit, whether they be those of his friends or his foes, he would not only seem to be suffering nothing at all, but he would also, with Moses and the Apostle Paul, [Ex. 32:32, Rom. 9:3] be filled with an hearty desire to die for them, if it might be, and to be blotted out of the book of life, as it is written in Romans ix, that thereby they might be set free. With such zeal and burning was Christ's heart kindled, when He died for us and descended into bell, leaving us an example that we also should be so regardful of the evils of others, and forgetful of our own, nay, rather covetous of evils of our own.
But even when it comes to physical suffering, the wicked are inevitably in a worse situation than we are. What kind of sweet and pure joy can they experience, as long as their conscience is troubled? Is there a greater suffering than the constant unrest of a guilty conscience? Isaiah says, "The wicked are like the troubled sea, unable to rest, whose waters stir up mud and dirt. There is no peace, says my God, for the wicked." [Isaiah 57:20 f.] This also applies to them in Deuteronomy 28: "The Lord will give you a trembling heart, failing eyes, and deep sorrow; your life will hang in doubt before you; you will fear day and night, with no assurance of your life; in the morning you will wish it were evening, and in the evening you will wish it were morning, because of the fear that grips your heart and the sights you will see." [Deut. 28:65 ff.] In short, if one looked at all the troubles of the wicked with the right perspective, whether they come from friends or enemies, they wouldn't seem to suffer at all. Instead, with Moses and the Apostle Paul, [Ex. 32:32, Rom. 9:3] one would feel a deep desire to die for them, if possible, and to be erased from the book of life, as written in Romans 9, so that they might be saved. Such passion and intensity filled Christ's heart when He died for us and descended into hell, leaving us an example to also care about the suffering of others and forget about our own, or rather, to wish for our own struggles.
CHAPTER VI
THE SIXTH IMAGE
THE EVIL ON OUR RIGHT HAND
On out right hand are our friends, in the contemplation of whose evils out own will grow light, as St. Peter teaches, I. Peter v, "Resist the devil, steadfast in the faith, knowing that the same afflictions are accomplished in your brethren that are in the world." [1 Pet. 5:9] Thus also does the Church entreat in her prayers, that provoked by the example of the saints, we may imitate the virtue of their sufferings; and thus she sings,
On our right side are our friends, and by reflecting on their struggles, our own will become easier to bear, as St. Peter teaches in 1 Peter 5:9, "Resist the devil, standing firm in your faith, knowing that the same sufferings are being experienced by your fellow believers throughout the world." [1 Pet. 5:9] Likewise, the Church asks in her prayers that inspired by the example of the saints, we may strive to emulate their resilience in suffering; and so she sings,
What torments all the Saints endured,
That they might win the martyr's palm!
What suffering all the Saints went through,
So they could earn the martyr's reward!
From such words and hymns of the Church we learn that the feasts of the saints, their memorials, churches, altars, names, and images, are observed and multiplied to the end that we should be moved by their example to bear the same evils which they also bore. And unless this be the manner of our observance, it is impossible that the worship of saints should be free from superstition. Even as there are many who observe all these things in order to escape the evil which the saints teach us should be borne, and thus to become unlike those whose feasts they keep for the sake of becoming like them.
From the words and hymns of the Church, we learn that the feasts of the saints, their memorials, churches, altars, names, and images are celebrated and increased so that we can be inspired by their example to endure the same hardships they faced. If this isn't how we observe these things, then the veneration of saints can't help but be tainted by superstition. There are many who follow these practices to avoid the difficulties that the saints show us we should endure, and in doing so, they become different from those whose feasts they celebrate instead of becoming more like them.
But the finest treatment of this portion of our consolation is given by the Apostle, when he says, in Hebrews xii: "Ye have not yet resisted unto blood, striving against sin. And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, demise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of Him; for whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom He receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence; shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? For they verily for a few days chastened us after their good pleasure; but He for our profit, that we might be partakers of His holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous; nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby." [Heb. 12:4 ff.] Who must not be terrified at these words of Paul, in which he plainly states that they who are without the chastisement of God are not the sons of God! Again, what greater strengthening and what better comfort can there be than to hear that they who are chastened are beloved of the Lord, that they are sons of God, that they have part in the communion of saints, that they are not alone in their sufferings! So forceful an exhortation must make chastisement a thing to be loved.
But the best explanation of this part of our comfort comes from the Apostle, when he says in Hebrews 12: "You have not yet resisted to the point of bloodshed in your struggle against sin. And you have forgotten the encouragement that speaks to you as children: 'My son, don’t take the Lord’s discipline lightly, and don’t lose heart when He rebukes you; for the Lord disciplines the one He loves and punishes every son He accepts.' If you endure discipline, God is treating you as His children; for what child is not disciplined by their father? But if you are not disciplined, and all undergo discipline, then you are not true children, but illegitimate. Moreover, we have had earthly fathers who disciplined us, and we respected them; shouldn’t we submit even more to the Father of spirits and live? They disciplined us for a little while as they thought best; but He does so for our good, that we may share in His holiness. No discipline seems pleasant at the time, but painful; however, later on it produces a harvest of righteousness and peace for those who have been trained by it." [Heb. 12:4 ff.] Who wouldn’t be alarmed by these words of Paul, which clearly state that those who are not subjected to God's discipline are not God’s children! Again, what greater strength and comfort can there be than knowing that those who are disciplined are loved by the Lord, that they are His children, that they partake in the fellowship of saints, and that they are not alone in their sufferings! Such a powerful message must make discipline something to be embraced.
Nor is there here any room for the excuse that some have lighter, others heavier, evils to bear. For to every one is given his temptation according to measure, and never beyond his strength. As it is written in Psalm lxxix, "Thou shalt feed us with the bread of tears, and give us for our drink tears in measure";[25] [Ps. 80:5] and as Paul says, "God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it." [1 Cor. 10:13] Where there is, therefore, a greater evil, there is also more of divine help, and an easier way to escape; so that the unequal distribution of sufferings appears to be greater than it actually is. Does not the example of St. John Baptist, whom we commemorate on this day[26] as beheaded by Herod, shame and amaze us all!—that so great a man, than whom there was none greater born of woman, [Matt. 11:11] the special friend of the Bridegroom, [John 3:29] the forerunner of Christ, and more than all the prophets, [Matt. 11:9] should have been put to death, not indeed after a public trial, nor on a feigned charge (as it was with Christ), nor yet for the sake of the people; but in a dungeon, and for the sake of a dancing-girl, daughter of an adulteress! [Matt. 14:3-11] This one Saint's ignominious death, and his life so vilely and shamelessly given over into the hands of his sworn and adulterous enemy, must make ail our evil light. Where was God then, that He could look on such things? Where was Christ, Who, hearing of it, was altogether silent? He perished as if unknown to God, and men, and every creature. Compared with such a death, what sufferings have we to boast of; nay, what sufferings of which we must not even be ashamed? And where shall we appear, if we are unwilling to endure any suffering, when such a man endured so shameful a death, and so undeserved, and his body, after death, was given up to the insults of his enemies! [1 Pet. 4:18] "Behold," He saith in Jeremiah, "behold, they whose judgment was not to drink of the cup have assuredly drunken: and art thou he that shall altogether go unpunished? thou shalt not go unpunished, but thou shalt surely drink of it." [Jer. 49:12]
There’s no excuse here that some people have lighter burdens while others have heavier ones. Each person is given their own temptation in proportion to what they can handle, and never more than their strength. As it’s written in Psalm 79, "You will feed us with the bread of tears and give us tears to drink in measurements"; and as Paul says, "God is faithful; he won't let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can endure it." Where there’s a greater evil, there’s also more divine help and a clearer path to escape, making the unequal distribution of suffering seem greater than it actually is. Does the example of St. John the Baptist, whom we remember today as having been beheaded by Herod, not humiliate and astonish us all?—that such a great man, greater than anyone born of a woman, the beloved friend of the Bridegroom, the forerunner of Christ, and more than all the prophets, should be executed not in a public trial, nor under false charges (like with Christ), or for the sake of the people, but in a prison because of a dancing girl, the daughter of an adulteress! This one Saint’s disgraceful death, and his life so ignobly handed over to his sworn enemy, should make our troubles seem light. Where was God then, to allow such things to happen? Where was Christ, who, when he heard about it, didn’t say a word? He suffered as if he were unknown to God, and to humanity, and to every creature. With such a death, what sufferings do we have to brag about; in fact, what sufferings should we not even be ashamed of? And where will we stand if we refuse to endure any suffering when such a man faced such a shameful and undeserved death, and his body, after death, was left for his enemies to mock? "Look," He says in Jeremiah, "look, those who were not supposed to drink from the cup have certainly drunk from it; and are you one that will go completely unpunished? You will not go unpunished; you will surely drink from it."
Therefore, that hermit, who was used to fall ill every year, did well to weep and lament, when for one whole year he found himself in sound health, because, he said, God had forsaken him and withdrawn His grace from him. So necessary and so salutary is the Lord's chastening for all Christians.
Therefore, that hermit, who was used to getting sick every year, had good reason to cry and mourn when he spent a whole year in good health, because he believed that God had abandoned him and taken away His grace. The Lord's discipline is so essential and beneficial for all Christians.
We see, then, that all our sufferings are as nothing, when we consider the nails, dungeons, irons, faggots, wild beasts, and all the endless tortures of the saints; nay, when we ponder the afflictions of men now living, who endure in this life the most grievous persecutions of the devil. For there is no lack of men who are suffering more sharp and bitter pains than we, in soul as well as in body.
We can see that all our struggles are minimal when we think about the nails, prisons, chains, fire, wild animals, and the countless tortures endured by the saints. In fact, when we reflect on the suffering of people today, who experience the harshest persecutions from the devil in this life, it becomes clear. There are many who are going through sharper and more painful trials than we are, both mentally and physically.
But now some will say, "This is my complaint, that my suffering cannot be compared with the sufferings of the saints; because I am a sinner, and not worthy to be compared with them. They, indeed, suffered because of their innocence, but I suffer because of my sins. It is no wonder, then, that they so blithely bore all." That is a very stupid saying. If you suffer because of your sins, then you ought to rejoice that your sins are being purged away. And, besides, were not the saints, too, sinners? But do you fear that you are like Herod, and the thief on Christ's left hand? You are not, if you have patience. For what was it that distinguished the thief on the left hand from him on the right but the patience of the one and the impatience of the other? If you are a sinner, well; the thief, too, was a sinner; but by his patience he merited the glorious reward of righteousness and holiness. Go, and do thou likewise. [Luke 10:37] For you can suffer nothing except it be either on account of your sins or on account of your righteousness; and both kinds of suffering sanctify and save, if you will but love them. And so there is no excuse left. In short, just as soon as you have confessed that you are suffering on account of your sins, you are righteous and holy, even as the thief on the right hand. For the confession of sins, because it is the truth,[27] justifies and sanctifies, and so, in the very moment of this confession, you are suffering no longer on account of your sins, but on account of your innocence. For the righteous man always suffers innocently. But you are made righteous by the confession of your merited sufferings and of your sins. And so your sufferings may truly and worthily be compared with the sufferings of the saints, even as your confession may truly and worthily be compared with the confession of the saints. For one is the truth of all, one the confession of all sins, one the suffering of all evils, and one the true communion of saints in all and through all.[28]
But now some will say, "This is my complaint: my suffering can't compare to the suffering of the saints because I am a sinner and not worthy to be compared to them. They suffered for their innocence, while I suffer because of my sins. It's no wonder they bore everything so easily." That's a really silly argument. If you suffer because of your sins, then you should be glad that your wrongdoings are being wiped away. Besides, weren't the saints sinners too? Do you worry that you're like Herod or the thief on Christ's left? You aren’t, as long as you have patience. What made the thief on the left different from the one on the right was the patience of the one and the impatience of the other. If you are a sinner, that's fine; the thief was a sinner too, but through his patience, he earned the glorious reward of righteousness and holiness. Go, and do the same. [Luke 10:37] You can only suffer for your sins or for your righteousness, and both types of suffering can sanctify and save if you choose to embrace them. So there’s no excuse left. In short, once you confess that you're suffering because of your sins, you are righteous and holy, just like the thief on the right. The confession of sins, because it is the truth, justifies and sanctifies, and in that very moment of confession, you are no longer suffering for your sins, but for your innocence. A righteous person always suffers innocently. But you become righteous through the confession of your just sufferings and your sins. So your sufferings can truly and rightly be compared to the sufferings of the saints, just as your confession can be compared to the confession of the saints. For there is one truth for all, one confession for all sins, one suffering for all evils, and one true communion of saints in all and through all.
CHAPTER VII
THE SEVENTH IMAGE
THE SUPERNAL EVIL, OR THE EVIL ABOVE US
Finally, let us lift up our hearts, and ascend with the Bride into the mountain of myrrh. [Song of Sol. 4:6] This is Jesus Christ the Crucified, Head of all saints, and Prince of all sufferers; of Whom many have written many things, and all all things, as it is meet.[29] His memory is commended to the Bride, when it is said, "Set Me as a seal upon thine heart, as a seal upon thine arm." [Song of Sol. 8:6] The blood of this Lamb, signed upon the threshold, wards off the destroying angel. [Ex. 12:7, 13] By Him is the Bride praised, because "the hair of her head is as the king's purple"; [Song of Sol. 7:5] that is, her meditation glows red with the remembrance of the Passion of Christ. This is that tree which Moses was commanded to cast into the waters of Marah (that is, the bitterness of suffering), and they were made sweet. [Ex. 15:23 ff.] There is nothing that this Passion cannot sweeten, not even death itself; as the Bride saith, "His lips are lilies, dropping sweet-smelling myrrh." [Song of So. 5:13] What resemblance is there between lips and lilies, since lips are red and lilies white? But she says this in a mystery, signifying that the words of Christ are most fair and pure, and that there is in them naught of blood-red bitterness or guile; nevertheless, in them He drops precious and chosen myrrh, that is, the bitterness of death. These most pure lips and sweet have power to make the bitterest death sweet and fair and bright and dear,—death that, like precious myrrh, removes at once all of sin's corruption.
Finally, let’s lift our hearts and rise with the Bride to the mountain of myrrh. [Song of Sol. 4:6] This refers to Jesus Christ the Crucified, Head of all saints and Prince of all who suffer; many have written about Him, all rightly so.[29] His memory is cherished by the Bride, as it is expressed, "Set Me as a seal upon your heart, as a seal upon your arm." [Song of Sol. 8:6] The blood of this Lamb, marked on the doorway, protects against the destroying angel. [Ex. 12:7, 13] Through Him, the Bride is celebrated, because "the hair of her head is as the king's purple"; [Song of Sol. 7:5] meaning her thoughts shine red with the remembrance of Christ's Passion. This is the tree that Moses was instructed to throw into the waters of Marah (the bitterness of suffering), and they became sweet. [Ex. 15:23 ff.] There is nothing that this Passion cannot make sweet, not even death itself; as the Bride says, "His lips are lilies, dropping sweet-smelling myrrh." [Song of So. 5:13] What similarity is there between lips and lilies, since lips are red and lilies are white? But she says this in a mystery, implying that Christ's words are beautiful and pure, containing nothing of blood-red bitterness or deceit; yet, in them, He offers precious and chosen myrrh, which is the bitterness of death. These pure and sweet lips have the power to transform the most bitter death into something sweet, beautiful, bright, and precious—death that, like valuable myrrh, removes all corruption of sin.
How does this come to pass? When, forsooth, you hear that Jesus Christ, God's Son, hath, by His most holy touch, consecrated and hallowed all sufferings, even death itself, hath blessed the curse, glorified shame, and enriched poverty, so that death has been made a door to life, curse a fount of blessing, and shame the mother of glory: how can you then be so hard and ungrateful as not to long for and to love all manner of sufferings, now that they have been touched by Christ's most pure and holy flesh and blood, and made unto you holy, harmless, wholesome, blessed, and full of joy?
How does this happen? When you hear that Jesus Christ, God's Son, has, through His holy touch, made all sufferings, even death itself, sacred, has blessed the curse, glorified shame, and enriched poverty, so that death has become a doorway to life, curse a source of blessings, and shame the beginning of glory: how can you then be so hard and ungrateful as not to yearn for and embrace all kinds of suffering, now that they have been touched by Christ's pure and holy body and blood, and made holy, harmless, wholesome, blessed, and full of joy for you?
For if Christ, by the touch of His most innocent flesh, has hallowed all waters unto baptism, yea, and every creature besides; how much more has He, by the same contact of His most innocent flesh and blood, hallowed every form of death, all suffering and loss, every curse and shame, unto the baptism of the Spirit, or the baptism of blood![30] Even as He saith of this same baptism of His Passion, in Luke xii, "I have a baptism to be baptised with; and how am I straitened until it be accomplished!" [Luke 12:50] Behold, how He is straitened, how He pants and thirsts, to sanctify suffering and death, and make them things to be loved! For He sees how we stand in fear of suffering. He marks how we tremble and shrink from death. And so, like a godly pastor or faithful physician, He hastens to set bounds to this our evil, and is impatient to die and by His contact to commend suffering and death unto us. So that the death of a Christian is henceforth to be regarded as the brazen serpent of Moses, [Num. 21:8] which indeed hath in all things the appearance of a serpent, yet is quite without life, without motion, without venom, without sting. Even so the righteous seem, in the sight of the unwise, to die; but they are in peace. We resemble them that die, nor is the outward appearance of our dying unlike that of others; but the thing itself is different, because for us death is dead. In like manner all our sufferings are like the sufferings of other men; but it is only in the appearance. In reality our sufferings are the beginning of our freedom from suffering, as our death is the beginning of our life. This is that which Christ saith in John viii, "If a man keep my saying he shall never see death." [John 8:51] How shall he not see it? Because when he dies, he begins to live, and so he cannot see death for the life that he sees. For here the night shines as the day; [Ps. 139:12] since the life that breaks upon him is brighter far than departing death. These things are assured to all who believe in Christ, to the unbelieving they are not.
For if Christ, through the touch of His pure flesh, has blessed all waters for baptism, and every creature besides; how much more has He, through the same touch of His pure flesh and blood, blessed every form of death, all suffering and loss, every curse and shame, for the baptism of the Spirit, or the baptism of blood! Just as He says about this baptism of His Passion in Luke 12, "I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how am I straitened until it be accomplished!" Look at how He is straining, how He pants and thirsts, to sanctify suffering and death, turning them into things we should love! He knows how we fear suffering. He sees how we tremble and shrink away from death. So, like a caring shepherd or a dedicated doctor, He's eager to put an end to our pain, and He's impatient to die so that through His contact, He can present suffering and death to us positively. Therefore, the death of a Christian should now be seen as the bronze serpent of Moses, which appears like a serpent in every way but is entirely lifeless, motionless, without poison, and without sting. In the same way, the righteous may seem to die in the eyes of the foolish, but they are at peace. We look like those who die, and our outward appearance doesn't differ from that of others; but what is different is the reality, because for us, death is dead. Similarly, all our sufferings are like those of other people, but that's only in appearance. In reality, our sufferings are the beginning of our freedom from suffering, just like our death is the start of our life. This is what Christ says in John 8, "If a man keeps my saying, he shall never see death." How is that possible? Because when he dies, he begins to live, so he can't see death for the life that he experiences. Here, the night shines like day; since the life that comes to him is far brighter than death departing. These truths are assured to all who believe in Christ; they are not true for the unbelieving.
Therefore, if you kiss, caress, and embrace, as most sweet relics,[31] consecrated by His touch, the robe of Christ, the vessels, waterpots, and what things soever He touched and used; why will you not the rather caress, embrace, and kiss the pains and evils of this world, disgrace and death, which He not only hallowed by His touch, but sprinkled and blessed with His most holy blood, yea, embraced with willing heart, and great constraining love?[32] The more, since in these there are for you far greater merits, rewards, and blessings than in those relics; for in them there is offered to you the victory over death, and hell, and all sins, but in those relics nothing at all. O could we but see the heart of Christ, when, hanging on the Cross, He was so eager to slay death, and hold it up to our contempt! With what grace and ardor He embraced death and pain for us timid ones, who shrink from them! How willingly He first drinks this cup for us sick ones, that we may not dread to drink it after Him! For we see that naught of evil befell Him, but only good, in His resurrection. Could we see this, then doubtless that precious myrrh, dropping from Christ's lips, and commended by His words, would grow most sweet and pleasant unto us, even as the beauty and fragrance of lilies. Thus saith also St. Peter, I. Peter iv, "Forasmuch as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind." [1 Pet. 4:1] And St. Paul, Hebrews xii, "Consider Him that endured such contradiction of sinners against Himself, lest ye be wearied and faint in your minds." [Heb. 12:3]
Therefore, if you kiss, caress, and embrace, like many cherished relics,[31] blessed by His touch, the robe of Christ, the vessels, waterpots, and anything He touched or used; why wouldn’t you rather embrace, caress, and kiss the pains and struggles of this world, disgrace, and death, which He not only made holy with His touch but also sprinkled and blessed with His most holy blood, and willingly embraced with a loving heart? [32] Especially since in these, there are far greater merits, rewards, and blessings for you than in those relics; because in them, you are offered victory over death, hell, and all sins, while in those relics, there is nothing at all. Oh, if only we could see the heart of Christ when He hung on the Cross, so eager to defeat death and hold it up for our scorn! With what grace and passion He embraced death and pain for us timid ones, who shy away from them! How willingly He first drinks this cup for us who are sick, so that we won’t fear to drink it after Him! For we see that nothing evil happened to Him, only good, in His resurrection. If we could see this, surely that precious myrrh, dropping from Christ's lips and endorsed by His words, would become most sweet and pleasant to us, just like the beauty and fragrance of lilies. St. Peter also says, I. Peter iv, "Since Christ has suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mindset." [1 Pet. 4:1] And St. Paul, Hebrews xii, "Consider Him who endured such hostility from sinners against Himself, so that you won’t grow weary and lose heart." [Heb. 12:3]
If we have learned, in the foregoing images, beneath us and above us, to bear our evils with patience, surely in this last, lifted above and out of ourselves, caught up unto Christ, and made superior to all evils, we ought not only to bear with them, but to love them, desire them, and seek them out. Whoever is yet far from this state of mind, for him the Passion of Christ has little value; as it is with those who use the sign and arms of Christ[33] to ward off evils and death, that so they may neither suffer pain nor endure death, which is altogether contrary to the cross and death of Christ. Hence, in this image, whatever evils we may have to bear must be swallowed up and consumed, so that they shall not only cause us no pain, but even delight us; if indeed this image find its way into our heart, and fix itself in the inmost affections of our mind.
If we've learned from the previous images, both below and above us, to face our troubles with patience, then in this final one, lifted above and beyond ourselves, united with Christ and superior to all evils, we should not only endure them but also embrace them, want them, and actively seek them out. For anyone who hasn't yet reached this mindset, the Passion of Christ holds little significance; just like those who use the sign and symbols of Christ to avoid troubles and death, so they can escape pain or avoid dying, which completely opposes the cross and death of Christ. Therefore, in this image, whatever burdens we may bear should be absorbed and transformed, so they cause us not only no pain but even bring us joy; if indeed this image finds a place in our hearts and settles into the deepest feelings of our minds.
PART II
The second part also consists of seven images, answering to the first; the first representing the internal blessing, the second the future blessing, the third the past blessing, the fourth the infernal blessing, the fifth the blessing on the left hand, the sixth the blessing on the right hand, and the seventh the supernal blessing.
The second part also includes seven images, corresponding to the first; the first shows the internal blessing, the second the future blessing, the third the past blessing, the fourth the infernal blessing, the fifth the blessing on the left hand, the sixth the blessing on the right hand, and the seventh the supernal blessing.
CHAPTER I
THE FIRST IMAGE
THE BLESSING WITHIN US
Who can recount only those blessings which every one hath in his own person? How great are, first, the gifts and endowments of the body; such as beauty, strength, health, and the lively play of the senses! To these there comes, in the case of the male, a greater nobility of sex, that fits him for the doing of many things both in public and in private life, and for many splendid achievements, to which woman is a stranger. And if, by the grace of God, you enjoy these excellent gifts for ten, twenty, or thirty years, and in all this time endure suffering for a few days now and then, what great matter is that? There is a proverb among knaves, Es ist umb ein bose stund zuthun, and, Ein gutt stund ist eyner posen werdt.[34] What shall be said of us, who have seen so many good hours, yet are not willing to endure evil for a single hour! We see, therefore, how many blessings God showers upon us, and how few evils barely touch us. This is true at least of the most of us.
Who can only talk about the blessings each person has in their own life? Look at the wonderful gifts of the body, like beauty, strength, health, and the vibrant use of our senses! In men, there's an added nobility that allows them to accomplish many things in both public and private life, achieving greatness in ways that are often unfamiliar to women. If, by the grace of God, you get to enjoy these amazing gifts for ten, twenty, or thirty years, and only suffer for a few days now and then, how significant is that really? There's a saying among tricksters, Es ist umb ein bose stund zuthun, and, Ein gutt stund ist eyner posen werdt.[34] What about us, who have experienced so many good times yet can't stand the idea of enduring hardship for even one hour? We can see that God blesses us abundantly, and the evils we face are minimal. This is true for most of us, at least.
But not content with these blessings, our gracious God adds to them riches and an abundance of all things; if not in the case of all, certainly in the case of many, and of those especially who are too frail to bear the evil. For as I said before,[35] when He grants fewer bodily gifts and possessions, He gives greater mental gifts; so that all things may be equal, and He the just Judge of all. For a cheerful mind is a greater comfort than much riches. Moreover, to some He grants offspring, and, as men say, the highest pleasure, influence, rank, honor, fame, glory, favor, and the like. And if these be enjoyed for a long or even for a short season, they will soon teach men how they ought to conduct themselves under some small evil.
But not satisfied with these blessings, our gracious God adds even more, providing wealth and abundance of everything; if not for everyone, certainly for many, especially for those who are too weak to handle hardship. As I mentioned earlier,[35] when He gives fewer physical gifts and possessions, He offers greater mental gifts, ensuring that everything is balanced, with Him as the fair Judge of all. A joyful mind is a greater comfort than great riches. Additionally, He gives some people children, and, as people say, the highest pleasures, influence, status, honor, fame, glory, favor, and similar benefits. Whether these are enjoyed for a long time or just a brief period, they will quickly teach individuals how to cope with minor difficulties.
But more excellent than all these are the blessings of the mind; such as reason, knowledge, judgment, eloquence, prudence. And, here again, God tempers the justice of His dealing, so that when He bestows more of these gifts on some men. He does not therefore prefer them to others, since on these again He confers greater peace and cheerfulness of mind. In all these things we should gratefully mark the bountiful hand of God, and take comfort in our infirmity. For we should feel no surprise if among so many and great blessings there be some intermingling of bitterness; since even for epicures no meat is savory without salt, nor scarce any dish palatable that has not a certain bitter savor, either native or produced by seasoning. So intolerable is a continual and unrelieved sweetness, that it has been truly said, "Every pleasure too long continued begets disgust"; and again, "Pleasure itself turns at length to loathing." That is to say, this life is incapable of enjoying only good things without a tempering of evil, because of the too great abundance of good things, has arisen also this proverb, "It needs sturdy bones to bear good days"; which proverb I have often pondered and much admired for its excellent true sense, namely, that the wishes of men are contrary to one another; they seek none but good days, and, when these arrive, are less able to bear them than evil days.
But even better than all these are the blessings of the mind, like reason, knowledge, judgment, eloquence, and prudence. And once again, God balances His dealings, so when He gives more of these gifts to some people, He doesn’t prefer them over others, as He also grants more peace and happiness of mind. In all these things, we should gratefully recognize God's generous hand and find comfort in our weaknesses. We shouldn’t be surprised if among so many great blessings, there’s a mix of bitterness; even for those who indulge in pleasures, no food tastes good without salt, and hardly any dish is enjoyable without a bit of bitterness, whether natural or added during cooking. A constant and unbroken sweetness is so unbearable that it has been rightly said, "Every pleasure too long continued breeds disgust," and again, "Pleasure itself eventually turns to dislike." This means that life can’t enjoy only good things without a mix of bad, because when good things are too abundant, we also have the saying, "It takes strong bones to endure good days." I've thought about this proverb often and admire its deep truth—that people’s wishes are often opposed to one another; they only seek good days, and when those come, they find it harder to handle them than bad days.
What, then, would God have us here lay to heart but this, that the cross is held in honor even among the enemies of the cross! For all things must needs be tempered and sanctified with the relics of the cross, lest they decay; even as the meat must be seasoned with salt, that it may not breed worms. And why will we not gladly accept this tempering which God sends, and which, if He did not send it, our own life, weakened with pleasures and blessings, would of itself demand? Hence we see with what truth the Book of Wisdom says of God, "He[36] reacheth from end to end mightily, and ordereth all things sweetly." [Wid. 8:1] And if we examine these blessings, the truth of Moses' words, in Deuteronomy xxxii, will become plain, "He bore him on His shoulders, He led him about, and kept him as the apple of His eye." [Deut. 32:10] With these words we may stop the mouths of those ungrateful praters who hold that there is in this life more of evil than of good. For there is no lack of good things and endless sweet blessings, but they are lacking who ate of the same mind with him who said, "The earth is full of the mercy of the Lord" [Ps. 33:5]; and again, "The earth is full of His praise" [Hab. 3:3]; and in Psalm ciii, "The earth is full of Thy riches" [Ps. 104:24]; "Thou, Lord, hast made me glad through Thy work," [Ps. 92:4] Hence we sing every day in the Mass; [37] "Heaven and earth are full of Thy glory." [Isa. 6:3] Why do we sing this? Because there are many blessings for which God may be praised, but it is done only by those who see the fulness of them. Even as we said concerning the evils of the first image,[38] that a man's evils are only so great as he in his thoughts acknowledges them to be, so it is also with the blessings. Though they crowd upon us from every side, yet they are only so great as we acknowledge them to be. For all things that God made are very good, [Gen. 1:31] but they are not acknowledged as very good by all. Such were they of whom it is said in Psalm lxxvii,[39] "They despised the pleasant land." [Ps. 106:24]
What, then, should we take to heart but this: that the cross is honored even by those who oppose it! Everything needs to be seasoned and blessed by the presence of the cross, or else it will decay; just like meat needs salt so it doesn’t spoil. So why wouldn’t we welcome this seasoning that God gives us? Without it, our lives, weakened by pleasures and comforts, would naturally crave something to ground us. This is why the Book of Wisdom rightly states about God, "He reaches from end to end powerfully, and orders everything beautifully." [Wid. 8:1] If we look closely at these blessings, it becomes clear what Moses said in Deuteronomy xxxii: "He carried him on His shoulders, He guided him, and kept him as the apple of His eye." [Deut. 32:10] With these words, we can silence those ungrateful speakers who claim there’s more bad than good in this life. There is no shortage of good things and endless sweet blessings; it’s just that those who are of the same mindset as the one who said, "The earth is full of the mercy of the Lord" [Ps. 33:5], and again, "The earth is full of His praise" [Hab. 3:3], and in Psalm ciii, "The earth is full of Thy riches" [Ps. 104:24]; "You, Lord, have made me glad through Your work," [Ps. 92:4] are the ones who recognize them. This is why we sing every day in Mass, [37] "Heaven and earth are full of Thy glory." [Isa. 6:3] Why do we sing this? Because there are many blessings for which God deserves praise, but it’s only the ones who see their abundance who do so. Just like we said about the negatives in the first image,[38] a person's problems are only as significant as they perceive them to be; the same goes for blessings. Even though they surround us, they are only as big as we choose to acknowledge them. For everything God created is very good, [Gen. 1:31] but not everyone sees it as such. They were like those mentioned in Psalm lxxvii,[39] "They despised the pleasant land." [Ps. 106:24]
The most beautiful and instructive example of this image is furnished by Job, who when he had lost all said. "Shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil?" [Job 2:10] Truly, that is a golden saying, and a mighty comfort in temptation. For Job not only suffered, but was tempted to impatience by his wife, who said to him, "Dost thou still retain thine integrity? curse God, and die." [Job 2:9] As who should say, "It is plain that he is not God who is thus forsaking thee. Why, then, dost thou trust in him, and not rather, renouncing him, and thus cursing him, acknowledge thyself a mortal man, for whom naught remains after this life?" These things and the like are suggested to each one of us by his wife (i. e., his carnal mind[40]) in time of temptation; for the carnal mind[40] savoreth not the things that be of God. [Matt. 16:13]
The most beautiful and instructive example of this idea comes from Job, who when he lost everything said, "Shall we accept good from God, and not trouble?" [Job 2:10] Truly, that is a powerful saying and a great comfort in times of temptation. For Job not only suffered but was also tempted to lose his patience by his wife, who said to him, "Do you still hold on to your integrity? Curse God and die." [Job 2:9] As if to say, "It's clear that God isn’t helping you. So why do you still trust Him? Instead of clinging to Him, why not give up and acknowledge your mortality, since nothing remains for you after this life?" Thoughts like these are suggested to each of us by our "wife" (i.e., our carnal mind) during times of temptation; for the carnal mind does not understand the things of God. [Matt. 16:13]
But these are all bodily blessings, and common to all men. A Christian has other and far better blessings within, namely, faith in Christ; of which it is said in Psalm xliv, "The king's daughter is all glorious within; her clothing is of wrought gold." [Ps. 45:14 f.] For, as we said concerning the evil of the first image,[41] that no evil in a man can be so great as to be the worst of the evils within him; so too the greatest of the blessings which are in the Christian, he himself is unable to see. Could he perceive it, he would forthwith be in heaven; since the kingdom of heaven, as Christ says, is within us. [Luke 17:21] For to have faith is to have the Word and truth of God; and to have the Word of God is to have God Himself, the Maker of all. If these blessings, in all their fulness, were discovered to the soul, straightway it would be released from the body, for the exceeding abundance of sweet pleasure. Wherefore, of a truth, all the other blessings which we have mentioned are but as the monitors of those blessings which we have within, and which God would by than commend unto us. For this life of ours could not endure to have than revealed, but God mercifully keeps them hidden, until they have reached their full measure. Even so loving parents give their children foolish little toys, in order thereby to lead them on to look for better things.
But these are all physical blessings, common to everyone. A Christian has other, much better blessings inside, namely, faith in Christ; as it is said in Psalm 44, "The king's daughter is all glorious within; her clothing is of wrought gold." [Ps. 45:14 f.] For, just as we mentioned concerning the evil of the first image,[41] no evil in a person can be so great as to overshadow the worst evils within them; similarly, the greatest blessings within a Christian are completely invisible to him. If he could see them, he'd immediately be in heaven; because the kingdom of heaven, as Christ says, is within us. [Luke 17:21] To have faith means to have the Word and truth of God; and to have the Word of God means to have God Himself, the Creator of everything. If these blessings, in all their fullness, were revealed to the soul, it would instantly be freed from the body, overwhelmed by immense joy. Thus, truly, all the other blessings we've mentioned are like signs pointing to those inner blessings that God wants to show us. This life couldn't handle having those revealed, so God compassionately keeps them hidden until they reach their full potential. Just like loving parents give their children silly little toys to encourage them to seek better things.
Nevertheless, these blessings show themselves at times, and break out of doors, when the happy conscience rejoices in its trust to Godward, is fain to speak of Him, hears His Word with pleasure, and is quick to serve Him, to do good and suffer evil. All these are the evidence of that infinite and incomparable blessing hidden within, which sends forth such little drops and tiny rills. Still, it is sometimes more fully revealed to contemplative souls, who then are rapt away thereby, and know not where they are; as is confessed by St. Augustine and his mother,[42] and by many others.
Nevertheless, these blessings show up at times and spill out into the open when a joyful conscience revels in its trust in God, is eager to talk about Him, listens to His Word with delight, and is quick to serve Him, to do good, and to endure suffering. All of these are evidence of that infinite and unmatched blessing hidden within, which sends out small drops and tiny streams. Still, it is sometimes more fully revealed to reflective souls, who then become so absorbed that they don’t even know where they are; as St. Augustine and his mother confessed, along with many others.
CHAPTER II
THE SECOND IMAGE
THE FUTURE BLESSING, OR THE BLESSING BEFORE US
Those who are not Christians will find small comfort, amid their evils, in the contemplation of future blessings; since for them all these things are uncertain. Although much ado is made here by that famous emotion called hope, by which we call on each other, in words of human comfort, to look for better times, and continually plan greater things for the uncertain future, yet are always deceived. Even as Christ teaches concerning the man in the Gospel, Luke xii, who said to his soul, "I will pull down my barns, and build greater; and will say to my soul, Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry. But God said unto him, Thou fool, this night thy soul shall be required of thee; and then whose shall those things be which thou hast provided? So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God." [Luke 12:18 ff.]
Those who aren't Christians will find little comfort, amidst their struggles, in thinking about future blessings; for them, all these things are uncertain. While there’s a lot of fuss made here about that well-known feeling called hope, which encourages us with words of comfort to expect better times and to constantly plan for the uncertain future, we are often let down. Just like Christ teaches about the man in the Gospel of Luke, chapter 12, who said to himself, "I will tear down my barns and build bigger ones; and I will say to my soul, 'You have plenty of goods stored up for many years. Take it easy, eat, drink, and be happy.' But God said to him, 'You fool! This very night your life will be demanded from you. Then who will get what you have prepared for yourself?' This is how it will be with whoever stores up things for themselves but is not rich toward God." [Luke 12:18 ff.]
Nevertheless, God has not so utterly forsaken the sons of men that He will not grant them some measure of comfort in this hope of the passing of evil and the coming of good things. Though they are uncertain of the future, yet they hope with certain hope, and hereby they are meanwhile buoyed up, lest falling into the further evil of despair, they should break down under their present evil, and do some worse thing.[43] Hence, even this sort of hope is the gift of God; not that He would have them lean on it, but that He would turn their attention to that firm hope, which is in Him alone. For He is so long-suffering that He leadeth them to repentance, as it is said in Romans ii, and suffers none to be straightway deceived by this deceitful hope, if haply they may "return to the heart," [44] and come to the true hope.
Nevertheless, God hasn't completely abandoned humanity to the point where He won't provide some comfort in the hope of evil passing and good things arriving. Even though people are uncertain about the future, they still hold onto hope, and this hope helps lift them up, preventing them from falling into the deeper despair that could lead them to worse actions. This kind of hope is also a gift from God; it’s not meant for them to rely on it entirely, but rather to focus on the true hope that is found only in Him. He is so patient that He leads them to repentance, as mentioned in Romans 2, and doesn’t allow anyone to be quickly misled by this false hope, so that they might "return to the heart" and find the true hope.
But Christians have, beside this twofold blessing,[45] the very greatest future blessings certainly awaiting them; yet only through death and suffering. Although they, too, rejoice in that common and uncertain hope that the evil of the present will come to an end, and that its opposite, the blessing, will increase; still, that is not their chief concern, but rather this, that their own particular blessing should increase, which is the truth as it is in Christ, in which they grow from day to day, and for which they both live and hope. But beside this they have, as I have said, the two greatest future blessings in their death. The first, in that through death the whole tragedy of this world's ills is brought to a close; as it is written, "Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of His saints"; [Ps. 116:15] and again, "I will lay me down in peace and sleep"; [Ps. 4:8] and "Though the righteous be prevented with death, yet shall he be at rest." [Wisd. 4:7] But to the ungodly death is the beginning of evils; as it is said, "The death of the wicked is very evil," [Ps. 34:21] and, "Evil shall catch the unjust man unto destruction." [46] [Ps. 140:11] Even so Lazarus, who received his evil things in his lifetime, is comforted, while the rich glutton is tormented, because he received his good things here. [Luke 16:25] So that it is always well with the Christian, whether he die or live; so blessed a thing is it to be a Christian and to believe in Christ. Wherefore Paul says, "To me to live is Christ, and to die is gain," [Phil. 1:21] and, in Romans xiv, "Whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord; whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's." [Rom. 14:8 f.] This security Christ hath won for us by His death and rising again, that He might be Lord of both the living and dead, able to keep us safe in life and in death; as Psalm xxii. saith, "Though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for Thou art with me." [Ps. 23:4] If this gain of death move us but little, it is proof that our faith in Christ is feeble, and does not prize highly enough the reward and gain of a blessed death, or does not yet believe that death is a blessing; because the old man is still too much alive in us, and the wisdom of the flesh too strong. We should, therefore, endeavor to attain to the knowledge and the love of this blessing of death. It is a great thing that death, which is to others the greatest of evils, is made to us the greatest gain. And unless Christ had obtained this for us, what bad He done that was worthy of the great price He paid, namely, His own self? It is indeed a divine work that He wrought, and none need wonder, therefore, that He made the evil of death to be something that is very good. [Gen. 1:31]
But Christians have, in addition to this twofold blessing,[45] the greatest future blessings definitely waiting for them; yet only through death and suffering. Even though they also share in that common and uncertain hope that the struggles of today will come to an end and that blessings will grow, their main concern is that their own personal blessing should increase. This blessing is the truth found in Christ, in which they grow day by day, and for which they both live and hope. As I mentioned, they also have the two greatest future blessings in their death. The first blessing comes from the fact that through death, the entire tragedy of this world's suffering comes to an end; as it is written, "Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of His saints"; [Ps. 116:15] and again, "I will lie down in peace and sleep"; [Ps. 4:8] and "Though the righteous may be taken away by death, yet shall he be at rest." [Wisd. 4:7] But for the ungodly, death is the start of troubles; as it is said, "The death of the wicked is very evil," [Ps. 34:21] and, "Evil shall catch the unjust man to his destruction." [46] [Ps. 140:11] Just like Lazarus, who faced hardships in his life but is now comforted, while the rich glutton is tormented because he enjoyed his good things here. [Luke 16:25] So, it’s always well with the Christian, whether they die or live; being a Christian and believing in Christ is such a blessing. That's why Paul says, "For me, to live is Christ, and to die is gain," [Phil. 1:21] and in Romans xiv, "Whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord; whether we live or die, we are the Lord's." [Rom. 14:8 f.] This assurance was secured for us by Christ through His death and resurrection, so that He might be the Lord of both the living and the dead, capable of keeping us safe in life and in death; as it is said in Psalm xxii, "Though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for You are with me." [Ps. 23:4] If the benefit of death doesn’t move us much, it shows that our faith in Christ is weak, and we don’t appreciate the reward and benefit of a blessed death highly enough, or we don’t truly believe that death is a blessing; because the old self is still too much alive in us, and the flesh's wisdom is too strong. Therefore, we should strive to understand and appreciate this blessing of death. It is indeed remarkable that death, which is the greatest evil to others, becomes the greatest gain for us. And unless Christ had secured this for us, what could His enormous sacrifice—His own life—possibly be justified for? What He accomplished is indeed a divine act, so it's no surprise that He transformed the evil of death into something very good. [Gen. 1:31]
Death, then, to believers is already dead, and hath nothing terrible behind its grinning mask. Like unto a slain serpent, it hath indeed its former terrifying appearance, but it is only the appearance; in truth it is a dead evil, and harmless enough. Nay, as God commanded Moses to lift up a serpent of brass, at sight of which the living serpents perished, [Num. 21:8 f.] even so our death dies in the believing contemplation of the death of Christ, and now hath but the outward appearance of death. With such fine similitudes the mercy of God prefigures to us, in our infirmity, this truth, that though death would not be taken away, He yet has reduced its power to a mere shadow. [Matt. 9:24] For this reason it is called in the Scriptures a "sleep" rather than death. [1 Thess. 4:13 ff.]
Death, then, for believers is already dead and has nothing frightening behind its grinning mask. Like a slain serpent, it still looks terrifying, but that’s just the appearance; in reality, it’s a dead evil and pretty harmless. Just as God commanded Moses to lift up a brass serpent, which caused the living serpents to perish, [Num. 21:8 f.] our death fades away in the hopeful contemplation of Christ's death, leaving only the outward appearance of death. With such vivid comparisons, God's mercy shows us, in our weakness, the truth that even though death can't be completely removed, He has diminished its power to just a shadow. [Matt. 9:24] That’s why it’s referred to in the Scriptures as a "sleep" rather than death. [1 Thess. 4:13 ff.]
The other blessing of death is this, that it not only concludes the pains and evils of this life, but (which is more excellent) makes an end of sins and vices. And this renders death far more desirable to believing souls, as I have said above,[47] than the former blessing; since the evils of the soul, which are its sins, are beyond comparison worse evils than those of the body. This alone, did we but know it, should make death most desirable. But if it does not, it is a sign that we neither feel nor hate our sin as we should. For this our life is so full of perils—sin, like a serpent, besetting us on every side—and it is impossible for us to live without sinning; but fairest death delivers us from these perils, and cuts our sin clean away from us. Therefore, the praise of the just man, in Wisdom iv, concludes on this wise: "He pleased God, and was taken away, and was beloved of Him: so that living among sinners he was translated. Yea, speedily was he taken away, lest that wickedness should alter his understanding, or deceit beguile his soul. For the bewitching of naughtiness doth obscure things that are honest; and the wandering of concupiscence doth undermine the simple mind (O how constantly true is this!). He, being made perfect in a short time, fulfilled a long time; for his soul pleased the Lord: therefore hasted He to take him away from the wicked." [Wisd. 4:10-14]
The other blessing of death is that it not only ends the pains and troubles of this life, but, even more importantly, it puts an end to sins and vices. This makes death much more desirable for believing souls, as I mentioned before,[47] compared to the first blessing; because the evils of the soul, which are its sins, are far worse than those of the body. If we truly understood this, it should make death highly desirable. But if it doesn’t, it indicates that we neither recognize nor dislike our sins as we should. Our life is filled with dangers—sin, like a serpent, surrounds us on all sides—and it's impossible to live without sinning; but the beautiful death frees us from these dangers and completely removes our sins. Therefore, the praise of the righteous person, in Wisdom 4, concludes like this: "He pleased God, and was taken away, and was beloved of Him: so that living among sinners he was translated. Yes, he was taken away quickly, so that wickedness wouldn’t change his understanding, or deceit wouldn’t mislead his soul. For the charm of wrongdoing obscures what is honest; and the distractions of desire undermine the simple mind (O how true this is!). He, being made perfect in a short time, fulfilled a long time; for his soul pleased the Lord: therefore He hurried to take him away from the wicked." [Wisd. 4:10-14]
Thus, by the mercy of God, death, which was to man the punishment for his sin, is made unto the Christian the end of sin, and the beginning of life and righteousness. Wherefore, he that loves life and righteousness must not hate, but love sin, their minister and workshop; else he will never attain to either life or righteousness. But he that is not able to do this, let him pray God to enable him. For to this end are we taught to pray, "Thy will be done," [Matt. 6:10] because we cannot do it of ourselves, since through fear of death we love death and sin rather than life and righteousness. And that God appointed death for the putting to death of sin, may be gathered also from the fact that He imposed death upon Adam immediately after his sin; and that before He drove him out of paradise; in order to show us that death should bring us no evil, but every blessing, since it was imposed in paradise, as a penance and satisfaction.[48] For it is true that, through the envy of the devil, death altered into the world; [Wisd. 2:24] but it is of the Lord's surpassing goodness that, after having thus entered in, it is not permitted to harm us very much, but is taken captive from the very beginning, and set to be the punishment and death of sin.
So, by the mercy of God, death, which was meant to be the punishment for human sin, has become for Christians the end of sin and the start of life and righteousness. Therefore, anyone who loves life and righteousness should not hate but love sin, which serves as a tool and a place for growth; otherwise, they can never achieve true life or righteousness. But if someone finds this difficult, they should pray to God for help. This is why we are taught to pray, "Thy will be done," [Matt. 6:10] because we can’t do it on our own; we tend to prefer death and sin over life and righteousness because of our fear of death. Additionally, the fact that God assigned death as a way to eliminate sin can also be seen in how He imposed death on Adam right after his sin, even before casting him out of paradise. This was to show us that death should bring us no harm, but rather every blessing, since it was introduced in paradise as a form of penance and satisfaction. It is true that death entered the world through the devil’s envy, [Wisd. 2:24] but thanks to the Lord's incredible goodness, even though it has come in, it is not allowed to harm us significantly; it has been captured from the outset and designated as the punishment and death of sin.
This He signified when, after having in His commandment foretold the death of Adam, [Gen. 2:17] He did not afterward hold His peace, but imposed death anew, and tempered the severity of His commandment, nay. He did not so much as mention death with a single syllable, but said only, "Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return" [Gen. 3:19]; and, "Until thou return unto the ground, from whence thou wast taken"—as if He then so bitterly hated death that He would not deign to call it by its name, according to the word, "Wrath is in His indignation; and life in His good will." [49] [Ps. 30:5] Thus He seemed to say that, unless death had been necessary to the abolishing of sin, He would not have been willing to know it nor to name it, much less to impose it. And so, against sin, which wrought death, the zeal of God arms none other than this very death again; so that you may here see exemplified the poet's line,[50]
This He indicated when, after predicting Adam's death in His commandment, [Gen. 2:17] He did not stay silent afterward but reintroduced death and softened the strictness of His command. He didn't even mention death directly; instead, He simply said, "You are dust, and to dust you shall return" [Gen. 3:19]; and, "Until you return to the ground from which you were taken"—as if He so strongly despised death that He refused to call it by name, in line with the saying, "His anger lasts a moment; His favor a lifetime." [49] [Ps. 30:5] Thus, it seemed He was saying that if death hadn’t been necessary to eliminate sin, He wouldn't have acknowledged it, let alone named it or imposed it. So, against sin, which brought about death, God's zeal uses this very death again; showing us the poet's line exemplified here,[50]
By his own art the artist perisheth.
By his own art, the artist perishes.
Even so sin is destroyed by its own fruit, and is slain by the death which it brought forth;[51] as a viper is slain by its own offering. This is a brave spectacle, to see how death is destroyed, not by another's work, but by its own; is stabbed with its own weapon, and, like Goliath, is beheaded with its own sword. [1 Sam. 17:51] For Goliath also was a type of sin, a giant terrible to all save the young lad David—that is Christ,—who single-handed laid him low, and having cut off his head with his own sword, said afterward that there was no better sword than the sword of Goliath (I. Samuel xxi). [1 Sam. 21:9]
Even so, sin is defeated by its own consequences and is killed by the very death it produced; like a viper that is brought down by its own poison. It’s a powerful sight to witness how death is conquered, not by someone else's efforts, but by its own actions; it is pierced by its own weapon and, much like Goliath, is decapitated with its own sword. [1 Sam. 17:51] Goliath, in this regard, represented sin—a giant who was intimidating to everyone except for the young David—which symbolizes Christ—who, on his own, brought him down and, after cutting off his head with Goliath's own sword, declared that there was no better sword than Goliath's sword. (I. Samuel xxi). [1 Sam. 21:9]
Therefore, if we meditate on these joys of the power Christ, and these gifts of His grace, how can any small evil distress us, the while we see such blessings in this great evil that is to come!
Therefore, if we reflect on these joys of Christ's power and these gifts of His grace, how can any small trouble upset us, especially when we recognize such blessings in the significant challenge that lies ahead!
CHAPTER III
THE THIRD IMAGE
THE PAST BLESSING, OR THE BLESSING BEHIND US
The consideration of this image is not difficult, in view of its counterpart, of the past evils;[52] we would, however, aid him who undertakes it. Here St. Augustine shows himself an excellent master, in his Confessions, in which he gives a beautiful rehearsal of the benefits of God toward him from his mother's womb.[52] The same is done in that fine Psalm cxxxvii, 'Lord, Thou hast searched me," [Ps. 139:2] where the Psalmist, marveled among other things at the goodness of God toward him, says, "Thou understandest my thoughts afar off, Thou compassest my path and my lying down." Which is as though he said, Whatever I have thought or done, whatever I shall achieve and possess, I see now that it is not the result of my industry, but was ordered long ago by Thy care. "And there is no speech in my tongue."[54] Where is it then? In Thy power.
The consideration of this image isn’t hard, especially when looking at its counterpart, which involves past wrongs; we would, however, support anyone who takes this on. Here, St. Augustine proves to be an excellent teacher in his Confessions, where he beautifully recounts the blessings God has given him since his mother’s womb. The same is expressed in the lovely Psalm 137, "Lord, you have searched me" [Ps. 139:2], where the Psalmist, marveling at God's goodness toward him, says, "You understand my thoughts from far away, you surround my path and my lying down." It’s as if he’s saying that everything I’ve thought or done, everything I will achieve and possess, I realize now is not just the result of my efforts but was arranged long before by Your care. "And there is no speech in my tongue." Where is it then? In Your power.
We learn this from our own experience. For if we reflect on our past life, is it not a wonder that we thought, desired, did and said that which we were not able to foresee? How far different our course would have been, had we been left to our own free will! Now only do we understand it, and see how constantly God's present care and providence were over us, so that we could neither think nor speak nor will anything except as He gave us leave. As it is said in Wisdom vii, "In His hands are both we and our words"; [Wisd. 7:16] and by Paul, "Who worketh all in all." [1 Cor. 12:6] Ought not we, insensate and hard of heart, to bang our heads in shame, when we learn from our own experience how our Lord hath cared for us unto this hour, and given us every blessing? And yet we cannot commit our care to Him in a small present evil, and act as if He had forsaken us, or ever could forsake us! Not so the Psalmist, in Psalm xxxix, "I am poor and needy; yet the Lord thinketh on me." [Ps. 40:17] On which St. Augustine has this comment: "Let Him care for thee, Who made thee. He Who cared for thee before thou wast, how shall He not care for thee now thou art that which He willed thee to be?" [55] But we divide the kingdom with God; to Him we grant (and even that but grudgingly) that He hath made us, but to ourselves we arrogate the care over ourselves; as though He had made us, and then straightway departed, and left the government of ourselves in our own hands.
We learn this from our own experience. When we look back on our lives, isn't it surprising how we thought, wanted, acted, and spoke in ways we couldn't have predicted? Our journey would have been so different if we had been entirely free to choose for ourselves! Now we see clearly how God's constant care and guidance were always with us, allowing us to think, speak, and desire only as He permitted. As it says in Wisdom 7:16, "In His hands are both we and our words"; and by Paul in 1 Corinthians 12:6, "Who works all in all." Shouldn't we, blinded and stubborn, feel ashamed when we realize from our own experience how our Lord has cared for us up to this point and blessed us with so much? Yet we still struggle to trust Him in even the smallest present difficulties, acting as if He has abandoned us or could ever abandon us! Not so, the Psalmist says in Psalm 40:17, "I am poor and needy; yet the Lord thinks of me." St. Augustine comments on this: "Let Him care for you, Who made you. He who cared for you before you existed, how could He not care for you now that you are what He willed you to be?" But we try to share the responsibility with God; we grudgingly acknowledge that He created us, yet we assume control over our own lives, as if He made us and then immediately left us to manage ourselves.
But if our wisdom and foresight blind us to the care that God hath over us, because perchance many things have fallen out according to our plans, let us turn again, with Psalm cxxxviii, and look in upon ourselves. "My substance was not hid from Thee when I was made in secret"—that is, Thou didst behold and didst fashion my bones in my mother's womb, when as yet I was not, and my mother knew not what was forming in her;—"and my substance was curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth"—that is, even the form and fashion of my body in the secret chambers of the womb were not hidden from Thee, for Thou wast fashioning it. What does the Psalmist intend with such words but to show us by this marvelous illustration how God hath always been caring for us without our help! For who can boast that he took any part in his formation in the womb? Who gave to our mother that loving care wherewith she fed and fondled and caressed us, and performed all those duties of motherhood, when we had as yet no consciousness of our life, and when we should neither know nor remember these things, but that, seeing the same things done to others, we believe that they were done to us also? For they were performed on us as though we had been asleep, nay dead, or rather not yet born, so far as our knowledge of them is concerned.
But if our wisdom and foresight blind us to the care that God has for us, because maybe many things have happened according to our plans, let’s reflect again with Psalm 138 and examine ourselves. "My substance was not hid from Thee when I was made in secret"—this means You saw and shaped my bones in my mother’s womb when I didn’t exist yet, and my mother didn’t know what was developing inside her;—"and my substance was curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth"—meaning, even the shape and form of my body in the hidden spaces of the womb were not hidden from You, for You were creating it. What does the Psalmist mean with these words but to show us through this amazing example how God has always cared for us without our assistance! For who can claim they played a role in their own formation in the womb? Who gave our mother that loving care with which she fed, nurtured, and took care of us, while we had no awareness of our life, and when we wouldn’t know or remember these things, except that, seeing the same things happen to others, we believe they also happened to us? Because those actions were taken on us as if we were asleep, or even dead, or rather not yet born, regarding our awareness of them.
Thus we see how the divine mercies and consolations bear us up, without our doing. And still we doubt, or even despair, that He is caring for us to-day. If this experience does not instruct and move one, I know not what will. For we have it brought home to us again and again, in every little child we meet; so that so many examples proposed to our foolishness and hardness of heart may well fill us with deep shame, if we doubt that the slightest blessing or evil can come to us without the particular care of God. Thus St Peter says, "Casting all your care upon Him, because He careth for you." [1 Pet. 5:7] And Psalm xxxvi, "Cast thy burden upon the Lord, and He will sustain thee." [Ps. 37:5] And St. Augustine, in the Confessions,[56] addresses his soul on this wise: "Why dost thou stand upon thyself, and dost not stand? Cast thyself on Him; for He will not withdraw His hand and let thee fall." Again, we read in I. Peter iv, "Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God, commit the keeping of their souls to Him in well doing, as unto a faithful Creator." [1 Pet. 4:10]
Thus we see how divine mercy and comfort support us, without any effort on our part. Yet we still doubt, or even despair, that He is looking after us today. If this experience doesn't teach us and move us, I don't know what will. We are reminded of this repeatedly in every little child we encounter; so many examples presented to our foolishness and hard hearts should rightly fill us with deep shame if we doubt that even the smallest blessing or misfortune can come to us without God's specific care. As St. Peter says, "Cast all your anxiety on Him, because He cares for you." [1 Pet. 5:7] And in Psalm 36, "Cast your burden on the Lord, and He will sustain you." [Ps. 37:5] St. Augustine, in the Confessions,[56] speaks to his soul like this: "Why do you rely on yourself and not on Him? Throw yourself on Him; He won't withdraw His hand and let you fall." Moreover, we read in 1 Peter 4, "Therefore let those who suffer according to God's will entrust their souls to Him while doing good, as to a faithful Creator." [1 Pet. 4:10]
O could a man attain unto such a knowledge of his God, how safely, how quietly, how joyfully, would he fare! He would in truth have God on his side, knowing this of a certainty, that all his fortunes, whatever they might be, had come to him, and still were coming, under the guidance of His most sweet will. The word of Peter stands firm, "He careth for you." [1 Pet. 5:7] What sweeter sound than this word can we hear! Therefore, he says, "Cast all your care upon Him." If we do this not, but rather take our care upon ourselves, what is this but to seek to binder the care of God, and, besides, to make our life a life of sorrow and labor, troubled with many fears and cares and much unrest! And all to no avail; for we accomplish nothing good thereby, but, as the Preacher saith, it is vanity of vanities, and vexation of spirit. [Eccl. 1:2,14] Indeed, that whole book treats of this experience, as written by one who for himself made trial of many things, and found them all only weariness, vanity and vexation of spirit, so that he concludes it is a gilt of God that a man may eat and drink and live joyfully with his wife, i. e., when he passes his days without anxiety, and commits his care to God. Therefore, we ought to have no other care for ourselves than this, namely, not to care for ourselves, and rob God of His care for us.
Oh, if a person could truly know their God, how safe, peaceful, and joyful their life would be! They would genuinely have God on their side, knowing for sure that all their circumstances, no matter what they are, come to them and continue to come under the guidance of His loving will. Peter's words ring true: "He cares for you." [1 Pet. 5:7] What sweeter message could we hear than this? Therefore, he urges, "Cast all your care upon Him." If we don't do this and instead take on our worries ourselves, what does that do but hinder God's care for us? Plus, it turns our lives into lives of sorrow and toil, filled with fears, worries, and restlessness! And all for nothing; we accomplish nothing good that way, just as the Preacher says, it is vanity of vanities and a chasing after the wind. [Eccl. 1:2,14] Indeed, that whole book is about this experience, written by someone who tried many things and found them all just weariness, vanity, and frustration. He concludes that it’s a gift from God for a person to enjoy food and drink and to live happily with their spouse, meaning that when one can pass their days without anxiety and trusts their worries to God. Therefore, we should not have any other concern for ourselves except this: not to take care of ourselves and deny God the opportunity to care for us.
Whatever remains to be said, will easily be gathered from the corresponding image of evils, as I have said,[57] and from the contemplation of one's past life.
Whatever else needs to be said can be easily understood from the related image of troubles, as I've mentioned,[57] and from reflecting on one's past life.
CHAPTER IV
THE FOURTH IMAGE
THE INFERNAL BLESSING, OR THE BLESSING BENEATH US
Thus far we have considered the blessings which are ours, and are found within ourselves; let us now turn to those blessings that are without us, and are found in others. The first of these is found in those who are beneath us, that is, the dead and damned. Do you wonder what kind of blessing can be discovered in the dead and damned? But the power of the divine goodness is everywhere so great that it grants us to descry blessings in the very greatest evils. Comparing, then, these poor wretches, first of all, with ourselves, we see how unspeakable is our gain; as may be gathered from the corresponding image of evils.[58] For great as are the evils of death and hell that we see in them, so great certainly are the gains that we behold in ourselves. These things are not to be lightly passed over, for they forcibly commend to us the magnificent mercy of God. And we run the danger, if we lightly esteem them, of being found ungrateful, and of being condemned together with these men, and even more cruelly tormented. Therefore, when we perceive how they suffer and wail aloud, we ought so much the more to rejoice in the goodness of God toward us; according to Isaiah lxv: "Behold, my servants shall eat, but ye shall be hungry; behold, my servants shall drink, but ye shall be thirsty; behold, my servants shall rejoice, but ye shall be ashamed; behold, my servants shall sing for joy of heart, but ye shall cry for sorrow of heart; and shall howl for vexation of spirit. And ye shall leave your name for a curse unto my chosen." [Isa. 65:13 ff.] In short, as I have said,[59] the examples of those who die in their sins and are damned are profitable unto us for admonition and instruction, as St. Gregory also observes in his Dialogues;[60] so that
Thus far, we have looked at the blessings that are ours and found within us; now let’s shift our focus to the blessings that come from others. The first of these blessings can be found in those who are below us, specifically, the dead and damned. Do you wonder what kind of blessing can come from the dead and damned? The power of divine goodness is so immense that it allows us to find blessings even in the greatest evils. Comparing these unfortunate souls to ourselves, we see how incredible our gain is, reflected in the corresponding image of their sufferings.[58] For as great as the evils of death and hell are for them, our benefits are certainly just as great. We should not take this lightly, as it powerfully highlights the magnificent mercy of God. If we underestimate these truths, we risk being ungrateful and being condemned along with them, suffering even more cruelly. Therefore, when we witness their suffering and hear their cries, we should rejoice even more in God’s goodness toward us; as Isaiah 65 says: "Behold, my servants shall eat, but you shall be hungry; behold, my servants shall drink, but you shall be thirsty; behold, my servants shall rejoice, but you shall be ashamed; behold, my servants shall sing for joy of heart, but you shall cry for sorrow of heart and howl for vexation of spirit. And you shall leave your name for a curse to my chosen." [Isa. 65:13 ff.] In short, as I have stated,[59] the examples of those who die in their sins and are damned serve as valuable admonitions and lessons for us, as St. Gregory notes in his Dialogues;[60] so that
Happy are they who caution gain
From that that which caused another's pain.
Happy are those who learn caution
From what caused someone else's pain.
This blessing, indeed, affects us but little, because it is so common and well known; nevertheless, it is to be ranked among the very highest blessings, and is comforted of no slight value by those who have an understanding heart; and many are the passages of Scripture that bear upon it, those, namely, which treat of the wrath, the judgments, and the threatenings of God. These most wholesome teachings are confirmed to us by the examples of those wretched men; and their examples only then have their effect on us, when we enter into the feelings of them that endure such things, and put ourselves as it were in their very place. Then will they move and admonish us to praise the goodness of God, Who has preserved us from those evils.
This blessing, in fact, doesn’t impact us much because it’s so common and well-known; still, it should be considered one of the greatest blessings, valued highly by those who have a true understanding. There are many passages in Scripture that address it, particularly those discussing God’s wrath, judgments, and warnings. These valuable lessons are shown to us through the examples of those unfortunate individuals; their experiences only resonate with us when we empathize with those who endure such hardships and imagine ourselves in their situation. Only then will we be moved and reminded to praise the goodness of God, who has kept us safe from those evils.
But let us also compare them with God, that we may see the divine justice in their case. Although this is a difficult task, yet it must be essayed. Now, since God is a just Judge, we must love and laud His justice, and thus rejoice in our God, even when He miserably destroys the wicked, in body and soul; for in all this His high, unspeakable justice shines forth. And so even hell, no less than heaven, is full of God and the highest good. For the justice of God is God Himself; and God is the highest good. Therefore, even as His mercy, so must His justice or judgment be loved, praised, and glorified above all things. In this sense David says, "The righteous shall rejoice when he seeth the vengeance; he shall wash his feet in the blood of the wicked." [Ps. 58:10] It was for this reason that the Lord forbade Samuel to mourn any longer for Saul (I. Samuel xvi), saying, "How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel?" [1 Sam. 16:1] As who should say, "Does My will so sorely displease thee, that thou preferrest the will of man to Me?" In short, this is the voice of praise and joy resounding through the whole Psalter,—that the Lord is the judge of the widow, and a father of the fatherless; that He will maintain the cause of the afflicted, and the right of the poor; that His enemies all be confounded, and the ungodly shall perish; [Ps. 68:5, 149:12] and many similar sayings. Should any one be inclined, in foolish pity, to feel compassion for that bloody generation, that killeth the prophets, yea, the Son of God Himself, and for the company of wicked men, he will be found rejoicing in their iniquity, and approving their deeds. Such a one deserves to perish in like manner with them whose sins he would condone, and will hear the word, "Thou lovest thine enemies, and hatest thy friends." [2 Sam. 19:6] For thus Joab said unto David, when he grieved too sorely over his impious and murderous son.
But let’s also compare them to God, so we can see the divine justice in their situation. While this is a challenging task, it must be attempted. Since God is a just Judge, we should love and praise His justice, and thus rejoice in our God, even when He mercilessly destroys the wicked, in body and soul; for in all this, His high, indescribable justice is revealed. Therefore, even hell, just like heaven, is filled with God and the highest good. God's justice is God Himself; and God is the highest good. So, just like His mercy, His justice or judgment should be loved, honored, and glorified above all else. In this sense, David says, "The righteous shall rejoice when he sees the vengeance; he shall wash his feet in the blood of the wicked." [Ps. 58:10] This is why the Lord told Samuel to stop mourning for Saul (I. Samuel xvi), saying, "How long will you mourn for Saul, since I have rejected him from reigning over Israel?" [1 Sam. 16:1] As if to say, "Does My will upset you so much that you prefer the will of man over Mine?" In short, this is the message of praise and joy throughout the entire Psalter—that the Lord is the judge of the widow, and a father to the fatherless; that He will uphold the cause of the afflicted and the rights of the poor; that His enemies will all be put to shame and the ungodly will perish; [Ps. 68:5, 149:12] and many similar statements. If anyone is foolishly inclined to feel pity for that bloodthirsty generation that kills the prophets, even the Son of God Himself, and for the group of wicked people, they will find themselves rejoicing in their wrongdoing and endorsing their actions. Such a person deserves to perish in the same way as those whose sins they would excuse, and will hear the words, "You love your enemies and hate your friends." [2 Sam. 19:6] For that is what Joab said to David when he was grieving too much over his wicked and murderous son.
Therefore, in this image, we ought to rejoice in the piety of all the saints, and in the justice of God which justly punishes the persecutors of their piety, that He may deliver His elect out of their hands. And so you may see no small blessings, but the very greatest, shining forth in the dead and damned; even the avenging of the injuries of the saints, and of your own as well, if you be righteous with them. What wonder, then, if God, by means of your present evil, should take vengeance also on your enemy, that is, the sin in your body! You ought the rather to rejoice in this work of the high justice of God, which, even without your prayer, is thus slaying and destroying your fiercest foe, namely, the sin that is within you. But, should you feel pity for it, you will be found a friend of sin, and an enemy to the justice that worketh in you. Of this beware; lest it be said also to you, "Thou lovest thine enemies, and hatest thy friends." Therefore, as you ought joyfully to consent to the justice of God when it rages against your sin, you should do even the same when it rages against sinners, those enemies of all men and of God. You see, then, that in the greatest evils may be found the greatest blessings, and that we are able to rejoice in these evils, not on account of the evils themselves, but on account of the supreme goodness of the justice of God our Avenger.
Therefore, in this image, we should celebrate the devotion of all the saints and the justice of God, which rightly punishes those who persecute their faith, so that He can rescue His chosen ones from their grasp. And you can see not just small blessings, but the greatest ones shining forth in the dead and damned; even the avenging of the saints' injuries, as well as your own, if you are righteous alongside them. What’s surprising, then, if God, through your current struggles, also takes revenge on your enemy, which is the sin within you? You should instead rejoice in this act of God's high justice, which, even without your prayers, is killing and destroying your fiercest foe, namely, the sin that resides in you. But if you feel sympathy for it, you will be seen as a friend of sin and an enemy to the justice that is working within you. Be cautious of this; lest it be said of you, "You love your enemies and hate your friends." Therefore, just as you should joyfully accept God’s justice when it comes down hard on your sin, you should do the same when it targets sinners, who are the enemies of all people and of God. You see, then, that in the greatest evils, the greatest blessings can be found, and that we can rejoice in these evils, not because of the evils themselves, but because of the supreme goodness of God's justice as our Avenger.
CHAPTER V
THE FIFTH IMAGE
THE BLESSING ON OUR LEFT HAND
Here are our adversaries who are yet in this life; for in the foregoing image we considered those who are already damned and given over to devils. These we must regard with other feelings, and find in them a twofold blessing. The first is this, that they abound in temporal goods, so that even the prophets were well nigh moved to envy thereby; as we read in Psalm lxii, "But as for me, my feet were almost gone; my steps had well nigh slipped. For I was envious at the foolish, when I saw the prosperity of the wicked" [Ps. 73:2 f.]; and again, "Behold, these are the ungodly, who prosper in the world; they increase in riches." [Ps. 73:12] And Jeremiah says, "Righteous art Thou, O Lord, when I plead with Thee: yet let me talk with Thee of Thy judgments: wherefore doth the way of the wicked prosper? Wherefore are all they happy that deal very treacherously?" [Jer. 12:1] Why does He lavish and waste so many blessings upon them except to comfort us thereby, and make us to know how good He is to "such as are of a clean heart"? as it is said in that same Psalm lxxii. If He is so good to the wicked, how good will He not be to the good? [Ps. 73:1] Except that He does not vex the wicked with any evil, yet afflicts the good with many evils, in order that they may acknowledge His goodness to them not only in the present blessings, but even in those that are hidden and yet to come, and that they may say, with the same Psalmist, "But it is good for me to draw near to God; I have put my trust in the Lord God." [Ps. 73:28] Which is as though he said. Even though I suffer certain things, from which I see that those men are free, nevertheless I trust that God is far more good to me than He is to them. Thus the blessings which we see the wicked enjoy become to us an incentive to hope for those blessings which are not seen, and to despise the evils which we suffer. Even as Christ, in Matthew vi, bids us behold the foul of the air and the lilies of the field, saying, "Wherefore if God so clothe the grass, which to-day is, and to-morrow is cast into the oven, shall He not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith?" [Matt. 6:26 ff.] Hence, by this comparison of the blessings in which the wicked abound with the evils that we suffer, our faith is exercised, and our consolation is placed in God alone, which is the only holy consolation. So doth He make all things work together for good unto His saints. [Rom. 8:28]
Here are our opponents who are still in this life; for in the earlier image, we considered those who are already condemned and given over to demons. We must view these individuals with different feelings and find a double blessing in them. The first is this: they are rich in worldly goods, to the point that even the prophets were nearly swayed to envy, as we read in Psalm 62, "But as for me, my feet were almost gone; my steps had well-nigh slipped. For I was envious of the foolish when I saw the prosperity of the wicked" [Ps. 73:2 f.]; and again, "Behold, these are the ungodly, who prosper in the world; they increase in riches." [Ps. 73:12] And Jeremiah says, "Righteous are You, O Lord, when I argue with You: yet let me talk to You about Your judgments: why does the way of the wicked prosper? Why are all those happy who act treacherously?" [Jer. 12:1] Why does He shower so many blessings on them except to comfort us and to show us how good He is to "those who have a pure heart"? as it says in that same Psalm 72. If He is so good to the wicked, how much more good will He be to the righteous? [Ps. 73:1] Although He does not trouble the wicked with any evil, He allows the righteous to endure many trials, so that they may recognize His goodness not only in the blessings they receive now but also in those that are hidden and yet to come, and that they may say, along with the Psalmist, "But it is good for me to draw near to God; I have put my trust in the Lord God." [Ps. 73:28] It is as if he is saying, even though I suffer certain things from which I see those men are free, I still trust that God is far kinder to me than He is to them. Thus, the blessings we see the wicked enjoy inspire us to hope for the blessings that are unseen and to disregard the evils we endure. Just as Christ, in Matthew 6, urges us to consider the birds of the air and the lilies of the field, saying, "If God clothes the grass, which today is and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will He not much more clothe you, O you of little faith?" [Matt. 6:26 ff.] Therefore, by comparing the blessings the wicked have with the troubles we face, our faith is strengthened, and our consolation rests solely in God, which is the only true consolation. He makes everything work together for good for His saints. [Rom. 8:28]
The other blessing, which is more marvelous, is this, that the evils of our adversaries become blessings to us, under the providence of God. For though their sins are a stumbling-block to the weak, to such as are strong they are an exercise of virtue, and an opportunity for conflict and the amassing of greater merit.[61] For, "Blessed is the man that endureth temptation, for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life." [Jas. 1:12] What greater temptation can there be than a host of evil examples? For this reason, indeed, the world is called one of the enemies of God's saints, because with its allurements and ungodly works it incites, provokes, and entices us from the way of God to its own way. As we read in Genesis vi, "The sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were fair, and they were made flesh." [Gen. 6:2,3] And in Numbers xxv, "The people of Israel began to commit whoredom with the daughters of Moab." [Num. 25:1] So it is good for us to be always oppressed with some trouble or other, that we may not, in our weakness, stumble at the offences of the world, and fall into sin. Thus Lot is praised by Peter, in II. Peter ii., because he suffered many things because of the evil example of the people of Sodom, so that he made progress thereby in his righteousness. [2 Pet. 2:8] It must needs be that these offences come, which furnish us an occasion for conflict and for victory; but woe unto the world because of offences! [Matt. 18:7] But if God procures us such great blessings in the sins of others, should we not with our whole heart believe that He will work, us much greater blessings in our own troubles; even though our flesh and blood judge it to be otherwise!
The other blessing, which is even more amazing, is this: the evils done by our enemies turn into blessings for us, thanks to God's guidance. Though their wrongs may be a stumbling block for the weak, for the strong, they serve as a test of virtue and a chance to grow through challenges and earn greater merit. For, "Blessed is the man who endures temptation, for when he is tested, he will receive the crown of life." [Jas. 1:12] What greater temptation can exist than an abundance of bad examples? This is why the world is considered one of the enemies of God's people, because its temptations and sinful actions provoke and lure us away from God's path to its own. As we read in Genesis 6, "The sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they took wives for themselves." [Gen. 6:2,3] And in Numbers 25, "The people of Israel began to engage in sexual immorality with the daughters of Moab." [Num. 25:1] Therefore, it's good for us to always face some sort of trouble, so we don't, in our weakness, stumble over the offenses of the world and fall into sin. Lot is commended by Peter in II Peter 2 because he suffered greatly due to the wicked examples of the people of Sodom, which helped him grow in righteousness. [2 Pet. 2:8] Offenses must come, providing us the opportunity for conflict and victory; but woe to the world because of these offenses! [Matt. 18:7] If God grants us such great blessings through the wrongs of others, shouldn't we wholeheartedly believe that He will provide us with even greater blessings in our own struggles, even if our flesh and blood perceive it differently?
Nor does the world confer a smaller blessing on us from another side of its evils; namely, its adversities. For, when it is unable to swallow us up with its allurements, and through its offences to make us one with itself, it endeavors through sufferings to drive us out, and through pains to cast us forth; always laying snares for us by the example of its sins, or else visiting its fury upon us through the torment of its pains. This is indeed that fabled monster, Chimaera,[62] with the head of a maiden, seductive, the body of a lion, cruel, and the tail of a serpent, deadly. For the end of the world, both of its pleasures and its tyranny, is poison and death everlasting. Hence, even as God grants us to find our blessings in the sins of the world, so also its persecutions, that they may not remain fruitless and in vain, are appointed unto us to increase our blessings; so that the very things that work us harm are turned to our profit. As St. Augustine says, concerning the innocents slain by Herod, "Never could he have done them so much good with his favor as he did with his hatred." And St. Agatha,[63] the blessed martyr, went to prison as to a banquet chamber; "for," said she, "except thou cause my body to be well broken by thy executioners, my soul will not be able to enter paradise, bearing the victor's palm; even as a grain of wheat, except it be stript of its husk, and well beaten on the threshing-floor, is not gathered into the barn."
The world doesn’t give us any less of a blessing from another angle of its troubles, that is, its challenges. When it can’t overwhelm us with its temptations, or make us part of itself through its offenses, it tries to push us away through suffering and throw us out through pain; always setting traps for us through the example of its sins, or else punishing us with the torment of its hardships. This is truly like that mythical monster, Chimaera, with the head of a beautiful woman, alluring, the body of a lion, fierce, and the tail of a serpent, deadly. For the outcome of the world, with all its pleasures and oppression, is poison and eternal death. Therefore, just as God allows us to find blessings in the world’s sins, so too its persecutions are meant to not be in vain, but to increase our blessings; so that the very things that harm us are turned to our advantage. As St. Augustine says about the innocents killed by Herod, "He could never have done them as much good with his favor as he did with his hatred." And St. Agatha, the blessed martyr, went to prison like it was a feast; "for," she said, "unless you allow my body to be well broken by your executioners, my soul won’t be able to enter paradise, carrying the victor’s palm; just as a grain of wheat, unless it is stripped of its husk and thoroughly beaten on the threshing floor, is not gathered into the barn."
But why waste words here, when we see the whole of the Scriptures, the writings and sayings of all the Fathers, and the lives and acts of all the saints, agreeing together in this matter; namely, that they who bring the most harm upon believers are their greatest benefactors, if only we bear with them in the right spirit. As St. Peter says, "And who is he that will harm you, if ye be followers of that which is good?" [1 Pet. 3:13] And Psalm lxxxviii, "The enemy shall not exact upon him; nor the son of wickedness afflict him." [Ps. 89:22] How is it that he shall not harm us, seeing that oftentimes he even kills us? Because, forsooth, in harming us he is working us the very greatest gain. [Rom. 8:36] Thus we find ourselves every way dwelling in the midst of blessings, if we are wise, and yet, at the same time, also in the midst of evils. So wondrously are all things tempered together under the rule of the goodness of God.
But why waste words here, when we can see that the entirety of the Scriptures, the writings and teachings of all the Church Fathers, and the lives and actions of all the saints all agree on this point: that those who bring the most harm to believers can actually be their greatest allies, as long as we endure it with the right mindset. As St. Peter says, "And who is he that will harm you, if you are followers of what is good?" [1 Pet. 3:13] And in Psalm 88, "The enemy shall not prevail against him; nor shall the wicked oppress him." [Ps. 89:22] How is it that he will not harm us, given that he often even kills us? Because, indeed, by harming us, he is bringing us the greatest benefit. [Rom. 8:36] Thus, we find ourselves surrounded by blessings if we are wise, while at the same time, we also face evils. Everything is wonderously balanced under the care of God’s goodness.
CHAPTER VI
THE SIXTH IMAGE
THE BLESSING ON OUR RIGHT HAND
This is the Church of the saints, the new creation of God, our brethren and our friends, in whom we see naught but blessing, naught but consolation; not, indeed, always with the eyes of the flesh (to which they would appear to belong rather under the corresponding image of evils),[64] but with the eyes of the spirit Nevertheless, we must not disregard even those blessings of theirs which may be seen, but rather learn from them how God would comfort us. For even the Psalmist did not venture, in Psalm lxxii, to condemn all those who amass riches in this world, but said, "If I say, I will speak thus; behold, I should offend against the generation of Thy children." [Ps. 73:15] That is to say, If I should call all men wicked who possess riches, health, and honor, I should be condemning even Thy saints, of whom there are many such. Paul also instructs Timothy to charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not high minded;[1 Tim. 6:17] but he does not forbid them to be rich. And Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were rich men, as the Scriptures record. Daniel, also, and his companions were raised to honor even in Babylon. [Dan. 2:48 f.] Moreover many of the kings of Judah were saintly men. It is with regard to such persons that the Psalmist says, "If I say, I will speak thus; behold, I should offend against the generation of Thy children." [Ps. 73:15] God gives, even to His people, an abundance of these blessings, for their own comfort, and the comfort of others. Still, these things are not their proper blessings, but only shadows and emblems of their true blessings, which consist in faith, hope, love, and other gifts and graces, which love communicates to all.
This is the Church of the saints, the new creation of God, our brothers and our friends, in whom we see nothing but blessing, nothing but comfort; not always with our physical eyes (which might lead us to see them as connected to worldly troubles), but with the eyes of the spirit. Still, we shouldn’t ignore the blessings we can see, but rather learn from them how God comforts us. Even the Psalmist didn’t completely condemn all those who gather riches in this world, but said, "If I say, I will speak this way; look, I would be offending the generation of Your children." [Ps. 73:15] In other words, if I were to label everyone who has wealth, health, and honor as wicked, I would be condemning Your saints, many of whom possess these things. Paul also tells Timothy to warn those who are wealthy in this world not to be arrogant; [1 Tim. 6:17] but he doesn’t tell them they can’t be rich. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were wealthy, as the Scriptures state. Daniel and his friends were honored even in Babylon. [Dan. 2:48 f.] Additionally, many kings of Judah were righteous men. It is regarding such individuals that the Psalmist says, "If I say, I will speak this way; look, I would be offending the generation of Your children." [Ps. 73:15] God grants an abundance of these blessings to His people for their own comfort and the comfort of others. However, these are not their true blessings, but merely shadows and symbols of their real blessings, which are found in faith, hope, love, and other gifts and graces that love shares with all.
This is the communion of saints, in which we glory. And whose heart will not be lifted up, even in the midst of great evils, when he believes that which is indeed the very truth; namely, that the blessings of all the saints are his blessings, and that his evil is also theirs! For this is the sweet and pleasant picture which the Apostle Paul depicts, in Galatians vi, "Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ." [Gal. 6:21] Is it not a blessing to be in such a company in which, "whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honored, all the members rejoice with it"? [1 Cor. 12:26] as it is said in I. Corinthians vi[65]. Therefore, when I suffer, I suffer not alone, but Christ and all Christians suffer with me; as He saith, "He that toucheth you, toucheth the apple of My eye." [Zach. 2:8] Even so others bear my burden, and their strength becomes my own. The Church's faith supports my fearfulness, the chastity of others bears the temptations of my flesh, the fastings of others are my gain, the prayer of another pleads for me. In short, such care have the members one for another, that the comely parts cover, serve, and honor the uncomely; as it is beautifully set forth in I. Corinthians vi.[65] others as though they were my own; and they are truly my own when I find joy and pleasure therein. Let me, then, be base and vile; yet they whom I love and admire are fair and beautiful. And by my love I make not only their blessings, but their very selves my own; so that by their honor my shame is made honorable, by their abundance my poverty is filled, by their merits my sins are healed. Who, then, could despair in his sins? Who would not rejoice in his pains? For it is not he that bears his sins and pains; or if he does bear them, he bears them not alone, but is assisted by so many holy sons of God, yea, even by Christ Himself. So great a thing is the communion of saints, and the Church of Christ.[66]
This is the communion of saints, in which we take pride. And whose heart wouldn’t be lifted up, even in the face of great evils, when they believe in the ultimate truth: that the blessings of all the saints are their blessings, and their struggles are also shared by others? For this is the beautiful image that the Apostle Paul paints in Galatians 6, "Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ." [Gal. 6:21] Isn't it a blessing to be part of a community where, "if one member suffers, all the members suffer with it; or if one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it"? [1 Cor. 12:26] as stated in I Corinthians 6. Therefore, when I suffer, I'm not alone; Christ and all Christians suffer alongside me, as He says, "Whoever touches you touches the apple of My eye." [Zach. 2:8] Others share my burdens, and their strength becomes my own. The faith of the Church supports my fears, the purity of others helps me resist temptation, the fasts of others benefit me, and someone else's prayers advocate for me. In short, the members care for each other so much that the honorable parts cover, serve, and honor those that are less esteemed, as expressed beautifully in I Corinthians 6. They become akin to my own, and they truly feel like my own when I find joy and satisfaction in them. Let me be lowly and unworthy; yet those I love and admire are lovely and commendable. Through my love, I make not only their blessings but their very essence my own, so that through their honor, my shame is made respectable, through their wealth, my poverty is enriched, and through their merits, my sins are healed. Who could possibly despair in their sins? Who wouldn’t find joy in their struggles? For it is not merely he who bears his sins and pains; even if he does, he is not alone; he is supported by many holy sons of God, even Christ Himself. Such is the greatness of the communion of saints and the Church of Christ.
If any one does not believe this, he is an infidel, and has denied Christ and the Church. For even if it should not be perceived yet it is true; but who could fail to perceive it? For why is it that you do not sink in despair, or grow impatient? Is it your strength? Nay: it is the communion of saints. Otherwise you could not bear even a venial sin,[67] nor endure a word of man against you. So close to you are Christ and the Church. It is this that we confess in the Creed, "I believe in the Holy Ghost; the holy Catholic[68] Church." What is it to believe in the holy Church but to believe in the communion of saints. But what things have the saints in common? Blessings, forsooth, and evils; all things belong to all; as the Sacrament of the Altar signifies, in the bread and wine, where we are all said by the Apostle to be one body, one bread, one cup.[69][1 Cor. 10:17] For who can hurt any part of the body without hurting the whole body? What pain can we feel in the tip of the toe that is not felt in the whole body? Or what honor can be shown to the feet in which the whole body will not rejoice? But we are one body. Whatever another suffers, that I suffer and bear; whatever good befalls him, befalls me. So Christ says that whatsoever is done unto one of the least of His brethren, is done unto Him. If a man partake of the smallest fragment of the bread of the altar, is he not said to have partaken of the bread? If he despise one crumb of it, is he not said to have despised the bread?
If anyone doesn’t believe this, they are an outsider and have denied Christ and the Church. Because even if you can’t see it, it’s still true; but who wouldn’t see it? Why is it that you don’t sink into despair or get impatient? Is it your own strength? No, it’s due to the communion of saints. Otherwise, you wouldn’t be able to bear even a minor sin, nor handle a single negative word from someone. Christ and the Church are very close to you. This is what we confess in the Creed, "I believe in the Holy Ghost; the holy Catholic Church." What does it mean to believe in the holy Church if not to believe in the communion of saints? But what do the saints share? Blessings and hardships; everything belongs to everyone; as the Sacrament of the Altar shows, in the bread and wine, where we are all described by the Apostle as one body, one bread, one cup. For who can hurt any part of the body without harming the whole body? What pain can we feel in our toe that isn’t felt by the entire body? Or what honor can be shown to the feet that the whole body doesn’t rejoice in? We are one body. Whatever someone else suffers, I also suffer and bear; whatever good happens to them, happens to me. Christ says that whatever is done to one of His least brothers is done to Him. If a person takes even the smallest piece of the altar bread, are they not considered to have eaten the bread? If they disregard a single crumb, have they not disdained the bread?
When we, therefore, feel pain, when we suffer, when we die, let us turn hither our eyes,[70] and firmly believe and be sure that it is not we, or we alone, but that Christ and the Church are in pain, are suffering, are dying with us. For Christ would not have us go alone into the valley of death, from which all men shrink in fear; but we set out upon the way of pain and death attended by the whole Church, and the Church bears the brunt of it all. Therefore, we can with truth apply to ourselves the words of Elisha, which he spake to his timid servant, "Fear not: for they that be with us a remote than they that be with them. And Elisha prayed, and said, Lord, I pray thee, open his eyes that he may see. And the Lord opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha." [2 Kings 6:16 f.] This one thing remains for us also; namely, to pray that our eyes may be opened (I mean the eyes of our faith), that we may see the Church round about us. Then there will be nothing for us to fear; as it is said also in Psalm cxxiv, "Mountains are round about it: so the Lord is round about His people from henceforth now and for ever." [Ps. 125:2][71]
When we feel pain, suffer, or face death, let us look here and truly believe that it’s not just us, but that Christ and the Church are also in pain, suffering, and dying with us. Christ doesn't want us to go alone into the valley of death, the place that everyone fears; instead, we embark on the road of pain and death surrounded by the whole Church, which carries the weight of it all. Therefore, we can genuinely claim the words of Elisha spoken to his fearful servant: "Don’t be afraid; for those who are with us are more than those who are with them." And Elisha prayed, "Lord, I ask you, open his eyes so he can see." Then the Lord opened the eyes of the young man, and he saw that the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire all around Elisha. This one thing remains for us as well: to pray that our eyes may be opened (the eyes of our faith) so we can see the Church surrounding us. Then we will have nothing to fear, as it is also said in Psalm 124, "Mountains surround it: so the Lord surrounds His people from now on and forever."
CHAPTER VII
THE SEVENTH IMAGE
THE SUPERNAL BLESSING, OR THE BLESSING ABOVE US
I do not now speak of the eternal blessings of Heaven, which the blessed enjoy in the perfect vision of God; or father, I do speak of them in faith, and in so far as they some within our comprehension. For this seventh image is Jesus Christ, the King of glory, rising from the dead; even as, in His Passion and death. He formed the seventh image of evils.[72] Here there is nothing at all of evil; for "Christ, being risen from the dead, dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him." [Rom. 6:9] Here is that furnace of love and fire of God in Zion; [Isa. 31:9] as Isaiah saith. For Christ is not only born unto us, but He is also given unto us. [Isa. 9:6] Therefore, His resurrection, and all that He wrought by it, are mine, and, as the Apostle exults in exuberant joy, "how hath [73] He not also, with Him, given us all things?" But what is it that He hath wrought by His resurrection? Why, He hath destroyed sin and brought righteousness to light, abolished death and restored life, conquered hell and bestowed on us everlasting glory. These are such inestimably precious blessings that the mind of man dare scarce believe that they have become ours; as it was with Jacob, in Genesis xlv, who, when he heard that his son Joseph was ruler in Egypt, was like one awakened out of deep slumber, and believed them not, until, after telling him all the words of Joseph, they showed him the wagons that Joseph had sent. [Gen 45:26 ff.] So difficult, indeed, would it be for us to believe that in Christ such great blessings have been conferred on us unworthy creatures, did He not teach us to believe it, with many words, and by the evidence of our own experience; even as He manifested Himself to His disciples[74] in divers appearances. [Acts 1:3] Such are our "Joseph's wagons." This is indeed a most godly "wagon," that He is made unto us of God righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption, and wisdom; [1 Cor. 1:30] as the Apostle saith in I. Corinthians i. For, I am a sinner; yet am I drawn in His righteousness, which is given me. I am unclean; but His holiness is my sanctification, in which I pleasurably tide. I am an ignorant fool; but His wisdom carries me forward. I have deserved condemnation; but I am set free by His redemption, a wagon in which I sit secure. So that a Christian, if he but believe it, may boast of the merits of Christ and all His blessings, even as if he had won them all himself. So truly are they his own, that he may even dare to look boldly forward to the judgment of God, unbearable though it be. So great a thing is faith, such blessings does it bring us, such glorious sons of God does it make us. For we cannot be sons without inheriting our Father's goods. Let the Christian say, then, with full confidence: "O death, where is thy victory? O death, where is thy sting? The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God,[75] which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ." [1 Cor. 15:55 ff.] That is to say, the law makes us sinners, and sin makes us guilty of death. Who hath conquered these twain? Was it our righteousness, or our life? Nay: it was Jesus Christ, rising from the dead, condemning sin and death, bestowing on us His merits, and holding His hand over us. And now it is well with us, we keep the law, and vanquish sin and death. For all which be honor, praise, and thanksgiving unto our God for ever and ever. Amen.
I’m not talking about the eternal blessings of Heaven that the blessed experience in the perfect vision of God; or, if I am, I do so in faith, as far as they can be understood by us. This seventh image is Jesus Christ, the King of glory, rising from the dead; just as, in His Passion and death, He embodied the seventh image of evil. Here, there is nothing evil at all; for "Christ, being raised from the dead, dies no more; death has no more power over Him." Here is that furnace of love and fire of God in Zion, as Isaiah says. For Christ is not only born to us, but He is also given to us. Therefore, His resurrection, and everything He accomplished through it, are ours, and, as the Apostle rejoices, "how has He not also, with Him, given us all things?" But what has He done through His resurrection? He has destroyed sin and revealed righteousness, abolished death and restored life, conquered hell and given us everlasting glory. These blessings are so incredibly valuable that the human mind can hardly believe they belong to us; just like Jacob in Genesis 45, who, upon hearing that his son Joseph was a ruler in Egypt, felt as though he had awakened from a deep sleep and didn't believe it until he was told all of Joseph's words and shown the wagons that Joseph had sent. So, it would be truly difficult for us to believe that such great blessings in Christ have been given to unworthy creatures like us, had He not taught us to believe it, with many words, and through our own experiences, just as He revealed Himself to His disciples in various appearances. These are our "Joseph's wagons." This is indeed a very godly "wagon," for He has become for us from God our righteousness, sanctification, redemption, and wisdom, as the Apostle says in 1 Corinthians 1. For, I am a sinner; yet I am drawn into His righteousness, which is given to me. I am unclean; but His holiness is my sanctification, in which I delight. I am an ignorant fool; but His wisdom propels me forward. I have earned condemnation; yet I am freed by His redemption, a wagon in which I sit securely. Thus, a Christian, if he simply believes it, can boast of the merits of Christ and all His blessings, as if he had earned them for himself. So truly are they his own that he can even boldly face the judgment of God, fearsome though it may be. Faith is such a powerful thing; it brings us amazing blessings and transforms us into glorious children of God. For we cannot be sons without inheriting our Father's possessions. Let the Christian declare, then, with full confidence: "O death, where is your victory? O death, where is your sting? The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ." That is to say, the law makes us sinners, and sin makes us deserving of death. Who has overcome both? Was it our righteousness, or our life? No: it was Jesus Christ, rising from the dead, condemning sin and death, granting us His merits, and covering us with His protection. And now it is well with us; we uphold the law and defeat sin and death. For all this, may there be honor, praise, and thanksgiving to our God forever and ever. Amen.
This, then, is the highest image of all, in which we are lifted up, not only above our evils, but above our blessings as well, and are set down amid strange blessings, brought together by another's labor; whereas we formerly lay among evils, heaped up by another's sin,[76] and added to by our own. We are set down, I say, in Christ's righteousness, with which He Himself is righteous; because we cling to that righteousness by which He is well pleasing to God, intercedes for us as our Mediator, and gives Himself wholly to be our own, as our High-Priest and Protector. Therefore, as it is impossible that Christ, with His righteousness, should not please God, so it is impossible that we should not please Him. Hence it comes that a Christian is almighty, lord of all,[77] having all things, and doing all things, wholly without sin. And even if he have sins, they can in no wise harm him, but are forgiven for the sake of the inexhaustible righteousness of Christ that swalloweth up all sins, on which our faith relies, firmly trusting that He is such a Christ unto us as we have described. But if any one does not believe this, he hears the tale with deaf ears,[78] and does not know Christ, and understands neither what blessings He hath nor how they may be enjoyed.
This, then, is the ultimate image, where we are lifted up, not just above our wrongdoings but also above our blessings, and placed in the midst of new blessings created by someone else's efforts; in contrast, we used to be buried in wrongs piled upon us by another's sin, and compounded by our own. We are now grounded in Christ's righteousness, which He possesses fully; because we cling to that righteousness that makes Him pleasing to God, intercedes for us as our Mediator, and fully gives Himself to us as our High Priest and Protector. Therefore, just as it is impossible for Christ, in His righteousness, to not please God, it is also impossible for us to not please Him. This is why a Christian is all-powerful, a master of all, possessing everything and doing everything completely without sin. Even if they have sins, those cannot harm them at all, as they are forgiven due to the endless righteousness of Christ that covers all sins, which our faith rests on, firmly believing that He is the kind of Christ we’ve described. However, if anyone does not believe this, they hear the story but do not understand it, and they do not know Christ, nor do they grasp the blessings He offers or how to experience them.
Therefore, if we considered it aright and with attentive hearts, this image alone would suffice to fill us with so great comfort that we should not only not grieve over our evils, [Rom. 5:3] but even glory in our tribulations, nay, scarcely feel them, for the joy that we have in Christ. In which glorying may Christ Himself instruct us, our Lord and God, blessed for evermore. Amen. [Rom. 9:5]
Therefore, if we really think about it with open hearts, this image alone would give us so much comfort that we wouldn't just stop grieving over our troubles, but we would even take pride in our struggles, hardly feeling them at all because of the joy we have in Christ. May Christ Himself teach us in this glory, our Lord and God, blessed forever. Amen.
EPILOGUE
With these prattlings of mine, Most Illustrious Prince, in token of my willingness to serve your Lordship to the best of my poor ability, I commend myself to your Illustrious Lordship, being ready to bring a worthier offering, if ever my mental powers shall equal my desires. For I shall always remain a debtor to every neighbor of mine, but most of all to your Lordship, whom may our Lord Jesus Christ, in His merciful kindness, long preserve to us, and at last by a blessed death take home to Himself. Amen.
With these ramblings of mine, Most Illustrious Prince, as a sign of my willingness to serve you to the best of my limited ability, I commend myself to your Illustrious Lordship. I am ready to bring a more worthy offering if my mental abilities ever match my desires. I will always be indebted to every neighbor, but most of all to you, my Lord, whom may our Lord Jesus Christ, in His merciful kindness, preserve for us for a long time and finally take home to Himself through a blessed death. Amen.
Your Most Illustrious Lordship's
Intercessor,
Brother Martin Luther,
Augustinian at Wittenberg.
Your Most Illustrious Lordship's
Intercessor,
Brother Martin Luther,
Augustinian at Wittenberg.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Written by Luther for the last edition of 1535.
[1] Written by Luther for the final edition of 1535.
[2] Compare to the Preface to the Complete Works (1545), page 11 of this volume.
[2] Compare to the Preface to the Complete Works (1545), page 11 of this volume.
[3] Antilogistae; the hunters of contradictions and inconsistencies in Luther's writings, such as John Faber, who published, in 1530, his Antilogiarum Mart. Lutheri Babylonia. Compare also reference in preceding note.
[3] Antilogistae; the seekers of contradictions and inconsistencies in Luther's writings, like John Faber, who published his Antilogiarum Mart. Lutheri Babylonia in 1530. Also, see reference in the previous note.
[4] As over against Christ and the saints in His train, the devil and his followers are represented here, as frequently in Luther, under the figure of a dragon with a scaly tail.
[4] Compared to Christ and the saints accompanying Him, the devil and his followers are depicted here, as often noted by Luther, as a dragon with a scaly tail.
[5] Omitted, through on oversight, from the Latin editio princeps. See Introduction, p. 105.
[5] Omitted, due to an oversight, from the Latin editio princeps. See Introduction, p. 105.
[6] On the political influence of Frederick, as a factor in the
German Reformation, see Hermelink, Reformation und
Gegenreformation (Krüger's Handbuch der Kirchengeschicte, 3.
Teil), p. 67.
[6] For the political influence of Frederick as a factor in the
German Reformation, check out Hermelink, Reformation und
Gegenreformation (Krüger's Handbuch der Kirchengeschicte, 3.
Teil), p. 67.
[7] Tessaradecas.
Tessaradecagon
[8] See Introduction, pp. 106 f.
[8] See Introduction, pp. 106 f.
[9] In the body of the work Luther places (6) between (3) and (4).
[9] In the body of the work, Luther places (6) between (3) and (4).
[10] A reminiscence of Luther's childhood?
[10] A memory of Luther's childhood?
[11] Luther has particular reference to the Elector's high rank.
[11] Luther is specifically referring to the Elector's high status.
[12] Luther follows the Vulgate numbering of the Psalms, which differs from the Hebrew (and the English and German). As far as Ps. 8 both agree; but the Vulgate (following the Greek version) counts Ps. 9 and 10 as one, thus dropping behind one in the numbering. But it divides Ps. 147 into two; vv. 1-11 being counted as Ps. 146, and vv. 12-20 as Ps. 147; and so both versions agree again from Ps. 148 to 150.
[12] Luther follows the Vulgate numbering of the Psalms, which is different from the Hebrew (as well as English and German). Up to Ps. 8, they match; however, the Vulgate (following the Greek version) combines Ps. 9 and 10 into one, which means it falls behind by one in the numbering. It also splits Ps. 147 into two; verses 1-11 are counted as Ps. 146, and verses 12-20 are counted as Ps. 147. After that, both versions agree again from Ps. 148 to 150.
[13] Job calls it a "warfare" (militia).
[13] Job refers to it as a "warfare" (militia).
[14] Luther harks back to his discussion of this point in the Preface, p. 113.
[14] Luther refers back to his discussion of this point in the Preface, p. 113.
[15] Particular reference to the Elector.
[15] Specific mention of the Elector.
[16] See pp. 147 ff.
See pp. 147 onward.
[17] Cypr. de mortal. c. V.
[17] Cypr. on death. c. V.
[18] Vulgate reading.
Vulgate version.
[19] See pp. 149 f.
See pp. 149 and following.
[20] From the Vulgate.
From the Vulgate.
[21] Luther is probably thinking of his own experience, when, near Erfurt, he came near bleeding to death from an injury to his ankle. See Köstlin-Kawerau, Martin Luther, I, 44.
[21] Luther is likely recalling his own experience when, near Erfurt, he nearly bled to death from an injury to his ankle. See Köstlin-Kawerau, Martin Luther, I, 44.
[22] Luther no longer held this view of "satisfaction" in 1535. See also pp. 150 and 161.
[22] Luther no longer believed in the idea of "satisfaction" in 1535. See also pp. 150 and 161.
[23] Luther is thinking here specifically of the Elector.
[23] Luther is specifically thinking about the Elector here.
[24] He means the communion of saints. See next chapter.
[24] He is referring to the fellowship of believers. See the next chapter.
[25] According to the Vulgate (Douay Version).
[25] According to the Vulgate (Douay Version).
[26] August 29th. See Introduction, p. 105.
[26] August 29th. See Introduction, p. 105.
[27] Cf. A Discussion of Confession, above, p. 82.
[27] Cf. A Discussion of Confession, above, p. 82.
[28] Luther might have considerably revised this whole paragraph.
[28] Luther might have significantly revised this entire paragraph.
[29] This seems to refer to the writers of the Holy Scriptures.
[29] This seems to refer to the authors of the Holy Scriptures.
[30] A reference to the threefold baptism, commonly accepted, viz., (1) fluminia, (2) flaminis, (3) sanguinis; that is, (1) the Sacrament of baptism, (2) the baptism of the Spirit, or repentance, (3) the baptism of blood, or martyrdom. Cf. PRE3, XIX, 414.
[30] A reference to the three types of baptism that are generally accepted, which are (1) water, (2) Spirit, and (3) blood; that is, (1) the Sacrament of baptism, (2) the baptism of the Spirit or repentance, and (3) the baptism of blood or martyrdom. Cf. PRE3, XIX, 414.
[31] Frederick the Wise was a pious collector of relics, having 5005 of them in the Castle Church at Wittenberg. They had something to do with Luther's choice of October 31st as the date of the posting of the XCV Theses. See Introduction to the Theses, p. 16 of this volume, note 1.
[31] Frederick the Wise was a devout collector of relics, having 5005 of them in the Castle Church at Wittenberg. They were related to Luther's decision to post the XCV Theses on October 31st. See Introduction to the Theses, p. 16 of this volume, note 1.
[32] Cf. Letter to George Leiffer, 15 April, 1516. See M. A. Cueriz, The Letters of M. Luther, p. 7.
[32] Cf. Letter to George Leiffer, April 15, 1516. See M. A. Cueriz, The Letters of M. Luther, p. 7.
[33] i. e., The sign of the cross.
[33] i. e., The sign of the cross.
[34] As much as, "We are in for a bad hour," and, "A good hour is worth a bad hour."
[34] Just like saying, "We're about to have a tough time," and, "A good hour makes up for a bad hour."
[35] See p. 134.
[35] See page 134.
[36] In this passage "Wisdom" is the subject.
[36] In this passage, "Wisdom" is the topic.
[37] In the Sanctus.
In the Sanctus.
[38] See p. 118.
[38] See page 118.
[39] Luther quotes a verse from Ps. 106, which sums up the contents of Ps. 78.
[39] Luther quotes a verse from Psalm 106, which summarizes the content of Psalm 78.
[40] Luther uses sensualitas the first time, and sensus the second.
[40] Luther uses sensualitas the first time, and sensus the second.
[41] See p.115.
See p. 115.
[42] The Confessions of St. Augustine, Book IX, chapter 1.
[42] The Confessions of St. Augustine, Book IX, chapter 1.
[43] Luther is probably thinking of the sin of suicide.
[43] Luther is likely considering the sin of suicide.
[44] From the Vulgate (Douay Version).
[44] From the Vulgate (Douay Version).
[45] Namely, the hope of the passing evil and the coming of good things. See above.
[45] Specifically, the hope for the end of bad times and the arrival of good things. See above.
[46] The last two passages read thus in the Vulgate.
[46] The last two passages read like this in the Vulgate.
[47] See p. 122.
See page 122.
[48] Cf. p. 127, note.
[48] See p. 127, note.
[49] Thus the Vulgate.
[49] So the Vulgate.
[50] Ovid, Ars amat., I, 656.
[50] Ovid, The Art of Love., I, 656.
[51] Cf. Treatise on Baptism, above, p. 66.
[51] Cf. Treatise on Baptism, above, p. 66.
[52] See pp. 123 ff.
See pages 123 and following.
[53] The Confessions of St. Augustine, Book I, chap. vi.
[53] The Confessions of St. Augustine, Book I, chap. vi.
[54] Thus the Vulgate.
[54] So the Vulgate.
[55] Comm. in Ps. xxxix, No. 27.
[55] Comm. in Ps. xxxix, No. 27.
[56] Book VIII, chap. xi.
[56] Book 8, chap. 11.
[57] See p. 152.
See page 152.
[58] See pp. 126 ff.
[58] See pp. 126 and following.
[59] See pp. 126 ff.
See pages 126 and following.
[60] Gregor. dialogorum libri iv, containing number of examples of the terrible end of the wicked.
[60] Gregor. dialogorum libri iv, with many examples of the terrible fate of the wicked.
[61] One of the passages Luther did not care to correct. Compare p. 127, note.
[61] One of the sections Luther chose not to revise. See p. 127, note.
[62] Luther here unites the mythological figures of chimaera and alren.
[62] Luther here combines the mythological figures of chimaera and alren.
[63] An Italian saint whose festival is observed on February 5th, whose worship flourishes especially in South Italy and Sicily, and whose historical existence is doubtful.
[63] An Italian saint celebrated on February 5th, whose veneration is particularly strong in Southern Italy and Sicily, and whose actual historical existence is uncertain.
[64] See pp. 133 ff.
See pp. 133 onward.
[65] Luther has mistaken the chapter.
[65] Luther has misunderstood the chapter.
[66] For the various interpretations of the "communion of the saints" among mediæval theologians, See Reinh. Seeberg, Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte, 1st ed., vol. ii, p.127, note. Luther in the Sermon von dem hochwürdigen Sacrament des heiligen wahren Leichnams Christi (1519), still accepts the phrase as meaning the participation in the Sacrament, and through it the participation in "the spiritual possessions of Christ and His saints." In our treatise, it is taken as the definition of "the holy Catholic Church," in the sense of a communion with the saints. In The Papacy at Rome (later in the same year), it becomes the communion or community (consisting of saints, or believers; as a Gemeinde oder Sammlung. Compare the classical passage in the Large Catechism (1529): "nicht Gemenschaft, sondern Gemeine."
[66] For the different interpretations of the "communion of the saints" among medieval theologians, see Reinh. Seeberg, Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte, 1st ed., vol. ii, p.127, note. Luther in the Sermon on the Most Holy Sacrament of the True Body of Christ (1519) still interprets the phrase as referring to participation in the Sacrament, and through it, participation in "the spiritual possessions of Christ and His saints." In our discussion, it is defined as "the holy Catholic Church" in the context of communion with the saints. In The Papacy at Rome (later that same year), it becomes the communion or community (made up of saints or believers; as a Gemeinde oder Sammlung. Compare the key passage in the Large Catechism (1529): "not Gemenschaft, but Gemeine."
[67] See A Discussion of Confession, above, p. 88.
[67] See A Discussion of Confession, above, p. 88.
[68] Changed to "Christian" in the Catechisms (1529), although the Latin translations retain catholocism.
[68] Changed to "Christian" in the Catechisms (1529), although the Latin translations retain catholocism.
[69] The Apostle does not say, "one cup."
[69] The Apostle doesn't say, "one cup."
[70] The translation here follows the reading of the Jena Ed. (huc feratur intuitus), as against that of the Weimar and Erl. Edd. (huc foratur intutus).
[70] The translation here follows the reading of the Jena Ed. (huc feratur intuitus), instead of that of the Weimar and Erl. Edd. (huc foratur intutus).
[71] Thus the Vulgate.
[71] So the Vulgate.
[72] See pp. 137 ff.
See pp. 137 and following.
[73] Vulgate.
Vulgate.
[74] Namely, after His resurrection.
After His resurrection.
[75] Compare the different form of this verse on p. 112.
[75] Compare the different form of this verse on p. 112.
[76] He means the sin of Adam.
[76] He refers to the sin of Adam.
[77] The germ of The Liberty of a Christian Man (1520).
[77] The essence of The Liberty of a Christian Man (1520).
[78] Cf. Terence's surdo narrare fabulam. Heauton., 222.
[78] Cf. Terence's to narrate the story in an understated way. Heauton., 222.
A TREATISE ON GOOD WORKS,
TOGETHER WITH THE LETTER OF DEDICATION
1520
1520
INTRODUCTION
1. The Occasion of the Work.—Luther did not impose himself as a reformer upon the Church. In the course of a conscientious performance of the duties of his office, to which he had been regularly and divinely called, and without any urging on his part, he attained to this position by inward necessity. In 1515 he received his appointment as the standing substitute for the sickly city pastor, Simon Heinse, from the city council of Wittenberg. Before this time he was obliged to preach only occasionally in the convent, apart from his activity as teacher in the University and convent. Through this appointment he was in duty bound, by divine and human right, to lead and direct the congregation at Wittenberg on the true way to life, and it would have been a denial of the knowledge of salvation which God had led him to acquire, by way of ardent inner struggles, if he had led the congregation on any other way than the one God had revealed to him in His Word. He could not deny before the congregation which had been intrusted to his care, what up to this time he had taught with ever increasing clearness in his lectures at the University—for in the lectures on the Psalms, which he began to deliver in 1513, he declares his conviction that faith alone justifies, as can be seen from the complete manuscript, published since 1885, and with still greater clearness from his Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (1515-1516), which is accessible since 1908; nor what he had urged as spiritual adviser of his convent brethren when in deep distress—compare the charming letter to Georg Spenlein, dated April 8, 1516,[1]
1. The Occasion of the Work.—Luther didn’t put himself forward as a reformer of the Church. Through his genuine commitment to his duties, which he was regularly and divinely called to fulfill, he reached this role out of inner necessity without any prompting from himself. In 1515, he was appointed as the acting substitute for the ailing city pastor, Simon Heinse, by the city council of Wittenberg. Before this, he had only preached occasionally in the convent while also teaching at the University. With this appointment, he was required, by both divine and human law, to guide the congregation in Wittenberg along the true path to life. It would have been a denial of the knowledge of salvation that God had led him to through intense inner struggles if he had guided the congregation in any direction other than the one revealed to him in His Word. He couldn’t deny before the congregation entrusted to his care what he had increasingly taught clearly in his university lectures—especially in his lectures on the Psalms that he began in 1513, where he expressed his belief that faith alone justifies, as shown in the complete manuscript published since 1885, and even more clearly in his Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (1515-1516), which has been available since 1908; nor could he disregard what he had advised as a spiritual guide to his convent brothers during their deep distress—refer to the charming letter to Georg Spenlein, dated April 8, 1516,[1]
Luther's first literary works to Appear in print were also occasioned by the work of his calling and of his office in the Wittenberg congregation. He had no other object in view than to edify his congregation and to lead it to Christ when, in 1517, he published his first independent work, the Explanation of the Seven Penitential Psalms. On Oct 31 of the same year he published his 95 Theses against Indulgences. These were indeed intended as controversial theses for theologians, but at the same time it is well known that Luther was moved by his duty toward his congregation to declare his position in this matter and to put in issue the whole question as to the right and wrong of indulgences by means of his theses. His sermon Of Indulgences and Grace, occasioned by Tetzel's attack and delivered in the latter part of March, 1515, as well as his sermon Of Penitence, delivered about the same time, were also intended for his congregation. Before his congregation (Sept., 1516-Feb., 1517) he delivered the Sermons on the Ten Commandments, which were published in 1518, and the Sermons on the Lord's Prayer, which were also published in 1518 by Agricola. Though Luther in the same year published a series of controversial writings, which were occasioned by attacks from outside sources, viz., the Resolutiones disputationis de virtute indulgentiarum, the Asterisci adversus obeliscos Joh. Eccii, and the Ad dialogum Silv. Prieriatis responsio, still he never was diverted by this necessary rebuttal from his paramount duty, the edification of the congregation. The autumn of the year 1518, when he was confronted with Cajetan, as well as the whole year of 1519, when he held his disputations with Eck, etc, were replete with disquietude and pressing labors; still Luther served his congregation with a whole series of writings during this time, and only regretted that he was not entirely at its disposal. Of such writings we mention: Explanation of the Lord's Prayer for the simple Laity (an elaboration of the sermons of 1517); Brief Explanation of the Ten Commandments; Instruction concerning certain Articles, which might be ascribed and imputed to him by his adversaries; Brief Instruction how to Confess; Of Meditation on the Sacred Passion of Christ; Of Twofold Righteousness; Of the Matrimonial Estate; Brief Form to understand and to pray the Lord's Prayer; Explanation of the Lord's Prayer "vor sich und hinter sich"; Of Prayer and Processions in Rogation Week; Of Usury; Of the Sacrament of Penitence; Of Preparation for Death; Of the Sacrament of Baptism; Of the Sacrament of the Sacred Body; Of Excommunication. With but few exceptions these writings all speared in print in the year 1519, and again it was the congregation which Luther sought primarily to serve. If the bounds of his congregation spread ever wider beyond Wittenberg, so that his writings found a surprisingly ready sale, even afar, that was not Luther's fault. Even the Tessaradecas consolatoria,[2] written in 1519 and printed in 1530, a book of consolation, which was originally intended for the sick Elector of Saxony, was written by him only upon solicitation from outside sources.
Luther's first published works were inspired by his work and responsibilities in the Wittenberg congregation. His only goal was to uplift his congregation and guide them to Christ when he published his first independent work, the Explanation of the Seven Penitential Psalms, in 1517. On October 31 of the same year, he released his 95 Theses against Indulgences. Although these were meant as debate points for theologians, it's well known that Luther felt compelled by his duty to his congregation to express his stance on indulgences and to dispute their morality through his theses. His sermon Of Indulgences and Grace, prompted by Tetzel's attack and delivered in late March 1515, along with his sermon Of Penitence, given around the same time, were also aimed at his congregation. From September 1516 to February 1517, he delivered the Sermons on the Ten Commandments, published in 1518, and the Sermons on the Lord's Prayer, which were also published in 1518 by Agricola. Even though Luther published a series of controversial writings that year, responding to outside attacks, such as the Resolutiones disputationis de virtute indulgentiarum, the Asterisci adversus obeliscos Joh. Eccii, and Ad dialogum Silv. Prieriatis responsio, he remained focused on his primary duty—edifying his congregation. The fall of 1518, when he faced Cajetan, and all of 1519, when he debated Eck and others, were filled with anxiety and demanding work; still, Luther continued to serve his congregation with a series of writings during this time, regretting only that he couldn’t devote himself entirely to them. Notable among these writings are: Explanation of the Lord's Prayer for the simple Laity (an elaboration of the sermons from 1517); Brief Explanation of the Ten Commandments; Instruction on certain articles that his opponents might falsely attribute to him; Brief Instruction on how to Confess; Of Meditation on the Sacred Passion of Christ; Of Twofold Righteousness; Of the Matrimonial Estate; Brief Form to Understand and to Pray the Lord's Prayer; Explanation of the Lord's Prayer "vor sich und hinter sich"; Of Prayer and Processions in Rogation Week; Of Usury; Of the Sacrament of Penitence; Of Preparation for Death; Of the Sacrament of Baptism; Of the Sacrament of the Sacred Body; Of Excommunication. With a few exceptions, these writings were all published in 1519, and once again, it was the congregation that Luther aimed to serve primarily. If his influence extended beyond Wittenberg and his writings sold surprisingly well even far away, that was not Luther's doing. The Tessaradecas consolatoria, written in 1519 and printed in 1530, was a book of consolation originally intended for the sick Elector of Saxony, and Luther only wrote it upon request from external sources.
To this circle of writings the treatise Of Good Works also belongs. Though the incentive for its composition came from George Spalatin, court-preacher to the Elector, who reminded Luther of a promise he had given, still Luther was willing to undertake it only when he recalled that in a previous sermon to his congregation he occasionally had made a similar promise to deliver a sermon on good works;[3] and when Luther actually commenced the composition he had nothing else in view but the preparation of a sermon for his congregation on this important topic.
To this collection of writings, the treatise Of Good Works also fits in. Although the motivation for writing it came from George Spalatin, the court-preacher for the Elector, who reminded Luther of a promise he made, Luther was only willing to take it on after remembering that he had previously made a similar promise to his congregation to give a sermon on good works;[3] and when Luther actually started writing it, his sole intention was to prepare a sermon for his congregation on this important subject.
But while the work was in progress the material so accumulated that it far outgrew the bounds of a sermon for his congregation. On March 25. he wrote to Spatatin that it would become a whole booklet instead of a sermon; on May 5. he again emphasizes the growth of the material; on May 13. he speaks of its completion at an early date, and on June 8. he could send Melanchthon a printed copy. It was entitled: Von den gutenwerckenn: D. M. L. Vuittenherg. On the last page it bore the printer's mark: Getruck zu Wittenberg bey dem iungen Melchior Lotther. Im Tausent funfhundert vnud zweynitzsgen Jar. It filled not less than 58 leaves, quarto. In spite of its volume, however, the intention of the book for the congregation remained, now however, not only for the narrow circle of the Wittenberg congregation, but for the Christian layman in general. In the dedicatory preface Luther lays the greatest stress upon this, for he writes: "Though I know of a great many, and must hear it daily, who think lightly of my poverty and say that I write only small Sexternlein (tracts of small volume) and German sermons for the untaught laity, I will not permit that to move me. Would to God that during my life I had served but one layman for his betterment with all my powers; it would be sufficient for me, I would thank God and suffer all my books to perish thereafter…Most willingly I will leave the honor of greater things to others, and not at all will I be ashamed of preaching and writing German to the untaught laity."
But while he was working on it, the material grew so much that it exceeded the limits of a sermon for his congregation. On March 25, he wrote to Spatatin that it would turn into a whole booklet instead of just a sermon; on May 5, he emphasized the expansion of the material again; on May 13, he mentioned its completion would be soon, and by June 8, he could send Melanchthon a printed copy. It was titled: Von den gutenwerckenn: D. M. L. Vuittenherg. On the last page, it had the printer's mark: Getruck zu Wittenberg bey dem iungen Melchior Lotther. Im Tausent funfhundert vnud zweynitzsgen Jar. It consisted of no less than 58 pages, quarto. Despite its size, the book's purpose for the congregation remained, now addressing not just the limited audience of the Wittenberg congregation, but for the Christian layperson in general. In the dedicatory preface, Luther emphasizes this point greatly by writing: "Though I know many who think little of my poverty and say I only write small tracts and German sermons for the uneducated laypeople, I won’t let that discourage me. If only I could serve even one layperson during my life for their betterment with all my efforts; that would be enough for me, and I would thank God and let all my books perish afterward… I would gladly leave the honor of greater things to others, and I will not be ashamed of preaching and writing in German to the uneducated laypeople."
Since Luther had dedicated the afore-mentioned Tessaradecas conolatoria to the reigning Prince,[4] he now, probably on Spalatin's recommendation, dedicated the Treatise on Good Works to his brother John, who afterward, in 1525, succeeded Frederick in the Electorate. There was probably good reason for dedicating the book to a member of the reigning house. Princes have reason to take a special interest in the fact that preaching on good works should occur within their realm, for the safety and sane development of their kingdom depend hugely upon the cultivation of morality on the part of their subjects. Time and again the papal church had commended herself to princes and statesmen by her emphatic teaching of good works. Luther, on the other hand, had been accused—like the Apostle Paul before him (Rom. 3:31)—that the zealous performance of good works had abated, that the bonds of discipline had slackened and that, as a necessary consequence, lawlessness and shameless immorality were being promoted by his doctrine of justification by faith alone. Before 1517 the rumor had already spread that Luther intended to do away with good works. Duke George of Saxony had received no good impression from a sermon Luther had delivered at Dresden, because he feared the consequences which Luther's doctrine of justification by faith alone might have upon the morals of the masses. Under these circumstances it would not have been surprising if a member of the Electoral house should harbor like scruples, especially since the full comprehension of Luther's preaching on good works depended on an evangelical understanding of faith, as deep as was Luther's own. The Middle Ages had differentiated between fides informis, a formless faith, and fides formata or informata, a formed or ornate faith. The former was held to be a knowledge without any life or effect, the latter to be identical with love, for, as they said, love which proves itself and is effective in good works must be added to the formless faith, as its complement and its content, well pleasing to God. In Luther's time every one who was seriously interested in religious questions was reared under the influence of these ideas.[5]
Since Luther had dedicated the aforementioned Tessaradecas conolatoria to the reigning Prince,[4] he now, likely on Spalatin's advice, dedicated the Treatise on Good Works to his brother John, who later, in 1525, succeeded Frederick in the Electorate. There was probably a good reason for dedicating the book to a member of the ruling family. Princes have a special interest in ensuring that preaching about good works happens within their domain, as the safety and healthy development of their kingdom greatly rely on the moral conduct of their subjects. Time and again, the papal church had gained favor with princes and politicians through its strong emphasis on good works. In contrast, Luther had been accused—like the Apostle Paul before him (Rom. 3:31)—of causing a decline in the zealous practice of good works, leading to a weakening of discipline and, as a direct result, promoting lawlessness and shameless immorality through his doctrine of justification by faith alone. Before 1517, rumors had spread that Luther intended to eliminate good works altogether. Duke George of Saxony was left unimpressed by a sermon Luther gave in Dresden because he worried about the potential impact that Luther's doctrine of justification by faith alone might have on the morals of the population. Given these circumstances, it wouldn't have been surprising for a member of the Electoral family to share similar concerns, especially since fully understanding Luther's preaching on good works relied on an evangelical grasp of faith as profound as Luther's own. During the Middle Ages, there was a distinction between fides informis, a formless faith, and fides formata or informata, a formed or decorated faith. The former was seen as knowledge without any life or impact, while the latter was equated with love, as they believed that love proved itself and manifested in good works must complement and enrich the formless faith, making it well-pleasing to God. In Luther's time, anyone seriously interested in religious matters was influenced by these ideas.[5]
Now, since Luther had opposed the doctrine of justification by love and its good works, he was in danger of being misunderstood by strangers, as though he held the bare knowledge and assent to be sufficient for justification, and such preaching would indeed have led to frivolity and disorderly conduct. But even apart from the question whether or not the brother of the Elector was disturbed by such scruples, Luther must have welcomed the opportunity, when the summons came to him, to dedicate his book Of Good Works to a member of the Electoral house. At any rate the book could serve to acquaint him with the thoughts of his much-abused pastor and professor at Wittenberg, for never before had Luther expressed himself on the important question of good works in such a fundamental, thorough and profound way.
Now, since Luther had challenged the idea that justification comes from love and good deeds, he risked being misunderstood by outsiders, as if he believed that mere knowledge and agreement were enough for justification, and such preaching could definitely lead to irresponsibility and chaos. But even aside from whether the Elector's brother was troubled by these concerns, Luther must have been pleased when he received the opportunity to dedicate his book Of Good Works to a member of the Electoral family. Regardless, the book could help him understand the views of his much-misunderstood pastor and professor at Wittenberg, since Luther had never before addressed the important issue of good works in such a fundamental, thorough, and insightful manner.
2. Contents of the Work.—A perusal of the contents shows that the book, in the course of its production, attained a greater length than was originally intended. To this fact it must be attributed that a new numeration of sections begins with the argument on the Third Commandment, and is repeated at every Commandment thereafter, while before this the sections were consecutively numbered. But in spite of this, the plan of the whole is clear and lucid. Evidently the whole treatise is divided into two parts: the first comprising sections 1-17, while the second comprises all the following sections. The first, being fundamental, is the more important part. Luther well knew of the charges made against him that "faith is so highly elevated" and "works are rejected" by him; but he knew, too, that "neither silver, gold and precious stone, nor any other precious thing had experienced so much augmentation and diminution" as had good works "which should all have but one simple goodness, or they are nothing but color, glitter and deception." But especially was he aware of the fact that the Church was urging nothing but the so-called self-elected works, such as "running to the convent, singing, reading, playing the organ, saying the mass, praying matins, vespers, and other hours, founding and ornamenting churches, altars, convents, gathering chimes, jewels, vestments, gems and treasures, going to Rome and to the saints, curtsying and bowing the knees, praying the rosary and the psalter," etc., and that she designated these alone as truly good works, while she represented the faithful performance of the duties of one's calling as a morality of a lower order. For these reasons it is Luther's highest object in this treatise to make it perfectly clear what is the essence of good works. Whenever the essence of good works has been understood, then the accusations against him will quickly collapse.
2. Contents of the Work.—A look at the contents reveals that the book, during its development, became longer than originally planned. This is why a new numbering of sections starts with the discussion on the Third Commandment, and continues with each Commandment that follows, whereas prior to this point, the sections were numbered consecutively. Nevertheless, the overall structure is clear and straightforward. The entire treatise is clearly divided into two parts: the first part contains sections 1-17, and the second part includes all the following sections. The first part, being foundational, is the more significant section. Luther was aware of the accusations against him that "faith is overly praised" and "works are dismissed" by him; however, he also recognized that "neither silver, gold, nor precious stones, nor anything else of value had experienced as much increase and decrease" as good works, which should have only one simple goodness, or else they are nothing but mere appearance and deceit. He was particularly conscious that the Church was promoting only the so-called self-chosen works, like "going to the convent, singing, reading, playing the organ, saying mass, praying matins, vespers, and other hours, building and decorating churches, altars, convents, collecting bells, jewels, vestments, gems and treasures, traveling to Rome and to the saints, bowing and kneeling, praying the rosary and the psalter," etc., and that it regarded these as the only true good works, while it viewed the faithful execution of one's duties as a lesser form of morality. For these reasons, Luther’s primary goal in this treatise is to clearly define the essence of good works. Once the essence of good works is understood, the accusations against him will quickly fall apart.
In the fundamental part he therefore argues; Truly good works are not self-elected works of monastic or any other holiness, but such only as God has commanded and as are comprehended within the bounds one's particular calling, and all works, let the name be what it may, become good only when they flow from faith, the "first, greatest, and noble of good works." (John 6:19.) In this connection the essence of faith, that only source of all truly good works, must of course be rightly understood. It is the sure confidence in God, that all my doing is well-pleasing to him; it is trust in His mercy even though He appear angry and puts sufferings and adversities upon us; it is the assurance of the divine good will even though "God should reprove the conscience with sin, death and hell, and deny it all grace and mercy, as though He would condemn and show His wrath eternally." Where such faith lives in the heart, there the works are good "even though they were as insignificant as the picking up of a straw"; but where it is wanting, there are only such works as "heathen, Jew and Turk" may have and do. Where such faith possesses the man, he needs no teacher in good works, as little as does the husband or the wife, who only look for love and favor from one another, nor need any instruction therein "how they are to stand toward each other, what they are to do, to leave undone, to say, to leave unsaid, to think."
In the core of his argument, he states; Truly good works aren’t chosen acts of monastic or any other type of holiness, but only those that God has commanded and fall within the scope of one's specific calling. All works, no matter what you call them, become good only when they come from faith, the "first, greatest, and noble of good works." (John 6:19.) In this context, the essence of faith—that sole source of all genuinely good works—must be clearly understood. It’s a sure confidence in God that everything I do pleases Him; it’s a trust in His mercy even when He seems angry and permits suffering and hardships; it’s the certainty of His goodwill even if "God were to convict the conscience with sin, death, and hell, denying it all grace and mercy, as if He were to condemn and show His wrath eternally." Where such faith exists in the heart, the works are good "even if they are as trivial as picking up a straw"; but where it is absent, there are only the kinds of works that "heathens, Jews, and Turks" can perform. When such faith inhabits a person, they need no guidance in good works, just as a husband or wife doesn't require instruction on how to love and support each other, nor do they need advice on "how to relate to one another, what to do, what to avoid, what to say, what to leave unsaid, what to think."
This faith, Luther continues, is "the true fulfilment of the First Commandment, apart from which there is no work that could do justice to this Commandment." With this sentence he combines, on the one hand, the whole argument of faith, as the best and noblest of good works, with his opening proposition (there are no good works besides those commanded of God), and, on the other hand, he prepares the way for the following argument, wherein he proposes to exhibit the good works according to the Ten Commandments. For the First Commandment does not forbid this and that, nor does it require this and that; it forbids but one thing, unbelief; it requires but one thing, faith, "that confidence in God's good will at all times." Without this faith the best works are as nothing, and if man would think that by them he could be well-pleasing to God, he would be lowering God to the level of a "broker or a laborer who will not dispense his grace and kindness gratis."
This belief, Luther goes on to say, is "the true fulfillment of the First Commandment, without which there is no action that could do justice to this Commandment." With this statement, he merges, on one hand, the entire argument of faith as the highest and noblest of good deeds, with his initial assertion (that there are no good deeds apart from those commanded by God), and, on the other hand, he sets the stage for the upcoming discussion, where he plans to illustrate the good deeds according to the Ten Commandments. The First Commandment does not prohibit this or that, nor does it demand this or that; it only forbids one thing, unbelief; it requires just one thing, faith, "that confidence in God's goodwill at all times." Without this faith, even the best deeds are meaningless, and if someone thinks that through them they can be pleasing to God, they would be reducing God to the status of a "broker or a laborer who won't give his grace and kindness for free."
This understanding of faith and good works, so Luther now addresses his opponents, should in fairness be kept in view by those who accuse him of declaiming against good works, and they should learn from it, that though he has preached against "good works," it was against such as are falsely so called and as contribute toward the confusion of consciences, because they are self-elected, do not flow from faith, and are done with the pretension of doing works well-pleasing to God.
This understanding of faith and good works, which Luther now presents to his opponents, should be considered by those who accuse him of speaking out against good works. They should realize that when he preached against "good works," it was about those that are falsely labeled as such and that contribute to a troubled conscience. These works are self-chosen, do not come from faith, and are performed with the intention of being pleasing to God.
This brings us to the end of the fundamental part of the treatise. It was not Luther's intention, however, to speak only on the essence of good works and their fundamental relation to faith; he would show, too, how the "best work," faith, must prove itself in every way a living faith, according to the other commandments. Luther does not proceed to this part, however, until in the fundamental part he has said with emphasis, that the believer, the spiritual man, needs no such instruction (1. Timothy 1:9), but that he of his own accord and at all times does good works "as his faith, his confidence, teaches him." Only "because we do not all have such faith, or are unmindful of it," does such instruction become necessary.
This brings us to the end of the fundamental part of the treatise. However, Luther didn't intend to only discuss the essence of good works and their core connection to faith; he also wanted to demonstrate how the "best work," faith, must show itself as a living faith in harmony with the other commandments. Luther doesn’t move on to this part until he has firmly stated in the fundamental part that the believer, the spiritual person, doesn't require such guidance (1. Timothy 1:9), as they naturally do good works "as their faith, their confidence, teaches them." It's only "because we don’t all possess such faith, or are neglectful of it," that this guidance becomes necessary.
Nor does he proceed until he has repeated his oft repeated words concerning the relation of faith to good works to the relation of the First to the other Commandments. From the fact, that according to the First Commandment, we acquire a pure heart and confidence toward God, he derives the good work of the Second Commandment, namely, "to praise God, to acknowledge His grace, to render all honor to Him alone." From the same source he derives the good work of the Third Commandment, namely, "to observe divine services with prayer and the hearing of preaching, to incline the imagination of our hearts toward God's benefits, and, to that end, to mortify and overcome the flesh." From the same source he derives the works of the Second Table.
He doesn’t move forward until he has repeated his usual points about how faith relates to good works and how the First Commandment relates to the others. From the First Commandment, which helps us gain a pure heart and confidence in God, he derives the good work of the Second Commandment: "to praise God, acknowledge His grace, and give Him all honor." Similarly, he draws the good work of the Third Commandment from the same source: "to participate in divine services through prayer and listening to preaching, to focus our hearts on God's blessings, and, for that reason, to suppress and overcome our physical desires." He extracts the works of the Second Table from the same foundation.
The argument on the Third and Fourth Commandments claims nearly one-half of the entire treatise. Among the good works which, according to the Third Commandment, should be an exercise and proof of faith, Luther especially mentions the proper hearing of mass and of preaching, common prayer, bodily discipline and the mortification of the flesh, and he joins the former and the latter by an important fundamental discussion of the New Testament conception of Sabbath rest.
The discussion on the Third and Fourth Commandments takes up almost half of the entire treatise. In terms of good works that, according to the Third Commandment, should demonstrate and validate faith, Luther highlights the importance of attending mass and listening to preaching, participating in communal prayer, maintaining physical discipline, and practicing self-control. He connects these ideas with a significant exploration of the New Testament's view of Sabbath rest.
Luther discusses the Fourth Commandment as fully as the Third. The exercise of faith, according to this Commandment, consists in the faithful performance of the duties of children toward their parents, of parents toward their children, and of subordinates toward their superiors in the ecclesiastical as well as in the common civil sphere. The various duties issue from the various callings, for faithful performance of the duties of one's calling, with the help of God and for God's sake, is the true "good work."
Luther talks about the Fourth Commandment in as much detail as he does the Third. The practice of faith, according to this Commandment, involves fulfilling the responsibilities of children towards their parents, parents towards their children, and those under authority towards their superiors, both in the church and in everyday civil life. The different responsibilities arise from the different roles people have because faithfully carrying out the duties of one’s role, with God's assistance and for God's glory, is what truly counts as a "good work."
As he now proceeds to speak of the spiritual powers, the government of the Church, he frankly reveals their faults and demands a reform of the present rulers. Honor and obedience in all things should be rendered unto the Church, the spiritual mother, as it is due to natural parents, unless it be contrary to the first Three Commandments. But as matters stand now the spiritual magistrates neglect their peculiar work, namely, the fostering of godliness and discipline, like a mother who runs away from her children and follows a lover, and instead they undertake strange and evil works, like parents whose commands are contrary to God. In this case members of the Church must do as godly children do whose parents have become mad and insane. Kings, princes, the nobility, municipalities and communities must begin of their own accord and put a check to these conditions, so that the bishops and the clergy, who are now too timid, may be induced to follow. But even the civil magistrates must also suffer reforms to be enacted in their particular spheres; especially are they called on to do away with the rude "gluttony and drunkenness," luxury in clothing, the usurious sale of rents and the common brothels. This, by divine and human right, is a part of their enjoined works according to the Fourth Commandment.
As he now begins to discuss the spiritual powers and the governance of the Church, he openly points out their shortcomings and calls for a reform of the current leaders. Respect and obedience should be given to the Church, our spiritual mother, just as it is to our natural parents, unless it goes against the first three Commandments. However, as things stand now, the spiritual magistrates ignore their important responsibilities, which include promoting godliness and discipline, like a mother who abandons her children for a lover. Instead, they engage in harmful and inappropriate actions, like parents whose commands contradict God. In such a scenario, members of the Church must act like devoted children whose parents have become irrational. Kings, princes, the nobility, municipalities, and communities must take the initiative to address these issues so that the bishops and clergy, who are currently too fearful, may be encouraged to act. But even the civil authorities must also undergo reforms in their specific areas; they especially need to eliminate the blatant "gluttony and drunkenness," extravagant clothing, unfair rental practices, and the prevalence of brothels. This is, by both divine and human right, part of their responsibilities according to the Fourth Commandment.
Luther, at last, briefly treats of the Second Table of the Commandments, but in speaking of the works of these Commandments he never forgets to point out their relation to faith, thus holding fast this fundamental thought of the book to the end. Faith which does not doubt that God is gracious, he says, will find it an easy matter to be graciously and favorably minded toward one's neighbor and to overcome all angry and wrathful desires. In this faith in God the Spirit will teach us to avoid unchaste thoughts and thus to keep the Sixth Commandment. When the heart trusts in the divine favor, it cannot seek after the temporal goods of others, nor cleave to money, but according to the Seventh Commandment, will use it with cheerful liberality for the benefit of the neighbor. Where such confidence is present there is also a courageous, strong and intrepid heart, which will at all times defend the truth, as the Eighth Commandment demands, whether neck or coat be at stake, whether it be against pope or kings. Where such faith is present there is also strife against the evil lust, as forbidden in the Ninth and Tenth Commandments, and that even unto death.
Luther finally touches on the Second Table of the Commandments, and when he discusses the actions related to these Commandments, he always highlights their connection to faith, maintaining this core idea throughout the text. He states that faith, which doesn’t doubt God’s grace, will easily lead someone to be kind and forgiving toward others and to overcome feelings of anger and resentment. With faith in God, the Spirit helps us avoid impure thoughts and keep the Sixth Commandment. When the heart relies on divine favor, it won’t seek after others' material possessions or cling to money, but instead, following the Seventh Commandment, will use it generously for the good of others. Where there is such confidence, there is also a bold, strong, and fearless heart, ready to defend the truth as demanded by the Eighth Commandment, whether it risks personal loss or challenges authority, be it the pope or kings. Where this faith exists, there's also a struggle against sinful desires, as warned against in the Ninth and Tenth Commandments, even to the point of death.
3. The Importance of the Work.—Inquiring now into the importance of the book, we note that Luther's impression evidently was perfectly correct, when he wrote to Spalatin, long before its completion—as early as March 15.—that he believed it to be better than anything he had heretofore written. His book, indeed, surpasses all his previous German writings in volume, as well as all his Latin and German ones in clearness, richness and the fundamental importance of its content. In comparison with the prevalent urging of self-elected works of monkish holiness, which had arisen from a complete misunderstanding of the so-called evangelical counsels (comp. esp. Matthew 19:16-22) and which were at that time accepted as self-evident and zealously urged by the whole church, Luther's argument must have appeared to all thoughtful and earnest souls as a revelation, when he so clearly amplified the proposition that only those works are to be regarded as good works which God has commanded, and that therefore, not the abandoning of one's earthly calling, but the faithful keeping of the Ten Commandments in the course of one's calling, is the work which God requires of us. Over against the wide-spread opinion, as though the will of God as declared in the Ten Commandments referred only to the outward work always especially mentioned, Luther's argument must have called to mind the explanation of the Law, which the Lord had given in the Sermon on the Mount, when he taught men to recognize only the extreme point and manifestation of a whole trend of thought in the work prohibited by the text, and when he directed Christians not to rest in the keeping of the literal requirement of each Commandment, but from this point of vantage to inquire into the whole depth and breadth of God's will—positively and negatively—and to do His will in its full extent as the heart has perceived it. Though this thought may have been occasionally expressed in the expositions of the Ten Commandments which appeared at the dawn of the Reformation, still it had never before been so clearly recognized as the only correct principle, much less had it been so energetically carried out from beginning to end, as is done in this treatise. Over against the deep-rooted view that the works of love must bestow upon faith its form, its content and its worth before God, it must have appeared as the dawn of a new era (Galatians 3:13-35) when Luther in this treatise declared, and with victorious certainty carried out the thought, that it is true faith which invests the works, even the best and greatest of works, with their content and worth before God.
3. The Importance of the Work.—Now looking into the importance of the book, we see that Luther's view was completely correct when he wrote to Spalatin, even before it was finished—back on March 15—that he believed it was better than anything he had written before. His book truly surpasses all his earlier German writings in length, as well as all his Latin and German works in clarity, richness, and fundamental significance. Compared to the widespread advocacy of self-chosen acts of monastic piety, which stemmed from a complete misunderstanding of the so-called evangelical counsels (see especially Matthew 19:16-22) and were then accepted as obvious and fervently promoted by the entire church, Luther's argument must have felt like a revelation to all thoughtful and sincere individuals. He clearly elaborated on the idea that only the works commanded by God are to be considered good works, and that therefore, it’s not about abandoning one's earthly duties, but faithfully observing the Ten Commandments within one's profession that God expects of us. In contrast to the common belief that the will of God, as stated in the Ten Commandments, applied only to the outward actions specifically mentioned, Luther's argument must have reminded people of the explanation of the Law that the Lord provided in the Sermon on the Mount. He taught that one should recognize only the extreme form and manifestation of a broader line of thought in the actions forbidden by the text, and he urged Christians not to settle for merely following the literal requirements of each Commandment. Instead, they should explore the full depth and breadth of God's will—positively and negatively—and fulfill His will in its entirety as understood by the heart. While this idea may have been hinted at in the interpretations of the Ten Commandments presented at the start of the Reformation, it had never before been so clearly acknowledged as the only correct principle, let alone been so vigorously applied from beginning to end, as it is in this treatise. Against the deeply rooted belief that acts of love must give faith its shape, content, and value before God, it must have seemed like the dawn of a new era (Galatians 3:13-35) when Luther in this treatise proclaimed—and confidently carried out—the idea that it is true faith that gives works, even the best and greatest of works, their content and worth before God.
This preposition, which Luther here amplifies more clearly than ever before, demanded nothing less than a breach with the whole of prevalent religious views, and at that time must have been perceived as the discovery of a new world, though it was no more than a return to the dear teaching of the New Testament Scriptures concerning the way of salvation. This, too, accounts for the fact that in this writing the accusation is more impressively repelled than before, that the doctrine of justification by faith lone resulted in moral laxity, and that, on the other hand, the fundamental and radical importance of righteousness by faith for the whole moral life is revealed in such a heart-refreshing manner. Luther's appeal in this treatise to kings, princes, the nobility, municipalities and communities, to declare against the misuse of spiritual powers and to abolish various abuses in civil life, marks this treatise as a forerunner of the great Reformation writings, which appeared in the same year (1520), while, on the other hand, his espousal of the rights of the "poor man"—to be met with here for the first time—shows that the Monk of Wittenberg, coming from the narrow limits of the convent, had an intimate and sympathetic knowledge of the social needs of his time. Thus he proved by his own example that to take a stand in the center of the Gospel does not narrow the vision nor harden the heart, but rather produces courage in the truth and sympathy for all manner of misery.
This proposal, which Luther explains more clearly than ever before, called for nothing less than a break from all the existing religious beliefs, and at that time must have felt like discovering a new world, even though it was really just a return to the beloved teachings of the New Testament Scriptures about salvation. This also explains why, in this writing, the claim that the doctrine of justification by faith alone leads to moral laxity is more forcefully countered than before, and the fundamental and radical significance of righteousness by faith for the entire moral life is presented in a refreshingly heartfelt way. Luther's appeal in this treatise to kings, princes, the nobility, municipalities, and communities to stand up against the abuse of spiritual power and to eliminate various injustices in civil life marks this work as a precursor to the major Reformation writings that emerged in the same year (1520). At the same time, his support for the rights of the "poor man"—introduced here for the first time—demonstrates that the Monk of Wittenberg, coming from the limited environment of the convent, had a deep and sympathetic understanding of the social issues of his time. Thus, he showed by his own example that standing firmly in the center of the Gospel does not limit one's perspective or harden one's heart, but instead fosters courage in the truth and compassion for all kinds of suffering.
Luther's contemporaries at once recognized the great importance of the treatise, for within the period of seven months it passed through eight editions; these were followed by six more editions between the years of 1521 and 1525; in 1521 it was translation into Latin, and in this form passed through three editions up to the year 1525; and all this in spite of the fact that in those years the so-called three great Reformation writings of 1520 were casting all else into the shadow. Melanchthon, in a contemporaneous letter to John Hess, called it Luther's best book. John Mathesius, the well-known pastor at Joachimsthal and Luther's biographer, acknowledged that he had learned the "rudiments of Christianity" from it.
Luther's contemporaries immediately recognized the significant impact of the treatise, as it went through eight editions in just seven months. This was followed by six more editions between 1521 and 1525. In 1521, it was translated into Latin and saw three editions by 1525, all of this happening despite the fact that the three major Reformation writings of 1520 overshadowed everything else. Melanchthon, in a letter to John Hess at the time, referred to it as Luther's best book. John Mathesius, the well-known pastor in Joachimsthal and Luther's biographer, admitted that he learned the "basics of Christianity" from it.
Even to-day this book has its peculiar mission to the Church. The seeking after self-elected works, the indifference regarding the works commanded of God, the foolish opinion, that the path of works leads to God's grace end good-will, are even to-day widely prevalent within the kingdom of God. To all this Luther's treatise answers: Be diligent in the works of your earthly calling as commanded of God, but only after having first strengthened, by the consideration of God's mercy, the faith within you, which is the only source of all truly good works and well-pleasing to God.
Even today, this book has a unique role within the Church. The pursuit of self-chosen works, the apathy toward the works commanded by God, and the misguided belief that a path of works leads to God's grace and goodwill are still common in the kingdom of God. In response to all this, Luther's treatise states: Be diligent in the works of your earthly calling as God commands, but do so only after you've strengthened your faith by reflecting on God's mercy, as that is the only source of truly good works that are pleasing to God.
M. Reu.
M. Reu.
Wartburg Seminary, Dubuque, Iowa.
Wartburg Seminary, Dubuque, IA.
FOOTNOTES
[1] (Enders, Luther's Briefwechsel, I, p. 29.) Luther here writers: Learn Christ, dear Brother, learn Christ crucified; learn to sing unto him and, despairing of self, to say: "Thou, Lord Jesus art my righteousness, I, however, am Thy sin. Thou has taken unto Thyself what was mine, and has given me what is Thine." In this faith, receive the erring brethren, make their sins your own, and if you have anything good, let it be theirs.
[1] (Enders, Luther's Briefwechsel, I, p. 29.) Luther writes here: Learn Christ, dear Brother, learn Christ crucified; learn to sing to Him and, while giving up on yourself, to say: "You, Lord Jesus, are my righteousness; I, on the other hand, am Your sin. You have taken on what was mine and given me what is Yours." In this faith, welcome your mistaken brothers, take their sins as your own, and if you have anything good, let it be theirs.
[2] Above, pp. 103-171.
[2] Above, pp. 103-171.
[3] On Feb. 24, Luther answered Spalatin: Die sermone bonorum operum nibil memini; sed et tot jam edidi, ut periculum sit, ne emtores tandem fatigam; but on Feb. 26, he wrote again: Memoria mihi rediit de operibus bonis sermone tractandis, in concione scilicet id promisi; dabo operam, ut fiat. (De Weite, Luther's Briefe, I, p. 419, 421, 430 ff.)
[3] On Feb. 24, Luther responded to Spalatin: I don't remember anything about the discussion on good works; but I've published so many now that I might wear out the buyers; but on Feb. 26, he wrote again: I've recalled our discussion on good works that I promised to address in my sermon; I'll make an effort to make it happen. (De Weite, Luther's Briefe, I, p. 419, 421, 430 ff.)
[4] See Dedicatory Letter, above, p. 107.
[4] See Dedicatory Letter, above, p. 107.
[5] We mention but one of many testimonies. John Dietenberger in his book, Der leye. Obe der gelaub allein selig mache, printed in Strassburg 1523, says on leaf B26: "Faith is a gift of God, which may appear bare or ornate; still it remains but one faith, which, however, has another effect when ornate than when bare. Ornate faith makes man a child of grace, an heir of the kingdom of heaven and justified. Bare faith, however, does not separate man from devils, helps not to the kingdom of heaven, and leads to no justification."
[5] We mention just one of many testimonies. John Dietenberger in his book, Der leye. Obe der gelaub allein selig mache, printed in Strasbourg 1523, says on leaf B26: "Faith is a gift from God, which can be simple or elaborate; however, it is still one faith that produces different effects when it's elaborate versus when it's simple. Elaborate faith makes a person a child of grace, an heir to the kingdom of heaven, and justified. Simple faith, on the other hand, does not separate a person from devils, does not help in reaching the kingdom of heaven, and does not lead to justification."
A TREATISE ON GOOD WORKS
1520
1520
DEDICATION
JESUS[1]
To the Illustrious, High-born Prince and Lord, John, Duke of
Saxony, Landgrave of Thuringia, Margrave of Meissen, my gracious
Lord and Patron.
To the distinguished and noble Prince and Lord, John, Duke of
Saxony, Landgrave of Thuringia, Margrave of Meissen, my kind
Lord and Patron.
Illustrious, High-born Prince, gracious Lord! My humble duty and my feeble prayer for your Grace always remembered!
Illustrious, High-born Prince, gracious Lord! I always remember my humble duty and my sincere prayers for your Grace!
For a long time, gracious Prince and Lord, I have wished to show my humble respect and duty toward your princely Grace, by the exhibition of some such spiritual wares as are at my disposal; but I have always considered my powers too feeble to undertake anything worthy of being offered to your princely Grace.
For a long time, kind Prince and Lord, I've wanted to show my sincere respect and duty to your royal Grace by sharing some spiritual gifts that I have. However, I've always thought my abilities were too limited to present anything truly worthy of your royal Grace.
Since, however, my most gracious Lord Frederick, Duke of Saxony, Elector and Vicar of the Holy Roman Empire, your Grace's brother, has not despised, but graciously accepted my slight book,[2] dedicated to his electoral Grace, and now published—though such was not my intention—I have taken courage from his gracious example and ventured to think that the princely spirit, like the princely blood, may be the same in both of you, especially in gracious kindness and good will. I have hoped that your princely Grace likewise would not despise this my humble offering which I have felt more need of publishing than any other of my sermons or tracts. For the greatest of all questions has been raised, the question of Good Works, in which is practised immeasurably more trickery and deception than in anything else, and in which the simple-minded man is so easily misled that our Lord Christ has commanded us to watch carefully for the sheep's clothing under which the wolves hide themselves. [Matt. 7:15]
Since my most gracious Lord Frederick, Duke of Saxony, Elector and Vicar of the Holy Roman Empire, your Grace's brother, has graciously accepted my modest book, dedicated to his electoral Grace, and now published—though that wasn't my intention—I’m encouraged by his kind example to think that the noble spirit, like the noble blood, may be the same in both of you, especially in kindness and goodwill. I hope that you, too, will not overlook this humble offering, which I felt a greater need to publish than my other sermons or writings. For the most significant question has been raised, the question of Good Works, in which there is far more trickery and deception than in anything else, and where the simple-minded are easily misled, prompting our Lord Christ to command us to be vigilant for the sheep's clothing that wolves hide behind. [Matt. 7:15]
Neither silver, gold, precious stones, nor any rare thing has such manifold alloys and flaws as have good works, which ought to have a single simple goodness, and without it are mere color, show and deceit.
Neither silver, gold, precious stones, nor any rare thing has as many mixed qualities and flaws as good deeds, which should have a straightforward goodness, and without it are just surface, show, and trickery.
And although I know and daily hear many people, who think slightingly of my poverty, and say that I write only little pamphlets[3] and German sermons for the unlearned laity, this shall not disturb me. Would to God I had in all my life, with all the ability I have, helped one layman to be better! I would be satisfied, thank God, and be quite willing then to let all my little books perish.
And even though I know and hear many people every day who look down on my poverty and say that I only write small pamphlets and sermons in German for the uneducated, this won’t bother me. I wish to God that I had, throughout my life, with all the abilities I possess, helped just one layperson become a better person! I would be satisfied, thank God, and would gladly let all my little books disappear.
Whether the making of many great books is an art and a benefit to the Church, I leave others to judge. But I believe that if I were minded to make great books according to their art, I could, with God's help, do it more readily perhaps than they could prepare a little discourse after my fashion. If accomplishment were as easy as persecution, Christ would long since have been cast out of heaven again, and God's throne itself overturned. Although we cannot all be writers, we all want to be critics.
Whether creating many great books is an art and a benefit to the Church, I'll let others decide. But I believe that if I wanted to create great books artfully, I could, with God's help, do it more easily than they could write a brief speech in my style. If achieving things were as easy as facing persecution, Christ would have been kicked out of heaven a long time ago, and God's throne would have been overturned. While not all of us can be writers, we all want to be critics.
I will most gladly leave to any one else the honor of greater things, and not be at all ashamed to preach and to write in German for the unlearned laymen. Although I too have little skill in it, I believe that if we had hitherto done, and should henceforth do more of it, Christendom would have reaped no small advantage, and have been more benefited by this than by the great, deep books and quaestiones[4], which are used only in the schools, among the learned.
I’m more than happy to let someone else take the credit for bigger achievements, and I’m not ashamed to preach and write in German for everyday people. Even though I'm not an expert at it, I think if we had done this more in the past and continue to do so, Christianity would have gained a lot more from it than from the complicated, in-depth books and quaestiones[4] that are only used in schools by scholars.
Then, too, I have never forced or begged any one to hear me, or to read my sermons. I have freely ministered in the Church of that which God has given me and which I owe the Church. Whoever likes it not, may hear and read what others have to say. And if they are not willing to be my debtors, it matters little. For me it is enough, and even more than too much, that some laymen condescend to read what I say. Even though there were nothing else to urge me, it should be more than sufficient that I have learned that your princely Grace is pleased with such German books and is eager to receive instruction in Good Works and the Faith, with which instruction it was my duty, humbly and with all diligence to serve you.
Then again, I’ve never forced or begged anyone to listen to me or read my sermons. I’ve freely shared what God has given me in the Church because I owe it to the Church. If someone doesn’t like it, they can turn to what others have to say. And if they’re not interested in owing me anything, that doesn’t concern me much. For me, it’s more than enough that some laypeople are willing to read what I have to say. Even if there were no other motivation, it should be more than sufficient that I’ve learned that your esteemed Grace appreciates such German books and is eager to learn about Good Works and the Faith, which it is my duty to humbly and diligently provide for you.
Therefore, in dutiful humility I pray that your princely Grace may accept this offering of mine with a gracious mind, until, if God grant me time, I prepare a German exposition of the Faith in its entirety. For at this time I have wished to show how in all good works we should practice and make use of faith, and let faith be the chief work. If God permit, I will treat at another time of the Faith[5] itself—how we are daily to pray or recite it.
Therefore, with humble respect, I ask that you kindly accept this offering of mine, until I have the chance, if God allows, to create a complete German explanation of the Faith. Right now, I want to demonstrate how we should practice and utilize faith in all good works, making faith our primary focus. If God permits, I will discuss the Faith itself at another time—specifically, how we should pray or recite it daily.
I humbly commend myself herewith to your princely Grace,
I respectfully commend myself to your royal grace,
Your Princely Grace's
Humble Chaplain,
Dr. Martin Luther.
Your Royal Highness,
Your Humble Chaplain,
Dr. Martin Luther.
From Wittenberg, March 39th, A.D. 1520.
From Wittenberg, March 39, 1520.
THE TREATISE
[Sidenote: Faith and the Commandments]
Faith and the Commandments
I. We ought first to know that there are no good works except those which God has commanded, even as there is no sin except that which God has forbidden. Therefore whoever wishes to know and to do good works needs nothing else than to know God's commandments. Thus Christ says, Matthew xix, "If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments." [Matt. 19:17] And when the young man asks Him, Matthew xix, what he shall do that he may inherit eternal life, Christ sets before him naught else but the Ten Commandments. [Matt. 19:18 f.] Accordingly, we must learn how to distinguish among good works from the Commandments of God, and not from the appearance, the magnitude, or the number of the works themselves, nor from the judgment of men or of human law or custom, as we see has been done and still is done, because we are blind and despise the divine Commandments.
I. First, we need to understand that there are no good works except those that God has commanded, just as there is no sin except what God has forbidden. Therefore, anyone who wants to know and do good works only needs to understand God's commandments. As Christ says in Matthew 19, "If you want to enter life, keep the commandments." [Matt. 19:17] When the young man asks Him in Matthew 19 what he should do to inherit eternal life, Christ presents nothing but the Ten Commandments. [Matt. 19:18 f.] Thus, we must learn to distinguish good works based on God's Commandments, rather than their appearance, size, or quantity, or based on human judgment, law, or custom, as we see has been done and continues to be done, because we are blind and disregard the divine Commandments.
[Sidenote: Faith the Best Work]
Faith is the Best Work
II. The first and highest, the most precious of all good works is faith in Christ, as He says, John vi. When the Jews asked Him: "What shall we do that we may work the works of God?" He answered: "This is the work of God, that ye believe on Him Whom He hath sent." [John 6:28 f.] When we hear or preach this word, we hasten over it and deem it a very little thing and easy to do, whereas we ought here to pause a long time and to ponder it well. For in this work[6] all good works must be done and receive from it the inflow of their goodness, like a loan. This we must put bluntly, that men may understand it.
II. The first and most important, the most valuable of all good works is faith in Christ, as He says in John 6. When the Jews asked Him, "What should we do to perform the works of God?" He replied, "This is the work of God: that you believe in the one He has sent." [John 6:28 f.] When we hear or preach this message, we often rush through it and think it’s a minor point and easy to achieve, but we should actually take our time to reflect on it deeply. Because in this work, all good works must be done and find their goodness, like a loan. We need to state this clearly so that people can grasp its meaning.
We find many who pray, fast, establish endowments, do this or that, lead a good life before men, and yet if you should ask them whether they are sure that what they do pleases God, they say, "No"; they do not know, or they doubt. And there are some very learned men, who mislead them, and say that it is not necessary to be sure of this; and yet on the other hand, these same men do nothing else but teach good works. Now all these works are done outside of faith, therefore they are nothing and altogether dead. For as their conscience stands toward God and as it believes, so also are the works which grow out of it. Now they have no faith, no good conscience toward God, therefore the works lack their head, and all their life and goodness is nothing. Hence it comes that when I exalt faith and reject such works done without faith, they accuse me of forbidding good works, when in truth I am trying hard to teach real good works of faith.
We see many people who pray, fast, set up funds, do this or that, and lead a good life in front of others, yet if you ask them if they’re sure that what they do pleases God, they answer, “No”; they’re uncertain or doubt it. There are also some very educated people who mislead them by saying it’s unnecessary to be sure about this; meanwhile, these same people focus solely on teaching good deeds. However, all these actions are done without faith, so they are meaningless and completely dead. Because their conscience relates to God and is based on what it believes, the actions that come from it are the same. They lack faith and a clear conscience toward God, so their actions lack purpose, and all their life and goodness add up to nothing. This is why when I promote faith and dismiss actions done without faith, they accuse me of condemning good deeds, when in reality, I'm working hard to teach true good deeds that come from faith.
[Sidenote: All Works done in Faith are Good]
[Sidenote: All Works Done in Faith Are Good]
III. If you ask further, whether they count it also a good work when they work at their trade, walk, stand, eat, drink, sleep, and do all kinds of works for the nourishment of the body or for the common welfare, and whether they believe that God takes pleasure in them because of such works, you will find that they say, "No"; and they define good works so narrowly that they are made to consist only of praying in church, fasting, and almsgiving. Other works they consider to be in vain, and think that God cares nothing for them. So through their damnable unbelief they curtail and lessen the service of God, Who is served by all things whatsoever that are done, spoken or thought in faith.
III. If you ask whether they see everyday activities like working at their jobs, walking, standing, eating, drinking, sleeping, and doing various tasks for their own nourishment or the common good as good works, and if they believe God finds joy in these actions, you'll find they say, "No." They define good works so narrowly that they include only praying in church, fasting, and giving to charity. They think other actions are pointless and believe God doesn’t care about them. So, through their harmful unbelief, they limit and diminish the service of God, who is honored by everything done, said, or thought in faith.
So teaches Ecclesiastes ix: "Go thy way with joy, eat and drink, and know that God accepteth thy works. Let thy garments be always white; and let thy head lack no ointment. Live joyfully with the wife whom thou lovest all the days of the life of thy vanity." [Eccles. 9:7] "Let thy garments be always white," that is, let all our works be good, whatever they may be, without any distinction. And they are white when I am certain and believe that they please God. Then shall the head of my soul never lack the ointment of a joyful conscience.
So Ecclesiastes 9 teaches: "Go your way with joy, eat and drink, and know that God accepts your works. Always wear white clothing; let your head be anointed with oil. Live joyfully with the wife you love all the days of your fleeting life." [Eccles. 9:7] "Always wear white clothing," meaning we should let all our actions be good, no matter what they are, without any distinction. They are pure when I am sure and believe they please God. Then the head of my soul will always have the oil of a joyful conscience.
So Christ says, John viii: "I do always those things that please Him." [John 8:29] And St. John says, I. John iii: "Hereby we know that we are of the truth, if we can comfort our hearts before Him and have a good confidence. And if our heart condemns or frets us, God is greater than our heart, and we have confidence, that whatsoever we ask, we shall receive of Him, because we keep His Commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in His sight." [1 John 3, 19 ff.] Again: "Whosoever is born of God, that is, whoever believes and trusts God, doth not commit sin, and cannot sin." [1 John 3, 9] Again, Psalm xxxiv: "None of them that trust in Him shall do sin." [Ps. 34:22] And in Psalm ii: "Blessed are all they that put their trust in Him." [Ps. 2:12] If this be true, then all that they do must be good, or the evil that they do must be quickly forgiven. Behold, then, why I exalt faith so greatly, draw all works into it, and reject all works which do not flow from it.
So Christ says, John 8: "I always do what pleases Him." [John 8:29] And St. John says, 1 John 3: "We know we are living in the truth if we can reassure ourselves before Him and have confidence. If our hearts condemn or trouble us, God is greater than our hearts, and we have confidence that whatever we ask, we will receive from Him because we keep His commandments and do what pleases Him." [1 John 3, 19 ff.] Again: "Anyone born of God, meaning anyone who believes and trusts God, does not sin and cannot sin." [1 John 3, 9] Again, Psalm 34: "None of those who trust in Him will sin." [Ps. 34:22] And in Psalm 2: "Blessed are all who put their trust in Him." [Ps. 2:12] If this is true, then everything they do must be good, or any wrongdoing must be quickly forgiven. Look then why I highly value faith, include all actions within it, and reject any actions that do not stem from it.
[Sidenote: Faith the Test of Good Works]
[Sidenote: Faith the Test of Good Works]
IV. Now every one can note and tell for himself when he does what is good or what is not good; for if he finds his heart confident that it pleases God, the work is good, even if it were so small a thing as picking up a straw. If confidence is absent, or if he doubts, the work is not good, although it should raise all the dead and the man should give himself to be burned. [1 Cor. 13:3] This is the teaching of St. Paul, Romans xiv: "Whatsoever is not done of or in faith is sin." [Rom. 14:23] Faith, as the chief work, and no other work, has given us the name of "believers on Christ." For all other works a heathen, a Jew, a Turk, a sinner, may also do; but to trust firmly that he pleases God, is possible only for a Christian who is enlightened and strengthened by grace.
IV. Everyone can recognize and determine for themselves when they are doing something good or not; if they feel confident in their heart that their actions please God, then what they are doing is good, even if it’s something as small as picking up a piece of straw. If there is no confidence, or if they have doubts, then the action is not good, even if it could raise the dead or if a person were to sacrifice themselves by being burned. [1 Cor. 13:3] This is the teaching of St. Paul in Romans xiv: "Whatever is not done from faith is sin." [Rom. 14:23] Faith, being the most important act, is what has earned us the title of "believers in Christ." Other people—whether they are heathens, Jews, Turks, or sinners—can perform all kinds of good deeds too, but having the firm belief that one pleases God is something only a Christian who is enlightened and strengthened by grace can achieve.
That these words seem strange, and that some call me a heretic because of them, is due to the fact that men have followed blind reason and heathen ways, have set faith not above, but beside other virtues, and have given it a work of its own, apart from all works of the other virtues; although faith alone makes all other works good, acceptable and worthy, in that it trusts God and does not doubt that for it all things that a man does are well done. Indeed, they have not let faith remain a work, but have made a habitus[7] of it, [John 6:29] as they say, although Scripture gives the name of a good, divine work to no work except to faith alone. Therefore it is no wonder that they have become blind and leaders of the blind. [Matt. 15:14] And this faith brings with it at once love, peace, joy and hope. For God gives His Spirit at once to him who trusts Him, as St. Paul says to the Galatians: "You received the Spirit not became of your good works, but when you believed the Word of God." [Gal. 3:2]
That these words sound unusual, and that some label me a heretic because of them, is because people have followed misguided reason and pagan practices. They have placed faith not above, but alongside other virtues, assigning it a task of its own, separate from the actions of the other virtues. However, faith alone makes all other actions good, acceptable, and worthy, as it relies on God and does not doubt that, through it, everything a person does is well done. In fact, they have not allowed faith to remain an action but have turned it into a habitus[7], as they say, even though Scripture assigns the title of a good, divine action only to faith. So, it’s no surprise that they have become blind and lead the blind. [Matt. 15:14] This faith immediately brings with it love, peace, joy, and hope. For God gives His Spirit instantly to whoever trusts Him, as St. Paul says to the Galatians: "You received the Spirit not because of your good works, but when you believed the Word of God." [Gal. 3:2]
[Sidenote: Faith makes all Works Equal]
[Sidenote: Faith makes all Works Equal]
V. In this faith all works become equal, and one is like the other; all distinctions between works fall away, whether they be great, small, short, long, few or many. For the works are acceptable not for their own sake, but because of the faith which alone is, works and lives in each and every work without distinction, however numerous and various they are, just as all the members of the body live, work and have their name from the head, and without the head no member can live, work and have a name.
V. In this belief, all actions become equal, and one is similar to another; all differences between actions disappear, whether they are big, small, brief, lengthy, few, or many. Actions are accepted not for their own sake, but because of the faith that exists in each and every action without distinction, no matter how numerous or diverse they are, just like all the parts of the body live, function, and derive their name from the head, and without the head, no part can live, function, or have a name.
From which it further follows that a Christian who lives in this faith has no need of a teacher of good works, but whatever he finds to do he does, and all is well done; as Samuel said to Saul: "The Spirit of the Lord will come upon thee, and thou shalt be turned into another man; then do thou as occasion serves thee; for God is with thee." [1 Sam. 10:6] So also we read of St. Anna, Samuel's mother: "When she believed the priest Eli who promised her God's grace, she went home in joy and peace, and from that time no more turned hither and thither," [1 Sam. 1:17 f.] that is, whatever occurred, it was all one to her. St. Paul also says: "Where the Spirit of Christ is, there all is free." [Rom. 8:2] For faith does not permit itself to be bound to any work [1 Cor. 3:17], nor does it allow any work to be taken from it, but, as the First Psalm says "He bringeth forth his fruit in his season," [Ps. 1:3] that is, as as a matter of course.
From this, it follows that a Christian who lives in this faith doesn’t need a teacher for good works; whatever they find to do, they do, and it all turns out well. As Samuel said to Saul: "The Spirit of the Lord will come upon you, and you will be changed into another person; then do what you see fit, for God is with you." [1 Sam. 10:6] We also read about St. Anna, Samuel’s mother: "When she believed the priest Eli who promised her God's grace, she went home in joy and peace, and from that point on, she didn’t waver," [1 Sam. 1:17 f.] meaning that whatever happened, it didn’t faze her. St. Paul also says: "Where the Spirit of Christ is, there is freedom." [Rom. 8:2] Faith doesn’t let itself be tied to any one work [1 Cor. 3:17], nor does it allow any work to be taken away from it. As the First Psalm states, "He brings forth his fruit in his season," [Ps. 1:3] which happens naturally.
[Sidenote: An Analogy]
[Side Note: An Analogy]
VI. This we may see in a common human example. When a man and a woman love and are pleased with each other, and thoroughly believe in their love, who teaches them how they are to behave, what they are to do, leave undone, say, not say, think? Confidence alone teaches them all this, and more. They make no difference in works: they do the great, the long, the much, as gladly as the small, the short, the little, and vice versa; and that too with joyful, peaceful, confident hearts, and each is a free companion of the other. But where there is a doubt, search is made for what is best; then a distinction of works is imagined whereby a man may win favor; and yet he goes about it with a heavy heart, and great disrelish; he is, as it were, taken captive, more than half in despair, and often makes a fool of himself.
VI. We can see this in a common human example. When a man and a woman love each other and are happy together, truly believing in their love, who teaches them how to act, what to do, what to leave undone, what to say, what not to say, or what to think? Only confidence teaches them all of this and more. They don’t differentiate in their actions: they do the big, the long, and the plentiful just as willingly as the small, the short, and the few, and vice versa; and they do this with joyful, peaceful, and confident hearts, each being a free partner to the other. But where there is doubt, they start searching for what’s best; then they create a distinction in their actions in hopes of gaining approval; yet they approach it with a heavy heart and great reluctance, feeling as if they are trapped, more than half in despair, and often end up embarrassing themselves.
[Sidenote: The First Stage of Faith: Works]
[Sidenote: The First Stage of Faith: Works]
So a Christian who lives in this confidence toward God, knows all things, can do all things, undertakes all things that are to be done, and does everything cheerfully and freely; not that he may gather many merits and good works, but because it is a pleasure for him to please God thereby, and he serves God purely for nothing, content that his service pleases God. On the other hand, he who is not at one with God, or doubts, hunts and worries in what way he may do enough and with many works move God. He runs to St. James of Compostella,[8] to Rome, to Jerusalem, hither and yon, prays St. Bridget's prayer[9] and the rest, fasts on this day and on that, makes confession here, and makes confession there, questions this man and that, and yet finds no peace. He does all this with great effort, despair and disrelish of heart, so that the Scriptures rightly call such works in Hebrew Aven amal [Ps. 90:10], that is, labor and travail. And even then they are not good works, and are all lost. Many have been crazed thereby; their fear has brought them into all manner of misery. Of these it is written, Wisdom of Solomon v: "We have wearied ourselves in the wrong way; and have gone through deserts, where there lay no way; but as for the way of the Lord, we have not known it, and the sun of righteousness rose not upon us." [Wisd. 5:6 f.]
So a Christian who has confidence in God knows everything, can do anything, takes on all tasks, and does everything happily and willingly; not to earn a lot of merits or good deeds, but because it brings him joy to please God, and he serves God purely for its own sake, satisfied that his service is pleasing to God. On the other hand, someone who is not aligned with God or has doubts is constantly stressed about how to do enough and how to win God’s favor with many actions. He travels to St. James of Compostella,[8] to Rome, to Jerusalem, going here and there, prays St. Bridget's prayer[9] and others, fasts on this day and that, confesses here and there, asks this person and that, and still finds no peace. He does all of this with great effort, despair, and reluctance, so the Scriptures accurately refer to such efforts in Hebrew as Aven amal [Ps. 90:10], meaning labor and toil. Even then, these are not good works and are all in vain. Many have lost their minds over this; their fear has led them into all kinds of misery. Of these, it is written in the Wisdom of Solomon v: "We have wearied ourselves in the wrong way; we have wandered through deserts where there was no path; yet we have not known the way of the Lord, and the sun of righteousness did not rise upon us." [Wisd. 5:6 f.]
[Sidenote: The Second Stage of Faith: Sufferings]
[Sidenote: The Second Stage of Faith: Sufferings]
VII. In these works faith is still slight and weak; let us ask further, whether they believe that they are well-pleasing to God when they suffer in body, property, honor, friends, or whatever they have, and believe that God of His mercy appoints their sufferings and difficulties for them, whether they be small or great. This is real strength, to trust in God when to all our senses and reason He appears to be angry; and to have greater confidence in Him than we feel. Here He is hidden, as the bride says in the Song of Songs: "Behold he standeth behind our wall, he looketh forth at the windows" [Song 2:9]; that is, He stands hidden among the sufferings, which would separate us from Him like a wall, yea, like a wall of stone, and yet He looks upon me and does not leave me, for He is standing and is ready graciously to help, and through the window of dim faith He permits Himself to be seen. And Jeremiah says in Lamentations, "He casts casts off men, but He does it not willingly." [Lam. 3:32]
VII. In these works, faith is still small and weak; let's ask further if they really believe that they are pleasing to God when they suffer in their bodies, possessions, honor, friendships, or anything else they have, and if they trust that God, in His mercy, assigns their sufferings and challenges, whether they are minor or major. This is true strength: to trust in God when, to all our senses and reason, He seems to be angry; and to have more confidence in Him than we actually feel. Here He is hidden, as the bride says in the Song of Songs: "Behold, he stands behind our wall, he looks through the windows" [Song 2:9]; meaning He remains hidden among the sufferings that would separate us from Him like a wall, even a stone wall, and yet He watches over me and does not abandon me, for He is there, ready to help graciously, and through the window of weak faith, He allows Himself to be seen. And Jeremiah says in Lamentations, "He casts off men, but He does not do it willingly." [Lam. 3:32]
This faith they do not know at all, and give up, thinking that God has forsaken them and is become their enemy; they even lay the blame of their ills on men and devils, and have no confidence at all in God. For this reason, too, their suffering is always an offence and harmful to them, and yet they go and do some good works, as they think, and are not aware of their unbelief. But they who in such suffering trust God and retain a good, firm confidence in Him, and believe that He is pleased with them, these see in their sufferings and afflictions nothing but precious merits and the rarest possessions, the value of which no one can estimate. For faith and confidence make precious before God all that which others think most shameful, so that it is written even of death in Psalm cxvi, "Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of His saints." [Ps. 116:13] And just as the confident and faith are better, higher and stronger at this stage than in the first stage, so and to the same degree do the sufferings which are borne in this faith excel all works of faith. Therefore between such works and sufferings there is an immeasurable difference and the sufferings are infinitely better.
This faith is completely unknown to them, and they give up, believing that God has abandoned them and become their enemy; they even blame their problems on people and demons, lacking any trust in God. Because of this, their suffering always feels like a burden and harms them, yet they engage in what they perceive as good deeds, unaware of their disbelief. However, those who trust God during such suffering and maintain a strong, confident belief that He is pleased with them see their struggles and pains as valuable merits and treasures that no one can truly measure. For faith and trust make everything precious to God, even what others consider most shameful, as it is written about death in Psalm 116, "Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of His saints." [Ps. 116:13] Just as confidence and faith are greater, higher, and stronger at this point than at the beginning, so too are the sufferings endured in this faith far superior to all acts of faith. Therefore, there is an immeasurable difference between such works and sufferings, and the sufferings are infinitely better.
[Sidenote: The Highest Stage of Faith: Torments of Conscience]
[Sidenote: The Highest Stage of Faith: Torments of Conscience]
VIII. Beyond all this is the highest stage of faith, when God punishes the conscience not only with temporal sufferings, but with death, hell, and sin, and refuses grace and mercy, as though it were His will to condemn and to be angry eternally. This few men experience, but David cries out in Psalm vi, "O Lord, rebuke me not in Thine anger." [Ps. 6:1] To believe at such times that God, in His mercy, is pleased with us, is the highest work that can be done by and in the creature;[10] but of this the work-righteous and doers of good works know nothing at all. For how could they here look for good things and grace from God, as long as they are not certain in their works, and doubt even on the lowest step of faith.
VIII. Beyond all this is the highest level of faith, when God punishes the conscience not just with temporary sufferings but with death, hell, and sin, and denies grace and mercy, as if He intends to condemn and be angry forever. Very few people go through this, but David cries out in Psalm 6, "O Lord, rebuke me not in Thine anger." [Ps. 6:1] To believe during such times that God, in His mercy, is pleased with us, is the highest achievement that can be accomplished by anyone; but those who rely on their own works and the doers of good deeds know nothing about this at all. For how could they expect good things and grace from God when they aren’t even secure in their actions and doubt at the most basic level of faith?
[Sidenote: The Works Rejected]
[Note: The Works Rejected]
In this way I have, as I said, always praised faith, and rejected all works which are done without such faith, in order thereby to lead men from the false, pretentious, Pharisaic, unbelieving good works, with which all monastic houses, churches, homes, low and higher classes are overfilled, and lead them to the true, genuine, thoroughly good, believing works. In this no one opposes me except the unclean beasts, which do not divide the hoof, [Lev. 11:4] as the Law of Moses decrees; who will suffer no distinction among good works, but go lumbering along: if only they pray, fast, establish endowments, go to confession, and do enough, everything shall be good, although in all this they have had no faith in God's grace and approval. Indeed, they consider the works best of all, when they have done many, great and long works without any such confidence, and they look for good only after the works are done; and so they build their confidence not on divine favor, but on the works they have done, that is, on sand and water, from which they must at last take a cruel fall, as Christ says, Matthew vii. [Matt. 7:16] This good-will and favor, on which our confidence rests, was proclaimed by the angels from heaven, when they sang on Christmas night: "Gloria in excel sis Deo, Glory to God in the highest, peace to earth, gracious favor to man." [Luke 2:14][11]
In this way, as I mentioned, I have always valued faith and rejected any actions taken without that faith. My goal is to steer people away from the false, showy, Pharisaic, and non-believing good deeds that fill monastic houses, churches, homes, and all social classes, and guide them toward true, genuine, and truly good acts grounded in belief. The only ones who oppose me in this are the unclean animals that don’t divide the hoof, as the Law of Moses states; they refuse to differentiate between good works and just lumber along: as long as they pray, fast, set up endowments, go to confession, and do enough, they think everything is fine, even though none of this is based on faith in God's grace and approval. In fact, they consider their works to be the best when they've completed many big and lengthy tasks without any such assurance, and they expect good results only after the work is done. Therefore, they place their confidence not in divine favor but in their accomplishments, which is like building on sand and water, leading to a crushing downfall, as Christ says in Matthew 7. This goodwill and favor, which is the foundation of our trust, was announced by the angels from heaven when they sang on Christmas night: "Gloria in excelsis Deo, Glory to God in the highest, peace on earth, good will toward men."
[Sidenote: The First Commandment]
[Sidebar: The First Commandment]
[Sidenote: Its Work is Faith]
[Side Note: Its Work is Faith]
IX. Now this is the work of the First Commandment, which commands: "Thou shalt have no other gods," went which means: "Since I alone am God, thou shalt place all thy confidence, trust and faith on Me alone, and on no one have a god, if you call him God only with your lips, or worship him with the knees or bodily gestures; but if you trust Him with the heart, and look to Him for all good, grace and favor, whether in works or sufferings, in life or death, in joy or sorrow; as the Lord Christ says to the heathen woman, John iv: "I say unto thee, they that worship God must worship Him in spirit and in truth." [John 4:24] And this faith, faithfulness, confidence deep in the heart, is the true fulfilling of the First Commandment; without this there is no other work that is able to satisfy this Commandment. And as this Commandment is the very first, highest and best, from which all the others proceed, in which they exist, and by which they are directed and measured, so also its work, that is, the faith or confidence in God's favor at all times, is the very first, highest and best, from which all others must proceed, exist, remain, be directed and measured. Compared with this, other works are just as if the other Commandments were without the First, and there were no God. Therefore St. Augustine well says that the works of the First Commandment are faith, hope and love. As I said above,[12] such faith and confidence bring love and hope with them. Nay, if we see it aright, love is the first, or comes at the same instant with faith. For I could not trust God, if I did not think that He wished to be favorable and to love me, which leads me, in turn, to love Him and to trust Him heartily and to look to Him for all good things.
IX. This is the essence of the First Commandment, which says, "You shall have no other gods." This means: "Since I alone am God, you should place all your confidence, trust, and faith in Me alone, and have no other god, whether it's just in name or through outward gestures. True trust comes from the heart, looking to Me for all that is good, gracious, and favorable, whether in actions or suffering, in life or death, in joy or sorrow. As the Lord Christ tells the Samaritan woman in John 4: "I tell you, those who worship God must worship Him in spirit and in truth." [John 4:24] This faith and deep trust in the heart is the genuine fulfillment of the First Commandment; without this, no other act can satisfy it. Since this Commandment is the first, highest, and most important, from which all others arise, in which they exist, and by which they are guided and measured, so its work, which is faith or confidence in God's favor at all times, is also the first, highest, and best, from which all others must come, exist, endure, and be directed and measured. In comparison, other actions are as though the other Commandments were irrelevant without the First, and as if there were no God. Therefore, St. Augustine rightly says that the works of the First Commandment are faith, hope, and love. As I mentioned earlier,[12] such faith and confidence naturally lead to love and hope. In fact, if we see it clearly, love comes first or appears at the same moment as faith. For I couldn’t trust God if I didn’t believe that He wanted to be favorable and love me, which in turn makes me love Him and trust Him wholeheartedly, looking to Him for all good things.
[Sidenote: All Works Without Faith are Idolatry]
[Sidenote: All Works Without Faith are Idolatry]
X. Now you see for yourself that all those who do not at at all times trust God and do not in all their works or sufferings, life and death, trust in His favor, grace and good-will, but seek His favor in other things or in themselves, do not keep this Commandment, and practise real idolatry, even if they were to do the works of all the other Commandments, and in addition had all the prayers, fasting, obedience, patience, chastity, and innocence of all the saints combined. For the chief work is not present, without which all the others are nothing but mere sham, show and pretence, with nothing back of them; against which Christ warns us, Matthew vii: "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing." [Matt. 7:15] Such are all who wish with their many good works, as they say, to make God favorable to themselves, and to buy God's grace from Him, as if He were a huckster or a day-laborer, unwilling to give His grace and favor for nothing. These are the most perverse people on earth, who will hardly or never be converted to the right way. Such too are all who in adversity run hither and thither, and look for counsel and help everywhere except from God, from Whom they are most urgently commanded to seek it; whom the Prophet Isaiah reproves thus, Isaiah ix: "The mad people turneth not to Him that smiteth them" [Isa. 9:13]; that is, God smote them and sent them sufferings and all kinds of adversity, that they should run to Him and trust Him. But they run away from Him to men, now to Egypt, now to Assyria, perchance also to the devil; and of such idolatry much is written in the same Prophet and in the Books of the Kings. This is also the way of all holy hypocrites when they are in trouble: they do not run to God, but flee from Him, and only think of how they may get rid of their trouble through their own efforts or through human help, and yet they consider themselves and let others consider them pious people.
X. Now you see for yourself that all those who do not consistently trust God and do not rely on His favor, grace, and goodwill in everything they do or during their sufferings, in life and death, but instead seek His approval in other things or within themselves, are not following this Commandment and are practicing real idolatry. This is true even if they perform all the other Commandments and combine all the prayers, fasting, obedience, patience, chastity, and innocence of all the saints. The essential act is missing, and without it, all the others are nothing but empty gestures and pretenses with no substance behind them. Christ warns us against this, as stated in Matthew 7: "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing." [Matt. 7:15] These are the people who believe that their many good deeds will somehow earn God's favor or buy His grace, as if He were a vendor or a laborer who is unwilling to give His grace and favor freely. These are the most misguided individuals on earth, who will likely never find their way back to the truth. This is also true for those who, in times of hardship, run around looking for help and advice everywhere but from God, the one source from whom they are commanded to seek it. The Prophet Isaiah points this out, saying in Isaiah 9: "The foolish people do not turn to Him who strikes them." [Isa. 9:13]; meaning God struck them and sent them trials and hardships so that they would turn to Him and trust Him. Yet they flee from Him to humans, to Egypt, then to Assyria, or perhaps even to the devil, with much written about this idolatry in the same Prophet and in the Books of Kings. This is also the behavior of all pious hypocrites when they face trouble: they do not turn to God, but run away from Him, thinking only of how they can resolve their problems through their own efforts or human assistance, all while considering themselves and allowing others to view them as devout individuals.
[Sidenote: Faith Must Do all Works]
[Sidenote: Faith Must Do all Works]
XI. This is what St. Paul means in many places, where he ascribes so much to faith, that he says: Justus ex fide sua vivit, "the righteous man draws his life out of his faith," [Rom. 1:17] and faith is that because of which he is counted righteous before God. If righteousness consists of faith, it is clear that faith fulfils all commandments and makes all works righteous, since no one is justified except he keep all the commands of God. Again, the works can justify no one before God without faith. So utterly and roundly does the Apostle reject works and praise faith, that some have taken offence at his words and say: "Well, then, we will do no more good works," [Rom. 3:8] although he condemns such men as erring and foolish.
XI. This is what St. Paul means in many places when he emphasizes the importance of faith, stating: Justus ex fide sua vivit, "the righteous person lives by their faith," [Rom. 1:17] and faith is what makes a person righteous before God. If righteousness is based on faith, it’s clear that faith fulfills all commandments and makes all actions righteous, since no one is justified unless they keep all of God's commands. Moreover, works cannot justify anyone before God without faith. The Apostle so completely rejects works and champions faith that some have been offended by his words, saying: "Well, then, we will stop doing good works," [Rom. 3:8] even though he condemns such people as misguided and foolish.
So men still do. When we reject the great, pretentious works of our time, which are done entirely without faith, they say: Men are only to believe and not to do anything good. For nowadays they say that the works of the First Commandment are singing, reading, organ-playing, reading the mass, saying matins and vespers and the other hours, the founding and decorating of churches, altars, and monastic houses, the gathering of bells, jewels, garments, trinkets and treasures, running to Rome and to the saints. Further, when we are dressed up and bow, kneel, pray the rosary and the Psalter, and all this not before an idol, but before the holy cross of God or the pictures of His saints: this we call honoring and worshiping God, and, according to the First Commandment, "having no other gods"; although these things usurers, adulterers and all manner of sinners can do too, and do them daily.
So men still do. When we reject the great, showy works of our time, which are done completely without faith, they say: Men are only supposed to believe and not to actually do anything good. Nowadays, they claim that the works of the First Commandment include singing, reading, playing the organ, saying mass, praying the daily hours, founding and decorating churches, altars, and monasteries, collecting bells, jewels, garments, trinkets, and treasures, or making pilgrimages to Rome and to the saints. Moreover, when we dress up, bow, kneel, pray the rosary and the Psalms—not before an idol, but before the holy cross of God or images of His saints—we consider this honoring and worshiping God, and, according to the First Commandment, “having no other gods.” Yet these are things that usurers, adulterers, and all kinds of sinners can also do, and they do them every day.
Of course, if these things are done with such faith that we believe that they please God, then they are praiseworthy, not because of their virtue, but because of such faith, for which all works are of equal value, as has been said.[13] But if we doubt or do not believe that God is gracious to us and is pleased with us, or if we presumptuously expect to please Him only through and after our works, then it is all pure deception, outwardly honoring God, but inwardly setting up self as a false god. This is the reason why I have so often spoken against the display, magnificence and multitude of such works and have rejected them, because it is as clear as day that they are not only done in doubt or without faith, but there is not one in a thousand who does not set his confidence upon the works, expecting by them to win God's favor and anticipate His grace; and so they make a fair[14] of them, a thing which God cannot endure, since He has promised His grace freely, and wills that we begin by trusting that grace, and in it perform all works, whatever they may be.
Of course, if we do these things with such faith that we genuinely believe they please God, then they are commendable—not because of their inherent goodness, but because of that faith, which gives equal value to all acts, as has been mentioned.[13] However, if we doubt or don't believe that God is kind to us and is pleased with us, or if we arrogantly assume we can please Him only through and after our actions, then it's all just a facade, outwardly honoring God but inwardly elevating ourselves as a false god. This is why I've frequently criticized the showiness, grandeur, and abundance of such acts and have dismissed them, because it's obvious that they are not only done out of doubt or without faith, but that not one in a thousand truly doesn’t place their trust in these actions, hoping to earn God's favor and anticipate His grace; thus, they make a spectacle[14] of their works, something God cannot stand, since He has promised His grace freely and wants us to begin by trusting in that grace and, through it, to perform all actions, no matter what they are.
[Sidenote: Works and Faith Contrasted]
Works vs. Faith
XII. Note for yourself, then, how far apart these two are: keeping the First Commandment with outward works only, and keeping it with inward trust. For this last makes true, living children of God, the other only makes worse idolatry and the most mischievous hypocrites on earth, who with their apparent righteousness lead unnumbered people into their way, and yet allow them to be without faith, so that they are miserably misled, and are caught in the pitiable babbling and mummery. Of such Christ says, Matthew xxiv: "Beware, if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there" [Matt. 24:23]; and John iv: "I say unto thee, the hour Cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain nor yet at Jerusalem worship God, for the Father seeketh spiritual worshipers." [John 4:21 f.]
XII. Take note of how different these two are: following the First Commandment with just outward actions versus following it with genuine inner faith. The latter creates true, living children of God, while the former leads to worse idolatry and creates some of the most harmful hypocrites on earth, who, with their misleading righteousness, lead countless people astray, leaving them without faith, causing them to be badly misled and caught up in meaningless chatter and rituals. Regarding these individuals, Christ warns in Matthew 24: "Be careful, if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ,’ or ‘There he is’" [Matt. 24:23]; and in John 4: "I tell you, the time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem, for the Father is seeking true worshipers." [John 4:21 f.]
These and similar passages have moved me and ought to move everyone to reject the great display of bulls, seals, flags, indulgences, by which the poor folk are led to build churches, to give, to endow, to pray, and yet faith is not mentioned, and is even suppressed. For since faith knows no distinction among works, such exaltation and urging of one work above another cannot exist beside faith. For faith desires to be the only service of God, and will grant this name and honor to no other work, except in so far as faith imparts it, as it does when the work is done in faith and by faith. This perversion is indicated in the Old Testament, when the Jews left the Temple and sacrificed at other places, in the green parks and on the mountains. [Isa. 65:3, 66:17] This is what these men also do: they are zealous to do all works, but this chief work of faith they regard not at all.
These kinds of passages have moved me and should inspire everyone to reject the huge display of bulls, seals, flags, and indulgences that lead ordinary people to build churches, to give, to endow, to pray, while faith is hardly mentioned and often overlooked. Since faith doesn't differentiate between works, emphasizing one action over another can't coexist with faith. Faith wants to be the only way to serve God and won’t grant this name and honor to any other action unless it’s done through faith, as it happens when the work is performed in faith and with faith. This distortion is highlighted in the Old Testament, when the Jews abandoned the Temple and made sacrifices in other locations, like green parks and mountains. [Isa. 65:3, 66:17] This is what these people also do: they are eager to perform all sorts of works, but they completely disregard the essential work of faith.
[Sidenote: The Abundance of Works Included in Faith]
[Sidenote: The Abundance of Works Included in Faith]
XIII. Where now are they who ask, what works are good; what they shall do; how they shall be religious? Yes, and where are they who say that when we preach of faith, we shall neither teach nor do works? Does not this First Commandment give us more work to do than any man can do? If a man were a thousand men, or all men, or all creatures, this Commandment would yet ask enough of him, and more than enough, since he is commanded to live and walk at all times in faith and confidence toward God, to place such faith in no one else, and so to have only one, the true God, and none other.
XIII. Where are the people who ask what good deeds are, what they should do, and how to be faithful? And where are those who claim that when we talk about faith, we shouldn’t have to teach or do anything? Doesn’t this First Commandment give us more to do than any one person could handle? Even if someone were a thousand people, or all people, or all living beings, this Commandment would still demand enough from them, and more than enough, as it commands them to live and walk in faith and trust in God at all times, to place their faith in no one else, and to worship only one true God, and no other.
Now, since the being and nature of man cannot for an instant be without doing or not doing something, enduring or running away from something (for, as we see, life never rests), let him who will be pious and filled with good works, begin and in all his life and works at all times exercise himself in this faith; let him learn to do and to leave undone all things in such continual faith; then will he find how much work he has to do, and how completely all things are included in faith; how he dare never grow idle, because his very idling must be the exercise and work of faith. In brief, nothing can be in or about us and nothing can happen to us but that it must be good and meritorious, if we believe (as we ought) that all things please God. So says St. Paul: "Dear brethren, all that ye do, whether ye eat or drink, do all in the Name of Jesus Christ, our Lord." [1 Cor. 10:31] Now it cannot be done in this Name except it be done in this faith. Likewise, Romans viii: "We know that all things work together for good to the saints of God." [Rom. 8:26]
Now, since the essence and nature of humanity cannot exist for even a moment without taking action or avoiding it, facing something or fleeing from it (because, as we see, life is always in motion), let those who wish to be virtuous and full of good deeds begin and throughout their lives and actions continually practice this faith; let them learn to do and to refrain from everything with this unwavering belief; then they will discover how much work lies ahead and how entirely everything is rooted in faith; how they can never allow themselves to become idle, because even their idleness must be an exercise and act of faith. In short, nothing can exist or occur within us, and nothing can happen to us that isn’t good and valuable if we believe (as we should) that all things please God. St. Paul says, "Dear brethren, all that you do, whether you eat or drink, do everything in the Name of Jesus Christ, our Lord." [1 Cor. 10:31] And it can’t be done in this Name unless it is done with this faith. Similarly, Romans viii states: "We know that all things work together for good for the saints of God." [Rom. 8:26]
Therefore, when some say that good works are forbidden when we preach faith alone, it is as if I said to a sick man: "If you had health, you would have the use of all your limbs; but without health, the works of all your limbs are nothing"; and he wanted to infer that I had forbidden the works of all his limbs; whereas, on the contrary, I meant that he must first have health, which will work all the works of all the members. So faith also must be in all works the master-workman and captain, or they are nothing at all.
Therefore, when some people say that good works are not allowed when we preach faith alone, it’s like I told a sick person: "If you were healthy, you would be able to use all your limbs; but without health, the actions of your limbs mean nothing." And then he mistakenly concluded that I had prohibited the use of his limbs; however, what I actually meant was that he needs to be healthy first, which will enable him to use all his limbs properly. Similarly, faith must be the driving force and leader in all actions, or else they are completely meaningless.
[Sidenote: Why Laws are Given]
[Sidenote: Why Laws Matter]
XIV. You might say: "Why then do we have so many laws of the Church and of the State, and many ceremonies of churches, monastic houses, holy places, which urge and tempt men to good works, if faith does all things through the First Commandment?" I answer; Simply because we do not all have faith or do not heed it. If every man had faith, we would need no more laws, but every one would of himself at all times do good works, as his confidence in God teaches him.
XIV. You might ask, "Why do we have so many laws from the Church and the State, along with various ceremonies in churches, monasteries, and holy places, that encourage and motivate people to do good works if faith handles everything through the First Commandment?" I respond: It's simply because not everyone has faith or pays attention to it. If every person had faith, we wouldn’t need any more laws; everyone would naturally do good works at all times, as their trust in God guides them.
[Sidenote: Four Kinds of Men]
[Sidenote: Four Types of Men]
But now there are four kinds of men: the first, just mentioned, who need no law, of whom St. Paul says, I. Timothy "The law is not made for a righteous man," [1 Tim. 1:9] that is, for the believer, but believers of themselves do what they know and can do, only because they finally trust that God's favor and grace rests upon them in all things. The second class want to abuse this freedom, put a false confidence in it, and grow lazy; of whom St. Peter says, I. Peter ii, "Ye shall live as free men, but not using your liberty for a cloak of maliciousness," [1 Pet. 2:16] as if he said: The freedom of faith does not permit sins, nor will it cover them, but it sets us free to do all manner of good works and to endure all things as they happen to us, so that a man is not bound only to one work or to a few. So also St. Paul, Galatians v: "Use not your liberty for an occasion to the flesh." [Gal. 5:13] Such men must be urged by laws and hemmed in by teaching and exhortation. The third class are wicked men, always ready for sins; these must be constrained by spiritual and temporal laws, like wild horses and dogs, and where this does not help, they must be put to death by the worldly sword, as St. Paul says, Romans xiii: "The worldly ruler bears the sword, and serves God with it, not as a terror to the good, but to the evil." [Rom. 13:3 f.] The fourth class, who are still lusty, and childish in their understanding of faith and of the spiritual life, must be coaxed like young children and tempted with external, definite and prescribed decorations, with reading, praying, fasting, singing, adorning of churches, organ-playing, and such other things as are commanded and observed in monastic houses and churches, until they also learn to know the faith. Although there is great danger here, when the rulers, as is now, alas! the case, busy themselves with and insist upon such ceremonies and external works as if they were the true works, and neglect faith, which they ought always to teach along with these works, just as a mother gives her child other food along with the milk, until the child can eat the strong food by itself.
But now there are four types of people: the first type, as mentioned, needs no law. St. Paul states in 1 Timothy, "The law is not made for a righteous man," [1 Tim. 1:9] meaning for the believer. Believers naturally do what they know and can do, simply because they trust that God's favor and grace are with them in all things. The second group wants to misuse this freedom, putting false confidence in it, and becoming lazy. St. Peter says in 1 Peter, "You shall live as free men, but not using your liberty as a cover for maliciousness," [1 Pet. 2:16] as if he means: The freedom of faith doesn’t allow sin or cover it up; instead, it empowers us to do good works and endure everything that happens to us, so that a person isn’t limited to just one task or a few. St. Paul also says in Galatians: "Do not use your liberty as an opportunity for the flesh." [Gal. 5:13] Such people need to be guided by laws and held in check by teachings and encouragement. The third group consists of wicked people, always ready to sin; they must be restrained by spiritual and secular laws, like wild horses and dogs. When that doesn't work, they should face punishment from the governing authorities, as St. Paul says in Romans: "The ruler does not bear the sword in vain, but is God's servant, an avenger who brings wrath on the wrongdoer." [Rom. 13:3 f.] The fourth type consists of those who are still immature and naive about faith and spiritual life, needing to be gently guided like young children and encouraged with external, clear rituals—like reading, praying, fasting, singing, beautifying churches, playing the organ, and other practices commanded in monasteries and churches—until they understand faith themselves. Although there’s a significant risk here, especially when leaders focus on such ceremonies and external actions as if they are the true works, neglecting the faith they should teach alongside these actions, much like how a mother provides her child with different foods along with milk until the child can handle solid food on their own.
[Sidenote: Charity Endures Unnecessary Works]
Charity Endures Unnecessary Tasks
XV. Since, then, we are not all alike, we must tolerate such people, share their observances and burdens, and not despise them, but teach them the true way of faith. So St. Paul teaches, Romans xiv: "Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, to teach him." [Rom. 14:1] And so he did himself, I. Corinthians ix: "To them that are under the law, I became as under the law, although I was not under the law." [1 Cor. 9:20] And Christ, Matthew xvii, when He was asked to pay tribute, which He was not obligated to pay, argues with St. Peter, whether the children of kings must give tribute, or only other people. St. Peter answers; "Only other people." Christ said: "Then are the children of kings free; notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first Cometh up; and in his mouth thou shalt find apiece of money; take that and give it for me and thee." [Matt. 17:25]
XV. Since we’re all different, we need to accept each other, share in their practices and challenges, and not look down on them, but guide them in the true faith. This is what St. Paul teaches in Romans xiv: "Welcome those who are weak in faith, to teach them." [Rom. 14:1] He lived this way himself, as he says in I Corinthians ix: "To those under the law, I became like one under the law, even though I’m not under the law." [1 Cor. 9:20] And in Matthew xvii, when Jesus was asked to pay a tax that He didn't have to, He discusses with St. Peter whether the king's children have to pay taxes or just everyone else. St. Peter replies, "Only everyone else." Jesus said, "Then the king's children are free; however, to avoid offending them, go to the sea, throw in a hook, and catch the first fish that comes up; you'll find a coin in its mouth. Take that and pay the tax for both of us." [Matt. 17:25]
Here we see that all works and things are free to a Christian through his faith; and yet, because the others do not yet believe, he observes and bears with them what he is not obligated to do. But this he does freely, for he is certain that this is pleasing to God, and he does it willingly, accepts it as any other free work which comes to his hand without his choice, because he desires and seeks no more than that he may in his faith do works to please God.[15]
Here we see that all actions and things are available to a Christian through his faith; however, since others do not believe yet, he patiently observes and tolerates what he isn’t required to do. But he does this freely, because he is sure that it pleases God, and he willingly accepts it as any other worthwhile task that comes his way without his choosing, as he desires and seeks nothing more than to do works that please God through his faith.[15]
But since in this discourse we have undertaken to teach what righteous and good works are, and are now speaking of the highest work, it is clear that we do not speak of the second, third and fourth classes of men, but of the first, into whose likeness all the others are to grow, and until they do so the first class must endure and instruct them. Therefore we must not despise, as if they were hopeless, these men of weak faith, who would gladly do right and learn, and yet cannot understand because of the ceremonies to which they cling; we must rather blame their ignorant, blind teachers, who have never taught them the faith, and have led them so deeply into works. They must be gently and gradually led back again to faith, as a sick man is treated, and must be allowed for a time, for their conscience sake, to cling to some works and do them as necessary to salvation, so long as they rightly grasp the faith; lest if we try to tear them out so suddenly, their weak consciences be quite shattered and confused, and retain neither faith nor works. But the hardheaded, who, hardened in their works, have no heed to what is said of faith, and fight against it, these we must, as Christ did and taught, let go their way, that the blind may lead the blind.
But since in this discussion we’re trying to teach what good and righteous actions are, and we’re focusing on the most important work, it’s clear that we’re not talking about the second, third, or fourth categories of people, but rather about the first group, which all others should aspire to emulate. Until they do, the first group must be patient and guide them. Therefore, we shouldn’t look down on those with weak faith as if they are beyond help; these individuals genuinely want to do the right thing and learn but struggle to understand because of the traditions they cling to. Instead, we should hold accountable their uninformed and misguided teachers, who have never truly educated them about faith and have instead focused them too much on actions. They need to be gently and gradually brought back to faith, just like a sick person is treated. For a while, to ease their conscience, they should be allowed to engage in certain actions that they believe are essential for salvation, as long as they also understand the true faith. If we try to pull them away too quickly, their fragile consciences might break and leave them without faith or good works. However, those who are stubborn and set in their ways, ignoring what is said about faith and resisting it, we must, as Christ did and taught, allow to continue on their path, letting the blind lead the blind.
[Sidenote: The Contradiction of Faith and Daily Sins]
[Sidenote: The Contradiction of Faith and Daily Sins]
XVI. But you say: How can I trust surely that all my works are pleasing to God, when at times I fall, and talk, eat, drink and sleep too much, or otherwise transgress, as I cannot help doing? Answer: This question shows that you still regard faith as a work among other works, and do not set it above all works. For it is the highest work for this very reason, because it remains and blots out these daily sins by not doubting that God is so kind to you as to wink at such daily transgression and weakness. Aye, even if a deadly sin should occur (which, however, never or rarely happens to those who live in faith and trust toward God), yet faith rises again and does not doubt that Sin is already gone; as it is written I. John ii: "My little children, these things I write unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an Advocate with God the Father, Jesus Christ, Who is the propitiation of all our sins." [1 John 2:1] And Wisdom xv: "For if we sin, we are Thine, knowing Thy power." [Wis. 15:2] And Proverbs xxiv: "For a just man falleth seven times, and riseth up again." [Prov. 24:16] Yes, this confidence and faith must be so high and strong that the man knows that all his life and works are nothing but damnable sins before God's judgment, as it is written, Psalm cxliii: "In thy sight no man living be justified" [Ps. 143:2]; and he must entirely despair of his works, believing that they cannot be good except through this faith, which looks for no judgment, but only for pure grace, favor, kindness and mercy, like David, Psalm xxvi: "Thy loving kindness is ever before mine eyes, and I have trusted in Thy truth" [Ps. 26:3]; Psalm iv: "The light of Thy countenance is lift up upon us (that is, the knowledge of Thy grace through faith), and thereby hast Thou put gladness in my heart" [Ps. 4:7]; for as faith trusts, so it receives.
XVI. But you might ask: How can I be sure that all my actions please God when I sometimes slip up and indulge in talking, eating, drinking, and sleeping too much, or otherwise mess up, which I can’t help doing? Answer: This question indicates that you still view faith as just one of many actions, rather than as the most important one. Faith is the greatest work precisely because it endures and wipes out these daily sins by believing wholeheartedly that God is generous enough to overlook these everyday mistakes and weaknesses. Yes, even if a serious sin were to happen (which, however, rarely occurs for those who live with faith and trust in God), faith rises again and does not doubt that the sin is already gone; as it is written in 1 John 2: "My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ, who is the atoning sacrifice for our sins." [1 John 2:1] And Wisdom 15: "For if we sin, we belong to You, knowing Your power." [Wis. 15:2] And Proverbs 24: "For a righteous person falls seven times and rises again." [Prov. 24:16] Yes, this confidence and faith must be so strong that a person acknowledges that all their life and actions are nothing but sinful before God's judgment, as it is written in Psalm 143: "In Your sight no living person can be justified" [Ps. 143:2]; and they must completely lose hope in their actions, believing that they can only be good through this faith, which expects no judgment but only pure grace, favor, kindness, and mercy, like David says in Psalm 26: "Your loving kindness is always before my eyes, and I have trusted in Your truth" [Ps. 26:3]; Psalm 4: "The light of Your countenance shines upon us (meaning the knowledge of Your grace through faith), and that alone brings joy to my heart" [Ps. 4:7]; for as faith trusts, so it receives.
See, thus are works forgiven, are without guilt and are good, not by their own nature, but by the mercy and grace of God because of the faith which trusts on the mercy of God. Therefore we must fear because of the works, but comfort ourselves because of the grace of God, as it is written, Psalm cxlvii: "The Lord taketh pleasure in them that fear Him, in those that hope in His mercy." [Ps. 147:11] So we pray with perfect confidence: "Our Father," and yet petition: "Forgive us our trespasses"; we are children and yet sinners; are acceptable and yet do not do enough; and all this is the work of faith, firmly grounded in God's grace.
See, works are forgiven, free of guilt, and considered good, not because of their own nature, but through God's mercy and grace due to faith that relies on this mercy. Therefore, we should be cautious about our actions, but also find comfort in God's grace, as it is written in Psalm 147: "The Lord takes pleasure in those who fear Him, in those who put their hope in His mercy." [Ps. 147:11] So we pray with complete confidence: "Our Father," and at the same time ask: "Forgive us our trespasses"; we are children but also sinners; we are accepted yet we fall short; and all of this stems from faith, firmly rooted in God's grace.
[Sidenote: The Source of Faith]
[Sidenote: The Origin of Faith]
XVII. But if you ask, where the faith and the confidence can be found and whence they come, this it is certainly most necessary to know. First: Without doubt faith does not come from your works or merit, but alone from Jesus Christ, and is freely promised and given; as St. Paid writes, Romans v: "God commendeth His love to us as exceeding sweet and kindly, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us" [Rom. 5:8]; as if he said: "Ought not this give us a strong unconquerable confidence, that before we prayed or cared for it, yes, while we still continually walked in sins, Christ dies for our sin?" St. Paul concludes; "If while we were yet sinners Christ died for us, how much more then, being justified by His blood, shall we be saved from wrath through Him; and if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by His life."
XVII. But if you ask where faith and confidence come from, it's definitely important to know. First, faith does not come from what you do or your merits, but solely from Jesus Christ, and it is freely promised and given. As St. Paul writes in Romans 5: "God shows His love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us" [Rom. 5:8]; as if to say: "Shouldn't this give us strong, unshakeable confidence that before we even prayed or cared, yes, even while we were still sinning, Christ died for our sins?" St. Paul concludes, "If while we were still sinners Christ died for us, how much more, being justified by His blood, will we be saved from wrath through Him; and if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son, how much more, having been reconciled, will we be saved by His life."
Lo! thus must thou form Christ within thyself and see how in Him God holds before thee and offers thee His mercy without any previous merits of thine own, and from such a view of His grace must thou draw faith and confidence of the forgiveness of all thy sins. Faith, therefore, does not begin with works, neither do they create it, but it must spring up and flow from the blood, wounds and death of Christ, if thou see in these that God is so kindly affectioned toward thee that He gives even His Son for thee, then thy heart also must in its turn grow sweet and kindly affectioned toward God, and so thy confidence must grow out of pure good-will and love—God's love toward thee and thine toward God. We never read that the Holy Spirit was given to any one when he did works, but always what men have heard the Gospel of Christ and the mercy of God. From this same Word and from no other source must faith still come, even in our day and always. For Christ is the rock out of which men suck oil and honey, as Moses says, Deuteronomy xxxii. [Deut. 32:13]
Hey! This is how you should nurture Christ within yourself and see how, through Him, God presents and offers you His mercy without any need for prior accomplishments on your part. From this perspective of His grace, you should draw faith and confidence in the forgiveness of all your sins. Therefore, faith doesn’t start with good deeds, nor do those deeds create it; rather, it must arise and flow from the blood, wounds, and death of Christ. If you see in these how kindly God cares for you by even giving His Son for you, then your heart should also warm and grow loving towards God. Thus, your confidence should stem from pure goodwill and love—God’s love for you and your love for God. We never read that the Holy Spirit was given to anyone because of their works, but always to those who have heard the Gospel of Christ and God's mercy. From this same Word, and no other source, must faith continue to come, even today and always. For Christ is the rock from which people draw oil and honey, as Moses says in Deuteronomy 32:13.
[Sidenote: The Second Commandment]
[Side Note: The Second Commandment]
XVII. So far we have treated of the first work and of the First Commandment, but very briefly, plainly and hastily, for very much might be said of it. We will now trace the works farther through the following Commandments.
XVII. Until now, we have discussed the first work and the First Commandment, but we did so very briefly, simply, and quickly, as there is a lot more that could be said about it. We will now explore the works further through the following Commandments.
[Sidenote: The Second Commandment]
The Second Commandment
The second work, next to faith, is the work of the Second Commandment, that we shall honor God's Name and not take it in vain. This, like all the other works, cannot be done without faith; and if it is done without faith, it is all sham and show. After faith we can do no greater work than to praise, preach, sing and in every way exalt and magnify God's glory, honor and Name.
The second task, following faith, is the work of the Second Commandment, which calls us to honor God's Name and not misuse it. This, like all the other tasks, cannot be accomplished without faith; and if done without faith, it’s just empty and superficial. After faith, there's no greater act than to praise, preach, sing, and in every way uplift and magnify God's glory, honor, and Name.
And although I have said above,[16] and it is true, that there is no difference in works where faith is and does the work, yet this is true only when they are compared with faith and its works. Measured by one another there is a difference, and one is higher than the other. Just as in the body the members do not differ when compared with health, and health works in the one as much as in the other; yet the works of the members are different, and one is higher, nobler, more useful than the other [Rom. 12:4, 1 Cor. 12]; so, here also, to praise God's glory and Name is better than the works of the other Commandments which follow; and yet it must be done in the same faith as all the others.
And even though I've mentioned earlier,[16] and it's true, that there’s no difference in actions where faith is present and at work, this only holds when we compare them to faith and its actions. When measured against each other, there's a difference, and one is greater than the other. Just like in the body, the parts don’t differ when looked at through the lens of health, and health operates in each part equally; however, the actions of the parts are different, and one is greater, nobler, or more useful than another [Rom. 12:4, 1 Cor. 12]; similarly, praising God's glory and name is superior to the actions of the other commandments that come after it, yet it must be done with the same faith as all the others.
But I know well that this work is lightly esteemed, and has indeed become unknown. Therefore we must examine it further, and will say no more about the necessity of doing it in the faith and confidence that it pleases God. Indeed there is no work in which confidence and faith are so much experienced and felt as in honoring God's Name; and it greatly helps to strengthen and increase faith, although all works also help to do this, as St. Peter says, II. Peter i: "Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence through good works to make your calling and election sure."
But I know that this work is not highly regarded and has actually become obscure. So, we need to look into it more deeply, and I won’t say anything more about the importance of doing so, trusting that it pleases God. There’s truly no task where confidence and faith are felt as strongly as in honoring God's Name; it greatly helps to strengthen and build our faith, though all actions contribute to this, as St. Peter says in II Peter i: "Therefore, brothers, make every effort to confirm your calling and election through good works."
[Sidenote: Its Positive Works]
[Note: Its Positive Effects]
XIX. The First Commandment forbids us to have other gods, and thereby commands that we have a God, the true God, by a firm faith, trust, confidence, hope and love, which are the only works whereby a man can have, honor and keep a God; for by no other work can one find or lose God except by faith or unbelief, by trusting or doubting; of the other works none reaches quite to God. So also in the Second Commandment we are forbidden to use His Name in vain. Yet this is not to be enough, but we are thereby also commanded to honor, call upon, glorify, preach and praise His Name. And indeed it is impossible that God's Name should not be dishonored where it is not rightly honored. For although it be honored with the lips, bending of the knees, kissing and other postures, if this is not done in the heart by faith, in confident trust in God's grace, it is nothing else than an evidence and badge of hypocrisy.
XIX. The First Commandment tells us not to have other gods and instead commands us to have one true God through strong faith, trust, confidence, hope, and love. These are the only ways we can have, honor, and keep a God; no other actions can help us find or lose God except through faith or doubt, trust or skepticism—nothing else truly connects us to God. Similarly, the Second Commandment prohibits misusing His Name. But this goes beyond just avoiding misuse; we are also commanded to honor, call upon, glorify, preach, and praise His Name. In fact, it’s impossible for God’s Name to be honored where it isn’t properly respected. Even if we show honor with our words, gestures, kneeling, or other actions, if it’s not rooted in genuine faith and trust in God’s grace, it simply becomes a sign of hypocrisy.
See now, how many kinds of good works a man can do under this Commandment at all times and never be without the good works of this Commandment, if he will; so that he truly need not make a long pilgrimage or seek holy places. For, tell me, what moment can pass in which we do not without ceasing receive God's blessings, or, on the other hand, suffer adversity? But what else are God's blessings and adversities than a constant urging and stirring up to praise, honor, and bless God, and to call upon His Name? Now if you had nothing else at all to do, would you not have enough to do with this Commandment alone, that you without ceasing bless, sing, praise and honor God's Name? And for what other purpose have tongue, voice, language and mouth been created? As Psalm li. says: "Lord, open Thou my lips, and my mouth shall show forth Thy praise." [Ps. 51:15] Again: "My tongue shall sing aloud of Thy mercy." [Ps. 51:14]
Look at how many types of good deeds a person can perform under this Commandment at all times and always have these good works available if they choose to. They really don’t need to take a long journey or visit holy places. Tell me, what moment goes by without us constantly receiving God’s blessings or, on the flip side, facing hardships? But aren’t God’s blessings and adversities just constant reminders to praise, honor, and bless God, and to call on His Name? If you had nothing else to do, wouldn’t you find this Commandment enough, to continuously bless, sing, praise, and honor God’s Name? For what other reason have we been given tongue, voice, language, and mouth? As Psalm 51 says: "Lord, open my lips, and my mouth will proclaim Your praise." [Ps. 51:15] And again: "My tongue will sing of Your mercy." [Ps. 51:14]
What work is there in heaven except that of this Second Commandment? As it is written in Psalm lxxxiv: "Blessed are they that dwell in Thy house: they will be for ever praising Thee." [Ps. 84:4] So also David says in Psalm xxxiv: "God's praise shall be continually in my mouth." [Ps. 34:1] And St. Paul, I. Corinthians x: "Whether therefore ye eat or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God." [1 Cor. 10:31] Also Colossians iii: "Whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the Name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father." [Col. 3:17] If we were to observe this work, we would have a heaven here on earth and always have enough to do, as have the saints in heaven.
What work is there in heaven other than this Second Commandment? As it says in Psalm 84: "Blessed are those who live in Your house: they will be forever praising You." [Ps. 84:4] David also says in Psalm 34: "God's praise will always be on my lips." [Ps. 34:1] And St. Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 10: "So whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do everything for the glory of God." [1 Cor. 10:31] Similarly, in Colossians 3: "Whatever you do in word or deed, do everything in the Name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father." [Col. 3:17] If we were to focus on this work, we would create a heaven here on earth and always have plenty to do, just like the saints in heaven.
[Sidenote: The Praise of God]
[Praise for God]
XX. On this is based the wonderful and righteous judgment of God, that at times a poor man, in whom no one can see many great works, in the privacy of his home joyfully praises God when he fares well, or with entire confidence calls upon Him when he fares ill, and thereby does a greater and more acceptable work than another, who fasts much, prays much, endows churches, makes pilgrimages, and burdens himself with great deeds in this place and in that. Such a fool opens wide his mouth, looks for great works to do, and is so blinded that he does not at all notice this greatest work, and praising God is in his eyes a very small matter compared with the great idea he has formed of the works of his own devising, in which he perhaps praises himself more than God, or takes more pleasure in them than he does in God; and thus with his good works he storms against the Second Commandment and its works. Of all this we have an illustration in the case of the Pharisee and the Publican in the Gospel. [Luke 18:10 f.] For the sinner calls upon God in his sins, and praises Him, and so has hit upon the two highest Commandments, faith and God's honor. The hypocrite misses both and struts about with other good works by which he praises himself and not God, and puts his trust in himself more than in God. Therefore he is justly rejected and the other chosen.
XX. This is the foundation for God’s amazing and just judgment: sometimes a poor man, who doesn’t seem to have many achievements, quietly rejoices in God when things go well for him, or confidently calls on Him when times are tough. In doing so, he accomplishes a greater and more honorable act than someone who fasts a lot, prays a lot, donates to churches, makes pilgrimages, and burdens himself with impressive deeds here and there. That person is so caught up in looking for grand accomplishments that he completely overlooks this greatest work. To him, praising God seems like a minor task compared to the grand ideas he has created for his own actions, where he might actually be praising himself more than God, or finding more joy in his works than in God. In doing this, he defies the Second Commandment and its principles. We see a clear example of this in the story of the Pharisee and the Publican in the Gospel. [Luke 18:10 f.] The sinner calls out to God despite his sins and honors Him, thus embodying the two greatest Commandments: faith and God’s honor. The hypocrite, on the other hand, misses both and struts around with various good deeds that end up glorifying himself rather than God, placing his trust in himself more than in God. Therefore, he is rightly rejected while the other is chosen.
The reason of all this is that the higher and better the works are, the less show they make; and that every one thinks they are easy, because it is evident that no one pretends to praise God's Name and honor so much as the very men who never do it and with their show of doing it, while the heart is without faith, cause the precious work to be despised. So that the Apostle St. Paul dare say boldly, Romans ii, that they blaspheme God's Name who make their boast of God's Law. [Rom. 2:23] For to name the Name of God and to write His honor on paper and on the walls is an easy matter; but genuinely to praise and bless Him in His good deeds and confidently to call upon Him in all adversities, these are truly the most rare, highest works, next to faith, so that if we were to see how few of them there are in Christendom, we might despair for very sorrow. And yet there is a constant increase of high, pretty, shining works of men's devising, or of works which look like these true works, but at bottom are all without faith and without faithfulness; in short, there is nothing good back of them. Thus also Isaiah xlviii. rebukes the people of Israel: "Hear ye this, ye which are called by the name of Israel, which swear by the Name of the Lord, and make mention of the God of Israel neither in truth, nor in righteousness" [Is. 48:1]; that is, they did it not in the true faith and confidence, which is the real truth and righteousness, but trusted in themselves, their works and powers, and yet called upon God's Name and praised Him, two things which do not fit together.
The reason for all this is that the higher and better the works are, the less attention they get; and everyone thinks they are easy because it’s clear that those who boast the most about honoring God’s Name are often the ones who never do it. Their outward show of doing so, while their hearts lack faith, leads to the precious work being undervalued. That’s why the Apostle St. Paul confidently states in Romans ii that those who brag about God’s Law are blaspheming God’s Name. [Rom. 2:23] It's easy to mention God's Name and write His honor on paper and walls, but genuinely praising and blessing Him for His good deeds and confidently calling on Him in times of trouble are truly some of the rarest and highest works, alongside faith. If we were to really look at how few there are in Christendom, we might feel utterly discouraged. And yet, there’s a constant rise in impressive, flashy works created by people, or works that look like these true ones but ultimately lack faith and sincerity; in short, there’s nothing good behind them. Similarly, Isaiah xlviii calls out the people of Israel: "Listen to this, you who are called by the name of Israel, who swear by the Name of the Lord, and mention the God of Israel neither in truth nor in righteousness." [Is. 48:1]; meaning they didn't do it with true faith and confidence, which is the essence of truth and righteousness, but relied on themselves and their own efforts while still calling upon God's Name and praising Him—two things that just don't align.
XXI. The first work of this Commandment then is, to praise God in all His benefits, which are innumerable, so that such praise and thanksgiving ought also of right never to cease or end. For who can praise Him perfectly for the gift of natural life, not to mention all other temporal and eternal blessings? And so through this one part of the Commandment man is overwhelmed with good and precious works; if he do these in true faith, he has indeed not lived in vain. And in this matter none sin so much as the most resplendent saints, who are pleased with themselves and like to praise themselves or to hear themselves praised, honored and glorified before men.
XXI. The main purpose of this Commandment is to praise God for all His countless benefits, which means that such praise and gratitude should never stop. Who can truly praise Him for the gift of life, let alone all the other temporary and eternal blessings? Through this part of the Commandment, a person is filled with good and valuable deeds; if he does these with genuine faith, he has certainly not lived in vain. In this regard, no one sins more than the most shining saints, who are pleased with themselves and enjoy praising themselves or hearing others praise, honor, and glorify them in front of others.
[Sidenote: Avoiding the Praise of Self]
[Sidenote: Avoiding the Praise of Self]
Therefore the second work of this Commandment is, to be on one's guard, to flee from and to avoid all temporal honor and praise, and never to seek a name for oneself, or fame and a great reputation, that every one sing of him and tell of him; which is an exceedingly dangerous sin, and yet the most common of all, and, alas! little regarded. Every one wants to be of importance and not to be the least, however small he may be; so deeply is nature sunk in the evil of its own conceit and in its self-confidence contrary to these two first Commandments.
Therefore, the second obligation of this Commandment is to stay alert, to run away from and avoid all worldly honor and praise, and never to seek a name for oneself, or fame and a big reputation, wanting everyone to talk about and recognize them. This is an extremely dangerous sin, yet it's the most common of all, and sadly, it’s often overlooked. Everyone wants to be important and not be the least significant, no matter how small they might be; such is the depth of human nature's pride and self-confidence that goes against these first two Commandments.
Now the world regards this terrible vice as the highest virtue, and this makes it exceedingly dangerous for those who do not understand and have not had experience of God's Commandments and the histories of the Holy Scriptures, to read or hear the heathen books and histories. For all heathen books are poisoned through and through with this striving after praise and honor; in them men are taught by blind reason that they were not nor could be men of power and worth, who are not moved by praise and honor; but those are counted the best, who disregard body and life, friend and property and everything in the effort to win praise and honor. All the holy Fathers have complained of this vice and with one mind conclude that it is the very last vice to be overcome, St, Augustine says: "All other vices are practised in evil works; only honor and self-satisfaction are practised in and by means of good works."
Now, the world sees this terrible vice as the highest virtue, which makes it extremely dangerous for those who do not understand or have not experienced God's Commandments and the stories of the Holy Scriptures to read or hear the writings of non-believers. All non-believer texts are thoroughly tainted by this pursuit of praise and honor; they teach people through misguided reasoning that those who are not motivated by praise and honor cannot be powerful or valuable. Instead, those who disregard their bodies and lives, friends, property, and everything else in the quest for praise and honor are considered the best. All the holy Fathers have spoken out against this vice and unanimously agree that it’s the last vice to conquer. St. Augustine states: "All other vices are practiced through evil works; only honor and self-satisfaction are practiced through and by means of good works."
Therefore if a man had nothing else to do except this second work of this Commandment, he would yet have to work all his life-time in order to fight this vice and drive it out, so common, so subtle, so quick and insidious is it. Now we all pass by this good work and exercise ourselves in many other lesser good works, nay, through other good works we overthrow this and forget it entirely. So the holy Name of God, which alone should be honored, is taken in vain and dishonored through our own cursed name, self-approval and honor-seeking. And this sin is more grievous before God than murder and adultery; but its wickedness is not so clearly seen as that of murder, because of its subtilty, for it is not accomplished in the coarse flesh, but in the spirit.
Therefore, if a person had nothing else to do except this second aspect of this Commandment, they would still have to work their entire life to combat this vice and eliminate it, as it is so common, so subtle, so quick, and so insidious. We all overlook this important task and focus instead on many other lesser good deeds; in fact, through these other good deeds, we undermine and completely forget this one. The holy Name of God, which should be the only name honored, is disrespected and tarnished by our own cursed names—our self-approval and desire for recognition. This sin is more serious in the eyes of God than murder and adultery; however, its wickedness is less obvious than that of murder because of its subtlety; it doesn’t manifest in the physical body but in the spirit.
[Sidenote: The Seeking of Honor as a Motive for Good]
[Sidenote: The Pursuit of Honor as a Reason for Good]
XXII. Some think it is good for young people that they be enticed by reputation and honor, and again by shame and dishonor, and so be induced to do good. For there are many who do the good and leave the evil undone out of fear of shame and love of honor, and so do what they would otherwise by no means do or leave undone. These I leave to their opinion. But at present we are seeking how true good works are to be done, and they who are inclined to do them surely do not need to be driven by the fear of shame and the love of honor; they have, and are to have a higher and far nobler incentive, namely, God's commandment, God's fear, God's approval, and their faith and love toward God. They who have not, or regard not this motive, and let shame and honor drive them, these also have their reward, [Matt. 6:2] as the Lord says, Matthew vi; and as the motive, so is also the work and the reward: none of them is good, except only in the eyes of the world.
XXII. Some people believe it's beneficial for young individuals to be motivated by reputation and honor, as well as by shame and dishonor, leading them to do good. Many do good and avoid wrongdoing out of fear of shame and a desire for honor, accomplishing things they wouldn't normally do or avoiding actions they typically would. I'll leave that opinion for them to consider. However, right now, we're trying to understand how to genuinely perform good deeds. Those inclined to do good shouldn't need to be driven by fear of shame or desire for honor; they should have, and strive for, a much higher and nobler motivation: God's command, God's fear, God's approval, along with their faith and love for God. Those who lack this motivation or disregard it, allowing shame and honor to drive them, will still receive their reward, as the Lord says in Matthew 6:2; and just as the motivation determines the quality of the work, so does the reward: none are truly good except in the eyes of the world.
Now I hold that a young person could be more easily trained and incited by God's fear and commandments than by any other means. Yet where these do not help, we must ensure that they do the good and leave the evil for the sake of shame and of honor, just as we must also endure wicked men or the imperfect, of whom we spoke above; nor can we do more than tell them that their works are not satisfactory and right before God, and so leave them until they learn to do right for the sake of God's commandments also. Just as young children are induced to pray, fast, learn, etc., by gifts and promises of the parents, even though it would not be good to treat them so all their lives, so that they never learn to do good in the fear of God: far worse, if they become accustomed to do good for the sake of praise and honor.
Now I believe that a young person can be more easily guided and motivated by the fear of God and His commandments than by any other approach. However, if that doesn’t work, we need to ensure they do good and avoid evil out of a sense of shame and honor, just like we have to tolerate wicked or imperfect people, as mentioned earlier. All we can do is point out that their actions are not acceptable and right before God, and then let them be until they understand how to do right for the sake of God's commandments too. Just as young children are encouraged to pray, fast, learn, and so on, by their parents' gifts and promises, it wouldn’t be good to raise them that way for their entire lives, so they never learn to do good out of a genuine fear of God. It’s even worse if they become used to doing good just for praise and recognition.
[Sidenote: The Need and the Danger of a Good Name]
[Sidenote: The Need and the Danger of a Good Name]
XXIII. But this is true, that we must none the less have a good name and honor, and every one ought so to live that nothing evil can be said of him, and that he give offence to no one, as St. Paul says, Romans xii: "We are to be zealous to do good, not only before God, but also before all men." [Rom. 12:17] And II. Corinthians iv: "We walk so honestly that no man knows anything against us." [2 Cor. 4:2] But there must be great diligence and care, lest such honor and good name puff up the heart, and the heart find pleasure in them. Here the saying of Solomon holds: "As the fire in the furnace proveth the gold, so man is proved by the mouth of him that praises him." [Prov. 27:21] Few and most spiritual men must they be, who, when honored and praised, remain indifferent and unchanged, so that they do not care for it, nor feel pride and pleasure in it, but remain entirely free, ascribe all their honor and fame to God, offering it to Him alone, and using it only to the glory of God, to the edification of their neighbors, and in no way to their own benefit or advantage; so that a man trust not in his own honor, nor exalt himself above the most incapable, demised man on earth, but acknowledge himself a servant of God, Who has given him the honor in order that with it he may serve God and his neighbor, just as if He had commanded him to distribute some gulden[17] to the poor for His sake. So He says, Matthew v: "Your light shall shine before men, so that they may see your good works and glorify your Father Who is in heaven." [Matt. 5:16] He does not say, "they shall praise you," but "your works shall only serve them to edification, that through them they may praise God in you and in themselves." This is the correct use of God's Name and honor, when God is thereby praised through the edification of others. And if men want to praise us and not God in us, we are not to endure it, but with all our powers forbid it and flee from it as from the most grievous sin and robbery of divine honor.
XXIII. But it’s still true that we need to have a good name and honor, and everyone should live in a way that nothing bad can be said about them, and that they don't offend anyone, as St. Paul says in Romans 12: "We should be eager to do good, not just in front of God, but also in front of everyone." [Rom. 12:17] And in 2 Corinthians 4: "We conduct ourselves so honestly that no one has anything against us." [2 Cor. 4:2] However, we must be very careful and diligent, so that this honor and good name don’t make us proud or feel good about ourselves. Here, Solomon's saying applies: "Just as fire in the furnace tests gold, so a person is tested by the praise of others." [Prov. 27:21] There are few truly spiritual people who, when praised and honored, remain indifferent and unchanged; they don't let it bother them or feel pride and pleasure in it, but stay completely free, giving all their honor and fame to God, offering it only to Him, and using it solely for God's glory, to build up their neighbors, and not for their own benefit. A person shouldn’t trust in their own honor or elevate themselves above the most incapable, dead man on earth, but should recognize themselves as a servant of God, who has given them that honor so they can serve God and their neighbor, just like God commanded them to distribute some gulden[17] to the poor for His sake. As He says in Matthew 5: "Your light should shine before others so they can see your good works and glorify your Father who is in heaven." [Matt. 5:16] He doesn't say, "they will praise you," but rather "your works should only serve to build them up, so that they may praise God in you and within themselves." This is the right way to honor God's name, when God is praised through the edification of others. And if people want to praise us instead of God in us, we shouldn't tolerate it; we should, with all our strength, reject it and avoid it like the most serious sin and theft of divine honor.
[Sidenote: The Profitableness of Dishonor]
The Profitability of Dishonor
XXIV. Hence it comes that God frequently permits a man to fall into or remain in grievous sin, in order that he may be put to shame in his own eyes and in the eyes of all men, who otherwise could not have kept himself from this great vice of vain honor and fame, if he had remained constant in his great gifts and virtues; so God must ward off this sin by means of other grievous sins, that His Name alone may be honored; and thus one sin becomes the other's medicine, because of our perverse wickedness, which not only does the evil, but also misuses all that is good.
XXIV. This is why God often allows a person to fall into or stay in serious sin, so that they can feel ashamed both in their own eyes and in the views of others. Otherwise, they might not have been able to avoid the major vice of seeking vain honor and fame if they had remained steadfast in their significant gifts and virtues. Therefore, God must protect against this sin by allowing other serious sins, so that His Name alone may be honored. In this way, one sin acts as a remedy for another, due to our twisted wickedness, which not only commits evil but also misuses everything that is good.
Now see how much a man has to do, if he would do good works, which always are at hand in great number, and with which he is surrounded on all sides; but, alas! because of his blindness, he passes them by and seeks and runs after others of his own devising and pleasure, against which no man can sufficiently speak and no man can sufficiently guard. With this all the prophets had to contend, and for this reason they were all slain, only because they rejected such self-devised works and preached only God's commandments, as one of them says, Jeremiah vii: "Thus saith the God of Israel unto you: Take your burnt-offerings unto all your sacrifices and eat your burnt-offerings and you yourselves; for concerning these things I have commanded nothing, but this thing commanded I you: Obey My voice (that is, not what seems right and good to you, but what I bid you), and walk in the way that I have commanded you." [Jer. 7:21] And Deuteronomy xii: "Thou shalt not do whatsoever is right in thine own eyes, but what thy God has commanded thee." [Deut 12:8, 32]
Now see how much a person has to do if they want to do good deeds, which are always plentiful and surrounding them on all sides; but, unfortunately, because of their blindness, they overlook them and instead chase after things of their own making and enjoyment, against which no one can adequately warn or protect themselves. All the prophets faced this challenge, and that's why they were all killed—simply for rejecting such self-created actions and only preaching God's commandments. As one of them says, Jeremiah 7: "Thus says the God of Israel to you: Take your burnt offerings to all your sacrifices and eat your burnt offerings yourselves; for I have not commanded anything regarding these things, but this is what I command you: Obey My voice (meaning, not what seems right and good to you, but what I instruct you), and walk in the way that I have commanded you." [Jer. 7:21] And Deuteronomy 12: "You shall not do whatever seems right in your own eyes, but what your God has commanded you." [Deut 12:8, 32]
These and numberless like passages of Scripture are spoken to tear man not only from sins, but also from the works which seem to men to be good and right, and to turn men, with a single mind, to the simple meaning of God's commandment only, that they shall diligently observe this only and always, as it is written, Exodus xiii: "These commandments shall be for a sign unto thee upon thine hand, and for a memorial between thine eyes." [Ex. 13:9] And Psalm i: "A godly man meditates in God's Law day and night." [Ps. 1:2] For we have more than enough and too much to do, if we are to satisfy only God's commandments. He has given us such commandments that if we understand them aright, we dare not for a moment be idle, and might easily forget all other works. But the evil spirit, who never rests, when he cannot lead us to the left into evil works, fights on our right through self-devised works that seem good, but against which God has commanded, Deuteronomy xxviii, and Joshua xxiii, "Ye shall not go aside from My commandments to the right hand or to the left." [Deut 28:14, Josh. 23:6]
These and countless similar passages of Scripture are meant to pull people away not just from sin, but also from the actions that seem good and right in their eyes. They aim to direct people solely to the straightforward meaning of God's command: to stick to these commandments diligently and consistently, as it says in Exodus xiii: "These commandments shall be for a sign on your hand and a reminder between your eyes." [Ex. 13:9] And in Psalm i: "A righteous person meditates on God's Law day and night." [Ps. 1:2] We have more than enough to focus on if we are to follow God's commandments alone. He has given us such commands that, if we truly understand them, we cannot afford to be idle for even a moment and might easily forget all other tasks. However, the evil spirit, who never takes a break, when unable to lead us into wrongdoing, attacks from the other side with seemingly good works that go against God's commands, as stated in Deuteronomy xxviii and Joshua xxiii: "You shall not turn aside from My commandments to the right or to the left." [Deut 28:14, Josh. 23:6]
[Sidenote: Calling on God's Name]
[Sidenote: Praying to God]
XXV. The third work of this Commandment is to call upon God's Name in every need. For this God regards as keeping His Name holy and greatly honoring it, if we name and call upon it in adversity and need. And this is really why He sends us so much trouble, suffering, adversity and even death, and lets us live in many wicked, sinful affections, that He may thereby urge man and give him much reason to run to Him, to cry aloud to Him, to call upon His holy Name, and thus to fulfil this work of the Second Commandment, as He says in Psalm l: "Call upon Me in the day of trouble; I will deliver you and thou shalt glorify Me; for I desire the sacrifice of praise." [Ps. 50:15] And this is the way whereby thou canst come unto salvation; for through such works man perceives and learns what God's Name is, how powerful it is to help all who call upon it; and Thereby confidence and faith grow mightily, and these are the fulfilling of the first and highest Commandment. This is the experience of David, Psalm liv: "Thou hast delivered me out of all trouble, therefore will I praise Thy Name and confess that it is lovely and sweet." [Ps. 54:7] And Psalm xci says, "Because he hath set his hope upon Me, therefore will I deliver him: I will help him, because he hath known My Name." [Ps. 91:14]
XXV. The third action of this Commandment is to call on God's Name whenever we are in need. God sees this as a way to keep His Name holy and to honor it greatly when we invoke it during difficult times. This is actually why He allows us to face so much trouble, suffering, adversity, and even death. He permits us to live in many sinful desires to encourage us to turn to Him, to cry out to Him, to call on His holy Name, and thus fulfill this responsibility outlined in the Second Commandment, as stated in Psalm 50: "Call on Me in the day of trouble; I will deliver you and you will glorify Me; for I desire the sacrifice of praise." [Ps. 50:15] This is how you can achieve salvation; through such actions, one understands and learns the power of God's Name, which helps anyone who calls upon it. This builds strong confidence and faith, fulfilling the first and highest Commandment. David expresses this in Psalm 54: "You have delivered me from all trouble, therefore I will praise Your Name and declare that it is lovely and sweet." [Ps. 54:7] Psalm 91 notes, "Because he has set his hope on Me, I will deliver him; I will help him because he knows My Name." [Ps. 91:14]
[Sidenote: In Prosperity]
[Sidenote: In Wealth]
Lo! what man is there on earth, who would not all his life long have enough to do with this work? For who lives an hour without trials? I will not mention the trials of adversity, which are innumerable. For this is the most in dangerous trial of all, when there is no trial and everything is and goes well; for then a man is tempted to forget God, to become too bold and to misuse the times of prosperity. Yea, here he has ten times more need to call upon God's Name than when in adversity. Since it is written, Psalm xci, "A thousand shall fail on the left hand and ten thousand on the right hand." [Ps. 91:7]
Look! What person on earth wouldn’t spend their entire life dealing with this challenge? Who can go even an hour without facing difficulties? I won’t even mention the countless challenges that come with adversity. The most dangerous trial of all is when there are no challenges and everything is going well; that’s when a person is tempted to forget God, to become overconfident, and to misuse their times of prosperity. In fact, during those times, they need to call upon God’s name ten times more than when they’re struggling. As it is written in Psalm 91, "A thousand may fall at your side, and ten thousand at your right hand." [Ps. 91:7]
So too we see in broad day, in all men's daily experience, that more heinous sins and vice occur when there is peace, when all things are cheap and there are good times, than when war, pestilence, sicknesses and all manner of misfortune burden us; so that Moses also fears for his people, lest they forsake God's commandment for no other reason than because they are too full, too well provided for and have too much peace, as he says, Deuteronomy xxxii: "My people is waxed rich, full and fat; therefore has it forsaken its God." [Deut. 32:15] Wherefore also God let many of its enemies remain and would not drive them out, in order that they should not have peace and must exercise themselves in the keeping of God's commandments, as it is written, Judges iii [Judges 3:1 ff.]. So He deals with us also, when sends us all kinds of misfortune: so exceedingly careful is He of us, that He may teach us and drive us to honor and call upon His Name, to gain confidence and faith toward Him, and so to fulfil the first two Commandments.
We also see in broad daylight, in everyone's daily life, that more serious sins and vices happen during times of peace, when things are abundant and times are good, than during war, plagues, illnesses, and all sorts of misfortunes; this is why Moses worries for his people, fearing they might abandon God's commandments simply because they are overly comfortable, well-off, and living in peace. He states in Deuteronomy 32: "My people has become rich, full, and complacent; therefore, they have abandoned their God." [Deut. 32:15] For this reason, God allowed many of their enemies to remain and wouldn't drive them out, so they wouldn't have peace and would need to focus on keeping God's commandments, as mentioned in Judges 3 [Judges 3:1 ff.]. He treats us similarly when He sends us various misfortunes; He cares for us so much that He wants to teach us and encourage us to honor and call upon His Name, to build our confidence and faith in Him, and to fulfill the first two Commandments.
[Sidenote: The Error of Calling on Other Names]
[Sidenote: The Error of Calling on Other Names]
XXVI. Here foolish men run into danger, and especially the work-righteous saints, and those who want to be more than others; they teach men to make the sign of the cross; one arms himself with letters, another runs to the fortune-tellers; one seeks this, another that, if only they may thereby escape misfortune and be secure. It is beyond telling what a devilish allurement attaches to this trifling with sorcery, conjuring and superstition, all of which is done only that men may not need God's Name and put no trust in it. Here great dishonor is done the Name of God and the first two Commandments, in that men look to the devil, men or creatures for that which should be sought and found in God alone, through naught but a pure faith and confidence, and a cheerful meditation of and calling upon His holy Name.
XXVI. Here, foolish people put themselves in danger, especially the work-righteous saints and those who want to stand out from the rest; they teach people to make the sign of the cross; some rely on written charms, while others consult fortune-tellers; one seeks this, another that, just to escape misfortune and feel secure. It's hard to express how seductive this dabbling in sorcery, conjuring, and superstition can be, all done just so people don't have to rely on God's Name and trust in it. This brings great dishonor to God's Name and the first two Commandments, as people turn to the devil, other people, or things for what should be sought and found in God alone, through nothing but pure faith and confidence, along with a joyful reflection on and invocation of His holy Name.
Now examine this closely for yourself and see whether this is not a gross, mad perversion: the devil, men and creatures they must believe, and trust to them for the best; without such faith and confidence nothing holds or helps. How shall the good and faithful God reward us for not believing and trusting Him as much or more than man and the devil, although He not only promises help and sure assistance, but also commands us confidently to look for it, and gives and urges all manner of reasons why we should place such faith and confidence in Him? Is it not lamentable and pitiable that the devil or man, who commands nothing and does not urge, but only promises, is set above God, Who promises, urges and commands; and that more is thought of them than of God Himself? We ought truly to be ashamed of ourselves and learn from the example of those who trust the devil or men. For if the devil, who is a wicked, lying spirit, keeps faith with all those who ally themselves with him, how much more will not the most gracious, all-truthful God keep faith, if a man trusts Him? Nay, is it not rather He alone Who will keep faith? A rich man trusts and relies upon his money and possessions, and they help him; and we are not willing to trust and rely upon the living God, that He is willing and able to help us? We say: Gold makes bold; and it is true, as Baruch iii. says, "Gold is a thing wherein men trust." [Bar. 3:17] But far greater is the courage which the highest eternal Good gives, wherein trust, not men, but only God's children.
Now take a close look for yourself and see if this isn’t a crazy and serious distortion: people have to trust in the devil, in other men and creatures, hoping for the best; without such belief and confidence, nothing really works or helps. How will the good and faithful God reward us for not believing in and trusting Him at least as much, if not more, than we trust men and the devil? He not only promises help and certain support but also commands us to expect it with confidence, giving us all sorts of reasons to put our faith and trust in Him. Isn’t it sad and shameful that the devil or a human, who offers nothing but promises and doesn’t urge us, is held in higher regard than God, who promises, urges, and commands? It’s truly embarrassing for us to consider that people think more highly of them than of God Himself. We should be genuinely ashamed and learn from those who place their trust in the devil or in humans. If the devil, a wicked and lying spirit, is faithful to those who ally with him, how much more will the most gracious and truthful God be faithful if someone trusts Him? Isn’t He the only one who truly keeps faith? A wealthy man relies on his money and possessions, and they support him; yet we hesitate to trust the living God, believing that He is willing and able to help us? We often say: Gold gives courage; and it’s true, as Baruch 3:17 states, "Gold is a thing wherein men trust." [Bar. 3:17] But the courage given by the highest eternal Good is far greater, where only God’s children, not men, place their trust.
[Sidenote: Motives for Calling on God's Name]
[Sidenote: Reasons for Invoking God's Name]
XXVII. Even if none of these adversities constrain us to call upon God's Name and to trust Him, yet were an alone more than sufficient to train and to urge us on in this work. For sin has hemmed us in with three strong, mighty armies. The first is our own flesh, the second the world, the third the evil spirit, by which three we are without ceasing oppressed and troubled; whereby God gives us occasion to do good works without ceasing, namely, to fight with these enemies and sins. The flesh seeks pleasure and peace, the world seeks riches, favor, power and honor, the evil spirit seeks pride, glory, that a man be well thought of, and other men be despised.
XXVII. Even if none of these challenges forces us to call on God’s name and trust Him, they are still more than enough to train and motivate us in this work. Sin has surrounded us with three powerful armies. The first is our own flesh, the second is the world, and the third is the evil spirit. Through these three, we are constantly oppressed and troubled; this gives us the opportunity to do good works without end, specifically to fight against these enemies and our sins. The flesh craves pleasure and comfort, the world seeks wealth, approval, power, and status, while the evil spirit aims for pride, glory, and the desire for others to be looked down upon.
And these three are all so powerful that each one of them is alone sufficient to fight a man, and yet there is no way we can overcome them, except only by calling upon the holy Name of God in a firm faith, as Solomon says, Proverbs xviii: "The Name of the Lord is a strong tower; the righteous runneth into it, and is set aloft." [Prov. 18:10] And David, Psalm cxvi: "I will drink the cup of salvation, and call upon the Name of the Lord." [Ps. 116:13] Again, Psalm xviii: "I will call upon the Lord with praise: so shall I be saved from all mine enemies." [Ps. 18:3] These works and the power of God's Name have become unknown to us, because we are not accustomed to it, and have never seriously fought with sins, and have not needed His Name, because we are trained only in our self-devised works, which we were able to do with our own powers.
And these three are so powerful that each one alone is enough to fight a person, yet we can only overcome them by calling on the holy Name of God with deep faith, as Solomon says in Proverbs 18: "The Name of the Lord is a strong tower; the righteous run to it and are safe." [Prov. 18:10] And David says in Psalm 116: "I will take the cup of salvation and call on the Name of the Lord." [Ps. 116:13] Again, in Psalm 18: "I will call upon the Lord with praise; so I will be saved from all my enemies." [Ps. 18:3] These actions and the power of God's Name have become unfamiliar to us because we are not used to them, have never truly battled against our sins, and have not needed His Name, as we have relied solely on our own self-made efforts, which we could accomplish through our own strength.
[Sidenote: Other Works of the Second Commandment]
[Sidenote: Other Works of the Second Commandment]
XXVIII. Further works of this Commandment are: that we shall not swear, curse, lie, deceive and conjure with the holy Name of God, and otherwise misuse it; which are very simple matters and well known to every one, being the sins which have been almost exclusively preached and proclaimed under this Commandment. These also include, that we shall prevent others from making sinful use of God's Name by lying, swearing, deceiving, cursing, conjuring, and otherwise. Herein again much occasion is given for doing good and warding off evil.
XXVIII. More actions related to this Commandment include: we should not swear, curse, lie, deceive, or misuse the holy Name of God in any way; these are straightforward matters and are well-known to everyone, being the sins that have been primarily focused on when discussing this Commandment. It also involves preventing others from misusing God’s Name through lying, swearing, deceiving, cursing, and conjuring, among other things. This again creates many opportunities for doing good and avoiding evil.
[Sidenote: The Greatest Work of the Second Commandment:
Preaching]
[Sidenote: The Greatest Work of the Second Commandment:
Preaching]
But the greatest and most difficult work of this Commandment is to protect the holy Name of God against all who misuse it in a spiritual manner, and to proclaim it to all men. For it is not enough that I, for myself and in myself, praise and call upon God's Name in prosperity and adversity. I must step forth and for the sake of God's honor and Name bring upon myself the enmity of all men, as Christ said to His disciples: "Ye shall be hated of all men for My Name's sake." Here we must provoke to anger father, mother, and the best of friends. Here we most strive against spiritual and temporal powers, and be accused of disobedience. Here we must stir up against us the rich, learned, holy, and all that is of repute in the world. And although this is especially the duty of those who are commanded to preach God's Word, yet every Christian is also obligated to do so when time and place demand. For we must for the holy Name of God risk and give up all that we have and can do, and show by our deeds that we love God and His Name, His honor and His praise above all things, and trust Him above all things, and expect good from Him; thereby confessing that we regard Him as the highest good, for the sake of which we let go and give up all other goods.
But the biggest and toughest challenge of this Commandment is to protect the sacred Name of God from anyone who misuses it in a spiritual way, and to share it with everyone. It's not enough for me to just praise and call on God's Name in good times and bad. I need to stand up and, for the sake of God’s honor and Name, face the hatred of all people, just as Christ told His disciples: "You will be hated by all for My Name's sake." This may provoke anger in our parents and even our closest friends. Here, we fight against spiritual and worldly powers and risk being accused of disobedience. We will face opposition from the rich, intellectuals, the holy, and anyone of high status in society. While this responsibility especially falls on those who are called to preach God's Word, every Christian must act accordingly when the situation calls for it. We have to risk and give up everything for the holy Name of God, demonstrating through our actions that we love God and His Name, His honor and His praise above all else, trust Him above all else, and expect good from Him; thus, we confess that we see Him as the greatest good, for which we willingly give up all other goods.
[Sidenote: Against Wrong]
[Sidenote: Stand Against Wrong]
XXIX. Here we must first of all resist all wrong, where truth or righteousness suffers violence or need, and dare make no distinction of persons, as some do, who fight most actively and busily against the wrong which is done to the rich, the powerful, and their own friends; but when it is done to the poor, or the demised or their own enemy, they are quiet and patient. These see the Name and the honor of God not as it is, but through a painted glass, and measure truth or righteousness according to the persons, and do not consider their deceiving eye, which looks more on the person than on the thing. These are hypocrites within and have only the appearance of defending the truth. For they well know that there is no danger when one helps the rich, the powerful, the learned and one's own friends, and can in turn enjoy their protection and be honored by them.
XXIX. Here we must first of all stand against all wrong when truth or justice is at stake, without making distinctions between people, as some do. They are quick to fight against injustices done to the wealthy, the powerful, and their own friends; yet when it happens to the poor, the deceased, or their enemies, they remain silent and patient. These individuals see the name and honor of God inaccurately, as if looking through a distorted lens, and judge truth or justice based on who is involved, not realizing their own biased perspective that focuses more on the person than the issue. They are hypocrites at heart and only give the appearance of defending truth. They know there's little risk in supporting the rich, powerful, educated, and their own friends, since they can then rely on their protection and gain their favor.
Thus it is very easy to fight against the wrong which is done to popes, kings, princes, bishops and other big-wigs.[18] Here each wants to be the most pious, where there is no great need. O how sly is here the deceitful Adam with his demand; how finely does he cover his greed of profit with the name of truth and righteousness and God's honor! But when something happens to a poor and insignificant man, there the deceitful eye does not find much profit, but cannot help seeing the disfavor of the powerful; therefore he lets the poor man remain unhelped. And who could tell the extent of this vice in Christendom? God says in the lxxxii. Psalm, "How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Judge the matter of the poor and fatherless, demand justice for the poor and needy; deliver the poor and rid the forsaken out of the hand of the wicked." [Ps. 82:2 ff.] But it is not done, and therefore the text continues: "They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness"; [Ps. 82:5] that is, the truth they do not see, but they stop at the reputation of the great, however unrighteous they are; and do not consider the poor, however righteous they are.
It's really easy to stand up for the wrongs done to popes, kings, princes, bishops, and other big shots. Everyone here wants to seem the most devout, even when it isn't necessary. Oh, how cunning the deceitful Adam is with his demands; he cleverly disguises his greed for profit as a quest for truth, righteousness, and God's honor! But when something happens to a poor, insignificant person, the deceitful eye doesn't see much profit there and can't help but notice the powerful's disregard; so they leave the poor person without help. And who knows how widespread this issue is in Christendom? God says in Psalm 82, "How long will you judge unjustly and favor the wicked? Advocate for the poor and fatherless; demand justice for the needy; rescue the poor and deliver the forsaken from the hand of the wicked." But this doesn't happen, and so the passage continues: "They do not know, nor do they understand; they walk in darkness"; that is, they fail to see the truth but focus on the reputation of the great, no matter how unjust they are, and ignore the plight of the poor, no matter how righteous they may be.
[Sidenote: The Sin of Silence]
The Sin of Silence
XXX. See, here would be many good works. For the greater portion of the powerful, rich and friends do injustice and oppress the poor, the lowly, and their own opponents; and the greater the men, the worse the deeds; and where we cannot by force prevent it and help the truth, we should at least confess it, and do what we can with words, not take the part of the unrighteous, not approve them, but speak the truth boldly.
XXX. Look, there are so many good things to be done. Most of the powerful, wealthy, and their friends do wrong and oppress the poor, the humble, and those who oppose them; and the higher their status, the worse their actions are. When we can't stop it by force and support what's right, we should at least acknowledge it and do what we can with our words. We shouldn't side with the unjust or approve of them, but we should speak the truth fearlessly.
What would it help a man if he did all manner of good, made pilgrimages to Rome and to all holy places, acquired all indulgences, built all churches and endowed houses, if he were found guilty of sin against the Name and honor of God, not speaking of them and neglecting them, and regarding his possessions, honor, favor and friends more than the truth (which is God's Name and honor)? Or who is he, before whose door and into whose house such good works do not daily come, so that he would have no need to travel far or to ask after good works? And if we consider the life of men, how in every place men act so very rashly and lightly in this respect, we must cry out with the prophet, Omnis homo mendax, "All men are liars, lie and deceive" [Ps. 116:11]; for the real good works they neglect, and adorn and paint themselves with the most insignificant, and want to be pious, to mount to heaven in peaceful security.
What good would it do a person if he did all kinds of good deeds, traveled to Rome and other holy places, collected all the indulgences, built churches, and funded charities, if he was still guilty of sin against God's name and honor, ignoring them and prioritizing his possessions, reputation, status, and friends over the truth (which represents God's name and honor)? And who is the person who does not have good deeds coming to his door every day, so he wouldn't need to travel far or seek out good works? If we look at how people live their lives, we see that everywhere, they act so recklessly and thoughtlessly about this, we must shout with the prophet, Omnis homo mendax, "All men are liars, lie and deceive" [Ps. 116:11]; because they neglect real good works and instead focus on trivial things, pretending to be religious, hoping to reach heaven in comfort and security.
But if you should say: "Why does not God do it alone and Himself, since He can and knows how to help each one?" Yes, He can do it; but He does not want to do it alone; He wants us to work with Him, and does us the honor to want to work His work with us and through us. And if we are not wilting to accept such honor, He will, after all, perform the work alone, and help the poor; and those who were unwilling to help Him and have despised the great honor of doing His work, He will condemn with the unrighteous, because they have made common cause with the unrighteous. Just as He alone is blessed, but He wants to do us the honor and not be alone in His blessedness, but have us to be blessed with Him. And if He were to do it alone, His Commandments would be given us in vain, because no one would have occasion to exercise himself in the great works of these Commandments, and no one would test himself to see whether he regards God and His Name as the highest good, and for His sake risks everything.
But if you ask, "Why doesn't God do it all by Himself, since He can and knows how to help everyone?" Yes, He can do it, but He doesn't want to do it alone; He wants us to work with Him. It's an honor for us to be involved in His work and for Him to work through us. If we're not willing to accept this honor, He will still do the work alone and help those in need. Those who were unwilling to assist Him and have disregarded the great honor of doing His work will be condemned alongside the unrighteous, because they chose to align themselves with the unrighteous. Just as He is solely blessed, He desires to share that blessing with us, not to be alone in His blessedness. He wants us to be blessed with Him. If He were to do it alone, His Commandments would be pointless for us because no one would have the chance to practice the important lessons of those Commandments, and no one would challenge themselves to see if they consider God and His Name the highest good, risking everything for His sake.
[Sidenote: Against Spiritual Wickedness]
Against Spiritual Wickedness
XXXI. It also belongs to this work to resist all false, seductive, erroneous, heretical doctrines, every misuse of spiritual power. Now this is much higher, for these use the holy Name of God itself to fight against the Name of God. For this reason it seems a great thing and a dangerous to resist them, because they assert that he who resists them resists God and all His saints, in whose place they sit and whose power they use, saying that Christ said of them, "He that heareth you, heareth Me, and he that despiseth you, despiseth Me." [Luke 10:6] On which words they lean heavily, become insolent and bold to say, to do, and to leave undone what they please; put to the ban, accurse, rob, murder, and practise all their wickedness, in whatever way they please and can invent, without any hindrance.
XXXI. This work also involves resisting all false, appealing, wrong, and heretical beliefs, as well as any misuse of spiritual power. This task is much more serious because these individuals use the holy Name of God Himself to work against the Name of God. Therefore, it seems both significant and dangerous to stand against them, as they claim that anyone who opposes them is opposing God and all His saints, in whose place they claim to act and whose power they wield. They quote Christ’s words, "He that heareth you, heareth Me, and he that despiseth you, despiseth Me." [Luke 10:6] Relying heavily on this scripture, they become arrogant and bold, justifying whatever they say, do, or choose not to do; they excommunicate, curse, steal, kill, and engage in all their evil acts however they want, without any obstacles.
Now Christ did not mean that we should listen to them in everything they might say and do, but only then when they present to us His Word, the Gospel, not their word, His work, and not their work. How else could we know whether their lies and sins were to be avoided? There must be some rule, to what extent we are to hear and to follow them, and this rule cannot be given by them, but must be established by God over them, that it may serve us as a guide, as we shall hear in the Fourth Commandment.
Now, Christ didn’t mean that we should listen to them in everything they say and do, but only when they share His Word, the Gospel, not their own words, His work, and not their work. How else would we know if their lies and sins should be avoided? There has to be some guideline for how much we should hear and follow them, and this guideline can’t come from them; it has to be established by God over them, so it can guide us, as we’ll see in the Fourth Commandment.
It must be, indeed, that even in the spiritual estate the greater part preach false doctrine and misuse spiritual power, so that thus occasion may be given us to do the works of this Commandment, and that we be tried, to see what we are willing to do and to leave undone against such blasphemers for the sake of God's honor.
It must be that even in the spiritual realm, most people preach false teachings and misuse spiritual authority, which gives us a chance to follow this Commandment and be tested to see what we are willing to do and what we won't do in response to such blasphemers for the sake of God's honor.
Oh, if we were God-fearing in this matter, how often would the knaves of officiales[19] have to decree their papal and episcopal ban in vain! How weak the Roman thunderbolts would become! How often would many a one have to hold his tongue, to whom the world must now give ear! How few preachers would be found in Christendom! But it has gotten the upper hand: whatever they assert and in whatever way, that must be right. Here no one fights for God's Name and honor, and I hold that no greater or more frequent sin is done in external works than under this head. It is a matter so high that few understand it, and, besides, adorned with God's Name and power, dangerous to touch. But the prophets of old were masters in this; also the apostles, especially St. Paul, who did not allow it to trouble them whether the highest or the lowest priest had said it, or had done it in God's Name or in his own. They looked on the works and words, and held them up to God's Commandment, no matter whether big John or little Nick said it, or whether they had done it in God's Name or in man's. And for this they had to die, and of such dying there would be much more to say in our time, for things are much worse now. But Christ and St. Peter and Paul must cover all this with their holy names, so that no more infamous cover for infamy has been found on earth than the most holy and most blessed Name of Jesus Christ!
Oh, if we truly respected God in this matter, how often would the shady characters in officiales[19] have to proclaim their papal and episcopal bans in vain! The power of Rome would seem so weak! How often would many people need to stay silent, even though the world must now listen to them! Few preachers would be found in Christendom! But they have taken control: whatever they claim and however they say it, that must be accepted as right. Here, no one defends God's Name and honor, and I believe that no greater or more frequent sin occurs in external actions than in this area. It's such a profound matter that few grasp it, and also, decorated with God's Name and power, it's dangerous to address. But the prophets of old were skilled in this; so were the apostles, especially St. Paul, who didn’t let whether the highest or the lowest priest said something, or whether it was done in God's Name or their own, trouble them. They focused on the actions and words, comparing them to God's Commandment, regardless of whether big John or little Nick said it, or if they did it in God's Name or in man's. For this, they faced death, and there would be much more to say about such deaths in our time, as things are much worse now. But Christ and St. Peter and Paul must cover all this with their holy names, so that no more disgraceful cover for infamy has been found on earth than the most holy and blessed Name of Jesus Christ!
One might shudder to be alive, simply because of the misuse and blasphemy of the holy Name of God; through which, if it shall last much longer, we will, as I fear, openly worship the devil as a god; so completely do the spiritual authorities and the learned lack all understanding in these things. It is high time that we pray God earnestly that He hallow His Name. But it will cost blood, and they who enjoy the inheritance of the holy martyrs and are won with their blood, must again make martyrs. Of this more another time.[20]
One might feel terrified to be alive, simply because of the way the holy Name of God is misused and disrespected; if this continues much longer, we will, as I fear, end up openly worshiping the devil as a god; the spiritual leaders and the educated seem to completely lack understanding in these matters. It’s high time we earnestly pray to God to sanctify His Name. But it will come at a cost, and those who benefit from the legacy of the holy martyrs, which was achieved with their blood, must once again create martyrs. More on this another time.[20]
[Sidenote: The Third Commandment]
[Side Note: The Third Commandment]
I.[21] We have now seen how many good works there are in the Second Commandment, which however are not good in themselves, unless they are done in faith and in the assurance of divine favor; and how much we must do, if we take heed to this Commandment alone, and how we, alas! busy ourselves much with other works, which have no agreement at all with it. Now follows the Third Commandment: "Thou shalt hallow the day of rest." [22] In the First Commandment is prescribed our heart's attitude toward God in thoughts, in the Second, that of our mouth in words, in this Third is prescribed our attitude toward God in works; and it is the first and right table of Moses, on which these three Commandments are written, and they govern man on the right side, namely, in the things which concern God, and in which God has to do with man and man with God, without the mediation of any creature.
I.[21] We have now seen how many good actions there are in the Second Commandment, which, however, are not truly good unless they are done with faith and the assurance of God’s favor; and how much we must do if we pay attention to this Commandment alone, and how we, unfortunately, preoccupy ourselves with other tasks that have no relation to it at all. Now we move on to the Third Commandment: "Keep the Sabbath day holy." [22] The First Commandment defines our heart's attitude towards God in our thoughts, the Second discusses our mouth's attitude in our words, and this Third outlines our attitude towards God in our actions; it is the first and correct table of Moses, on which these three Commandments are written, and they guide people in the right way, specifically in matters that relate to God, where God interacts with humanity and humanity interacts with God, without the need for any intermediary.
[Sidenote: Worship]
[Note: Worship]
The first works of this Commandment are plain and outward, which we commonly call worship,[23] such as going to mass, praying, and hearing a sermon on holy days. So understood there are very few works in this Commandment; and these, if they are not done in assurance of and with faith in God's favor, are nothing, as was said above. Hence it would also be a good thing if there were fewer saint's days, since in our times the works done on them are for the greater part worse than those of the work days, what with loafing, gluttony, and drunkenness, gambling and other evil deeds; and then, the mass and the sermon are listened to without edification, the prayer is spoken without faith. It almost happens that men think it is sufficient that we look on at the mass with our eyes, hear the preaching with our ears, and say the prayers with our mouths. It is all so formal and superficial! We do not think that we might receive something out of the mass into our hearts, learn and remember something out of the preaching, seek, desire and expect something in our prayer. Although in this matter the bishops and priests, or they to whom the work of preaching is entrusted, are most at fault, because they do not preach the Gospel, and do not teach the people how they ought to look on at mass, hear preaching and pray. Therefore, we will briefly explain these three works.
The first actions related to this Commandment are simple and outward, what we usually call worship,[23] like going to mass, praying, and listening to a sermon on holy days. Understood this way, there aren’t many actions in this Commandment; and if they aren’t done with confidence and faith in God’s favor, they mean nothing, as mentioned before. It would also be beneficial if there were fewer saint's days, since nowadays the activities on those days are often worse than those on regular workdays, filled with laziness, overindulgence, drunkenness, gambling, and other wrongdoings; and then, the mass and the sermon are attended without any real impact, with prayers said without faith. It almost seems like people think it’s enough to just watch the mass with their eyes, hear the sermon with their ears, and say the prayers with their mouths. It’s all so mechanical and superficial! We don’t consider that we could gain something from the mass in our hearts, learn and remember something from the preaching, or seek, desire, and expect something in our prayers. In this case, bishops and priests, or those entrusted with preaching, are mostly to blame because they don’t preach the Gospel and fail to teach the people how to properly participate in the mass, listen to sermons, and pray. Therefore, we will briefly explain these three actions.
[Sidenote: The Mass]
[Note: The Mass]
II. In the mass it is necessary that we attend with our hearts also; and we do attend, when we exercise faith in our hearts. Here we must repeat the words of Christ, when He institutes the mass and says, "Take and eat, this is My Body, which is given for you" [Matt. 26:26 ff., Luke 22:19 ff.]; in like manner over the cup, "Take and drink ye all of it: this is a new, everlasting Testament in My Blood, which is shed for you and for many for the remission of sins. This shall ye do, as oft as ye do it, in remembrance of Me." [1 Cor. 11:23 ff.] In these words Christ has made for Himself a memorial or anniversary,[24] to be daily observed in all Christendom, and has added to it a glorious, rich, great testament, in which no interest, money or temporal possessions are bequeathed and distributed, but the forgiveness of all sins, grace and mercy into eternal life, that all who come to this memorial shall have the same testament; and then He died, whereby this testament has become permanent and irrevocable. In proof and evidence of which, instead of letter and seal, He has left with us His own Body and Blood under the bread and wine.[25]
II. In the Mass, it's important that we engage our hearts too; and we do so when we have faith. We should remember the words of Christ when He established the Mass and said, "Take and eat, this is My Body, which is given for you" [Matt. 26:26 ff., Luke 22:19 ff.]; similarly, over the cup, "Take and drink all of you: this is a new, everlasting Testament in My Blood, which is shed for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins. You should do this as often as you do it, in remembrance of Me." [1 Cor. 11:23 ff.] In these words, Christ has created a memorial or anniversary,[24] to be observed daily throughout all Christendom, and He has added a glorious, rich, great testament, which does not include any interest, money, or material possessions, but offers the forgiveness of all sins, grace, and mercy for eternal life, so that everyone who comes to this memorial can share in the same testament; and then He died, which made this testament permanent and unchangeable. As proof of this, instead of a letter and seal, He has given us His own Body and Blood under the bread and wine.[25]
Here there is need that a man practise the first works of this Commandment right well, that he doubt not that what Christ has said is true, and consider the testament sure, so that he make not Christ a liar. For if you are present at mass and do not consider nor believe that here Christ through His testament has bequeathed and given you forgiveness of all your sins, what else is it, than as if you said: "I do not know or do not believe that it is true that forgiveness of my sins is here bequeathed and given me"? Oh, how many masses there are in the world at present! but how few who hear them with such faith and benefit! Most grievously is God provoked to anger thereby. For this reason also no one shall or can reap any benefit form the mass except he be in trouble of soul and long for divine mercy, and desire to be rid of his sins; or, if he have an evil intention, he must be changed during the mass, and come to have a desire for this testament. For this reason in olden times no open sinner was allowed to be present at the mass.
Here, a person needs to practice the core principles of this Commandment correctly, without doubting that what Christ said is true, and to understand the testament as reliable, so that they don’t make Christ a liar. If you attend mass and don’t believe that through His testament Christ has granted you forgiveness for all your sins, you might as well say: "I don’t know or believe that it’s true that forgiveness of my sins is offered and given to me here." Oh, there are so many masses happening in the world today! But how few people actually attend with the faith and intent to benefit from them! This deeply angers God. For this reason, no one can gain any benefit from the mass unless they are struggling with their soul, yearning for divine mercy, and wanting to be free from their sins; or if they have bad intentions, they must change during the mass and come to desire this testament. In the past, no openly sinful person was allowed to attend the mass.
When this faith is rightly present, the heart must be made joyful by the testament, and grow warm and melt in God's love. Then will follow praise and thanksgiving with a pure heart, from which the mass is called in Greek Eucharista, that is, "thanksgiving," because we praise and thank God for this comforting, rich, blessed testament, just as he gives thanks, praises and is joyful, to whom a good friend has presented a thousand and more gulden. Although Christ often fares like those who make several persons rich by their testament, and these persons never think of them, nor praise or thank them. So our masses at present are merely celebrated, without our knowing why or wherefore, and consequently we neither give thanks nor love nor praise, remain parched and hard, and have enough with our little prayer. Of this more another time.
When this faith is truly present, the heart should be filled with joy by the testament, becoming warm and softened by God's love. This will lead to praise and thanksgiving with a pure heart, which is why the mass is called Eucharista in Greek, meaning "thanksgiving," because we praise and thank God for this comforting, rich, blessed testament, just as someone gives thanks, praises, and feels joy when a good friend gifts them a thousand or more gulden. However, Christ often experiences the same fate as those who enrich multiple people through their testament, yet those individuals never think of or show gratitude towards them. Nowadays, our masses are simply performed without understanding the reason or purpose, leading us to neither give thanks nor show love or praise, leaving us dry and hard-hearted, content with just our little prayers. More on this another time.
[Sidenote: The Sermon]
[Sidenote: The Sermon]
III. The sermon ought to be nothing else than the proclamation of this testament. But who can hear it if no one preaches it? [Rom. 10:14] Now, they who ought to preach it, themselves do not know it. This is why the sermons ramble off into other unprofitable stories,[26] and thus Christ is forgotten, while we fare like the man in II. Kings vii: we see our riches but do not enjoy them. [2 Kings 7:19] Of which the Preacher also says, "This is a great evil, when God giveth a man riches, and giveth him not power to enjoy them." [Eccles. 6:2] So we look on at unnumbered masses and do not know whether the mass be a testament, or what it be, just as if it were any other common good work by itself. O God, how exceeding blind we are! But where this is rightly preached, it is necessary that it be diligently heard, grasped, retained, often thought of, and that the faith be thus strengthened against all the temptation of sin, whether past, or present, or to come.
III. The sermon should be nothing more than the announcement of this testament. But who can hear it if no one is preaching it? [Rom. 10:14] The people who are supposed to preach it don’t even understand it themselves. That's why sermons drift off into other pointless stories,[26] causing Christ to be forgotten, and we end up like the man in II Kings 7: we see our riches but don’t enjoy them. [2 Kings 7:19] As the Preacher also says, "This is a great evil when God gives a man riches but doesn't give him the ability to enjoy them." [Eccles. 6:2] So we look at countless masses and have no idea if the mass is a testament or something else, as if it were just any other ordinary good deed. O God, how blind we are! But where this is preached correctly, it’s essential to listen carefully, understand, remember, and think about it often, so that faith can be strengthened against all temptations of sin, whether from the past, present, or future.
Lo! this is the only ceremony or practice which Christ has instituted, in which His Christians shall assemble, exercise themselves and keep it with one accord; and this He did not make to be a mere work like other ceremonies, but placed into it a rich, exceeding great treasure, to be offered and bestowed upon all who believe on it.
Look! This is the only ceremony or practice that Christ established, where His followers should gather, engage, and observe it together in unity; and He didn't create it to be just another task like other rituals, but infused it with a valuable and abundant treasure, to be given and shared with everyone who believes in it.
This preaching should induce sinners to grieve over their sins, and should kindle in them a longing for the treasure. It must, therefore, be a grievous sin not to hear the Gospel, and to despise such a treasure and so rich a feast to which we are bidden; but a much greater sin to preach the Gospel, and to let so many people who would gladly hear it perish, since Christ has so strictly commanded that the Gospel and this testament be preached, that He does not wish even the mass to be celebrated, unless the Gospel be preached, as He says: "As oft as ye do this, remember me"; that is, as St. Paul says, "Ye shall preach of His death." [1 Cor. 11:26] For this reason it is dreadful and horrible in our times to be a bishop, pastor and preacher; for no one any longer knows this testament, to say nothing of their preaching it, although this is their highest and only duty and obligation. How heavily must they give account for so many souls who must perish because of this lack in preaching.
This preaching should make sinners feel sorrow for their sins and spark in them a desire for the treasure. It must, therefore, be a serious sin not to hear the Gospel and to disregard such a treasure and such a lavish feast that we've been invited to; but it’s an even greater sin to preach the Gospel and allow so many people who would gladly listen to it to be lost, since Christ has commanded that the Gospel and this testament be preached so strictly that He doesn’t even want the mass to be celebrated unless the Gospel is shared, as He says: "As often as you do this, remember me"; that is, as St. Paul says, "You shall preach of His death." [1 Cor. 11:26] For this reason, it is frightening and terrible to be a bishop, pastor, and preacher in our times; because no one knows this testament anymore, let alone preaches it, even though this is their highest and only duty. How heavily they must be held accountable for so many souls who are lost because of this failure in preaching.
[Sidenote: Prayer]
[Side Note: Prayer]
IV. We should pray, not as the custom is, counting many pages or beads, but fixing our mind upon some pressing need, desire it with all earnestness, and exercise faith and confidence toward God in the matter, in such wise that we do not doubt that we shall be heard. So St Bernard[27] instructs his brethren and says: "Dear brethren, you shall by no means despise your prayer, as if it were in vain, for I tell you of a truth that, before you have uttered the words, the prayer is already recorded in heaven; and you shall confidently expect from God one of two things: either that your prayer will be granted, or that, if it will not be granted, the granting of it would not be good for you."
IV. We should pray, not like the usual practice of counting many pages or beads, but by focusing our minds on a specific need, desiring it with all our heart, and having faith and confidence in God about it, without doubting that we will be heard. St. Bernard instructs his followers and says: "Dear friends, do not underestimate your prayer, as if it were pointless, for I assure you that even before you speak the words, your prayer is already noted in heaven; and you can confidently expect one of two outcomes from God: either that your prayer will be granted, or that if it isn't granted, it's because granting it wouldn't be good for you."
Prayer is, therefore, a special exercise of faith, and faith makes the prayer so acceptable that either it will surely be granted, or something better than we ask will be given in its stead. So also says St. James: "Let him who asketh of God not waver in faith; for if he wavers, let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord." [Jas. 1:6 f.] This is a clear statement, which says directly: he who does not trust, receives nothing, neither that which he asks, nor anything better.
Prayer is, therefore, a special act of faith, and faith makes the prayer so acceptable that either it will definitely be granted, or something better than what we ask for will be given instead. St. James also says, "Let anyone who asks God do so with unwavering faith; for if they waver, let not that person expect to receive anything from the Lord." [Jas. 1:6 f.] This is a clear statement that says directly: those who do not trust receive nothing, neither what they ask for nor anything better.
And to call forth such faith, Christ Himself has said, Mark xi: "Therefore I say unto you. What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall surely have them." [Mark 11:24] And Luke xi: "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you; for every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened. Or what father is there of you, who, if his son shall ask bread, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent? or if he ask an egg, will he give him a scorpion? But if you know how to give good gifts to your children, and you yourselves are not naturally good, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give a good spirit to all them that ask Him!" [Luke 11:9 ff.]
And to inspire such faith, Christ Himself said, Mark 11: "Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours." [Mark 11:24] And Luke 11: "Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened. Which of you fathers, if your son asks for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? Or if he asks for an egg, will give him a scorpion? If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him!" [Luke 11:9 ff.]
[Sidenote: Mistaken Prayer]
[Sidenote: Wrong Prayer]
V. Who is so hard and stone-like, that such mighty words ought not to move him to pray with all confidence joyfully and gladly? But how many prayers must be reformed, if we are to pray aright according to these words! Now, indeed, all churches and monastic houses are full of praying and singing, but how does it happen that so little improvement and benefit result from it, and things daily grow worse? The reason is none other than that which St. James indicates when he says: "You ask much and receive not, because ye ask amiss." [Jas. 4:3] For where this faith and confidence is not in the prayer, the prayer is dead, and nothing more than a grievous labor and work. If anything is given for it, it is none the less only temporal benefit without any blessing and help for the soul; nay, to the great injury and blinding of souls, so that they go their way, babbling much with their mouths, regardless of whether they receive, or desire, or trust; and in this unbelief, the state of mind most opposed to the exercise of faith and to the nature of prayer, they remain hardened.
V. Who is so tough and unfeeling that such powerful words shouldn't inspire them to pray with complete confidence, joy, and eagerness? But how many prayers need to be changed if we want to pray correctly according to these words! Right now, all churches and monasteries are filled with praying and singing, but why is it that so little improvement comes from it, and things just keep getting worse? The reason is the same as what St. James points out when he says: "You ask a lot and don’t receive, because you ask wrongly." [Jas. 4:3] Because where faith and confidence are missing in the prayer, the prayer is lifeless, just a heavy burden and work. If anything is received from it, it’s still just temporary benefits without any blessing or help for the soul; in fact, it’s often harmful and blinding to the soul, causing people to go about their lives, babbling a lot with their mouths, without caring whether they receive, desire, or trust; and in this unbelief, the state of mind most opposed to exercising faith and the true nature of prayer, they remain hardened.
From this it follows that one who prays aright never doubts that his prayer is surely acceptable and heard, although the very thing for which he prays be not given him. For we are to lay our need "before God in prayer, but not prescribe to Him a measure, number, time or place; but if He wills to give it to us better or in another way than we think, we are to leave it to Him; for frequently we do not know what we pray, as St. Paul says, Romans viii [Rom. 8:26]; and God works and gives above all that we understand, as he says, Ephesians iii [Eph. 3:20], so that there be no doubt that the prayer is acceptable and heard, and we yet leave to God the time, place, measure and limit; He will surely do what is right. They are the true worshipers, who worship God in spirit and in truth. [John 4:24] For they who believe not that they will be heard, sin upon the left hand against this Commandment, and go far astray with their unbelief. But they who set a limit for Him, sin upon the other side, and come too close with their tempting of God. So He has forbidden both, that we should err from His Commandment neither to the left nor to the right [Deut 6:16, 28:14], that is, neither with unbelief nor with tempting, but with simple faith remain on the straight road, trusting Him, and yet setting Him no bounds.
From this, it follows that anyone who prays sincerely never doubts that their prayer is truly heard and accepted, even if the specific thing they are asking for is not granted. We should present our needs "before God in prayer, but not dictate to Him how, when, or where to respond; if He chooses to provide for us in a way we didn’t expect or think we needed, we should trust Him with that. Often, we don’t even know what we should be praying for, as St. Paul says in Romans 8:26; and God acts and gives beyond what we can comprehend, as mentioned in Ephesians 3:20. Therefore, there’s no doubt that our prayers are acceptable and heard, while we leave the timing, method, and extent of the response to God; He will undoubtedly do what is best. Those who worship God truly worship in spirit and truth. [John 4:24] For those who don’t believe their prayers will be heard sin by doubting this commandment and stray far with their disbelief. Conversely, those who try to set limits on God sin in another way and risk testing Him. He has prohibited both, so we don’t stray from His Commandment either to the left or the right [Deut 6:16, 28:14], meaning we should not tremble with disbelief or test Him, but maintain simple faith and stay on the straight path, trusting Him without placing any restrictions on Him.
[Sidenote: Weak Faith no Reason for not Praying]
[Sidenote: Weak Faith no Reason for not Praying]
VI. Thus we see that this Commandment, like the Second, is to be nothing else than a doing and keeping of the First Commandment, that is, of faith, trust, confidence, hope and love to God, so that in all the Commandments the First may be the captain, and faith the chief work and the life of all other works, without which, as was said, they cannot be good.
VI. So we see that this Commandment, like the Second, is really just about doing and keeping the First Commandment, which means having faith, trust, confidence, hope, and love for God. This makes the First Commandment the guiding principle in all the Commandments, with faith being the main act and the essence of all other actions, since, as mentioned, without it, they can't be good.
But if you say: "What if I cannot believe that my prayer is heard and accepted?" I answer: For this very reason faith, prayer and all other good works are commanded, that you shall know what you can and what you cannot do. And when you find that you cannot so believe and do, then you are humbly to confess it to God, and so begin with a weak spark of faith and daily strengthen it more and more by exercising it in all your living and doing. For as touching infirmity of faith (that is, of the First and highest Commandment), there is no one on earth who does not have his good share of it. For even the holy Apostles in the Gospel, and especially St. Peter, were weak in faith, so that they also prayed Christ and said: "Lord, increase our faith" [Luke 17:5]; and He very frequently rebukes them because they have so little faith [Matt. 14:30].
But if you say, "What if I can’t believe that my prayer is heard and accepted?" I respond: This is exactly why faith, prayer, and all other good deeds are required, so you understand what you can and can’t do. And when you realize that you can’t believe or do this, then you should humbly admit it to God and start with a small spark of faith, working to strengthen it more and more every day by putting it into practice in all your actions. As for the weakness of faith (meaning the First and highest Commandment), there’s not a single person on earth who doesn’t struggle with it. Even the holy Apostles in the Gospel, especially St. Peter, were weak in their faith, to the point that they prayed to Christ and said, "Lord, increase our faith" [Luke 17:5]; and He often scolded them for having so little faith [Matt. 14:30].
Therefore you shall not despair, nor give up, even if you find that you do not believe as firmly as you ought and wish, in your prayer or in other works. Nay, you shall thank God with all your heart that He thus reveals to you your weakness, through which He daily teaches and admonishes you how much you need to exercise yourself and daily strengthen yourself in faith. For how many do you see who habitually pray, sing, read, work and seem to be great saints, and yet never get so far as to know where they stand in respect of the chief work, faith; and so in their blindness they lead astray themselves and others; think they are very well off, and so unknowingly build on the sand of their works without any faith, not on God's mercy and promise through a firm, pure faith.
Therefore, don’t lose hope or give up, even if you feel that your faith isn’t as strong as it should be or as you wish it to be in your prayers or other efforts. Instead, thank God wholeheartedly for showing you your weaknesses, through which He teaches and reminds you daily of how much you need to work on and strengthen your faith. Just look at how many people you see who regularly pray, sing, read, and work, appearing to be great saints, yet they never truly understand their standing in relation to the most important thing, faith. In their lack of insight, they mislead themselves and others, thinking they are doing well, and unknowingly build on the shaky foundation of their actions without any faith, rather than on God's mercy and promise through a steadfast, pure faith.
Therefore, however long we live, we shall always have our hands full to remain, with all our works and sufferings, pupils of the First Commandment and of faith, and not to cease to learn. No one knows what a great thing it is to trust God alone, except he who attempts it with his works.
Therefore, no matter how long we live, we will always be busy trying to stay true to the First Commandment and our faith, continually learning through our actions and struggles. Only those who truly try to trust God alone understand how significant that is.
[Sidenote: Prayer Without Ceasing]
[Sidenote: Constant Prayer]
VII. Again: if no other work were commanded, would not prayer alone suffice to exercise the whole life of man in faith? For this work the spiritual estate has been specially established, as indeed in olden times some Fathers prayed day and night. Nay, there is no Christian who does not have time to pray without ceasing. But I mean the spiritual praying, that is: no one is so heavily burdened with his labor, but that if he will he can, while working, speak with God in his heart, lay before Him his need and that of other men, ask for help, make petition, and in all this exercise and strengthen his faith.
VII. Once again: if no other work were required, wouldn't prayer alone be enough to guide a person's entire life in faith? For this purpose, the spiritual role has been specifically established, just as in ancient times some Fathers prayed day and night. In fact, there's no Christian who doesn't have time to pray continuously. But I mean spiritual prayer, which is: no one is so overwhelmed with their work that they can't, if they choose to, communicate with God in their heart while working, present their own needs and those of others, ask for help, make requests, and through all this, exercise and strengthen their faith.
This is what the Lord means, Luke xviii, when He says, "Men ought always to pray, and never cease," [Luke 18:1] although in Matthew vi. He forbids the use of much speaking and long prayers, because of which He rebukes the hypocrites; not because the lengthy prayer of the lips is evil, but because it is not that true prayer which can be made at all times, and without the inner prayer of faith is nothing. For we must also practise the outward prayer in its proper time, especially in the mass, as this Commandment requires, and wherever it is helpful to the inner prayer and faith, whether in the house or in the field, in this work or in that; of which we have no time now to speak more. For this belongs to the Lord's Prayer, in which all petitions and spoken prayer are summed up in brief words.
This is what the Lord means, Luke 18, when He says, "People should always pray and never give up," [Luke 18:1] although in Matthew 6, He warns against excessive talking and long prayers, which is why He criticizes the hypocrites; not because long prayers are bad, but because they don't represent the true prayer that can happen at any time, and without genuine faith, they are meaningless. We also need to practice outward prayer at the right times, especially during mass, as this Commandment demands, and whenever it supports our inner prayer and faith, whether at home or in the field, in this task or that; of which we don’t have time to discuss further now. This connects to the Lord's Prayer, where all our requests and spoken prayers are summarized in brief phrases.
[Sidenote: Prayer is Work]
[Sidenote: Prayer is Hard Work]
VIII. Where now are they who desire to know and to do good works? Let them undertake prayer alone, and lightly exercise themselves in faith, and they will find that it is true, as the holy Fathers have said, that there is no work like prayer. Mumbling with the mouth is easy, or at least considered easy, but with earnestness of heart to follow the words in deep devotion, that is, with desire and faith, so that one earnestly desires what the words say, and not to doubt that it will be heard: that is a great deed in God's eyes.
VIII. Where are those who want to know and do good works now? Let them focus on prayer and practice their faith lightly, and they will discover that it holds true, as the holy Fathers have said, that there’s no effort like prayer. It’s easy to mumble the words, or at least it seems easy, but to genuinely follow the words with deep devotion—meaning with desire and faith, so that you truly crave what the words express, and without doubting that it will be heard—that is a significant act in God's eyes.
Here the evil spirit hinders men with all his powers. Oh, how often will he here prevent the desire to pray, not allow us to find time and place, nay, often also raise doubts, whether a man is worthy to ask anything of such a Majesty as God is, and so confuse us that a man himself does not know whether it is really true that he prays or not; whether it is possible that his prayer is acceptable, and other such strange thoughts. For the evil spirit knows well how powerful one man's truly believing prayer is, and how it hurts him, and how it benefits all men. Therefore he does not willingly let it happen.
Here, the evil spirit tries to stop people with all his might. Oh, how often will he block the desire to pray, making it hard for us to find the time and space, and even creating doubts about whether anyone is worthy to ask anything of such a great Majesty as God. He confuses us so much that a person might not even know if they are truly praying or not, or if their prayer could ever be accepted, along with all sorts of strange thoughts. The evil spirit knows exactly how powerful one person's genuinely believing prayer is, how much it bothers him, and how beneficial it is for everyone. That's why he doesn’t want it to happen.
When so tempted, a man must indeed be wise, and not doubt that he and his prayer are, indeed, unworthy before such infinite Majesty; in no wise dare he trust his worthiness, or because of his unworthiness grow faint; but he must heed God's command and cast this up to Him, and hold it before the devil, and say: "Because of my worthiness I do nothing, because of my unworthiness I cease from nothing. I pray and work only because God of His pure mercy has promised to hear and to be gracious to all unworthy men, and not only promised it, but He has also most sternly, on pain of His everlasting displeasure and wrath, commanded us to pray, to trust and to receive. If it has not been too much for that high Majesty so solemnly and highly to obligate His unworthy worms to pray, to trust, and to receive from Him, how shall it be too much for me to take such command upon myself with all joy; however worthy or unworthy I may be?" Thus we must drive out the devil's suggestion with God's command. Thus will he cease, and in no other way whatever.
When faced with such temptation, a person must truly be wise and not doubt that he and his prayers are unworthy before such infinite Majesty. He should never trust in his own worthiness or let his unworthiness make him feel discouraged. Instead, he must follow God's command, bring it up to Him, and confront the devil, saying: "I do nothing because of my worthiness, and I don't stop doing anything because of my unworthiness. I pray and work solely because God, in His pure mercy, has promised to hear and be gracious to all unworthy people. Not only has He promised, but He has also very strongly commanded us to pray, to trust, and to receive, under threat of His eternal displeasure and wrath. If it hasn’t been too much for that high Majesty to obligate His unworthy servants to pray, to trust, and to receive from Him, how can it be too much for me to accept such a command joyfully, no matter how worthy or unworthy I may be?" This is how we must reject the devil's suggestions with God's command. That’s the only way he will stop.
[Sidenote: What Men Shall Pray For]
[Sidenote: What Men Should Pray For]
IX. But what are the things which we must bring before Almighty God in prayer and lamentation, to exercise faith thereby? Answer: First, every man's own besetting need and trouble, of which David says, Psalm xxxii: "Thou art my refuge in all trouble which compasseth me about; Thou art my comfort, to preserve me from all evil which surrounds me." [Ps. 32:7] likewise, Psalm cxlii: "I cried unto the Lord with my voice; with my voice unto the Lord did I make my supplication. I poured out my complaint before Him; I showed before Him my trouble." [Ps. 142:2] In the mass a Christian shall keep in mind the short-comings or excesses he feels, and pour out all these freely before God with weeping and groaning, as woefully as he can, as to his faithful Father, who is ready to help him. And if you do not know or recognise your need, or have no trouble, then you shall know that you are in the worst possible plight. For this is the greatest trouble, that you find yourself so hardened, hard-hearted and insensible that no trouble moves you.
IX. But what are the things we need to bring before Almighty God in prayer and sorrow to express our faith? Answer: First, each person's own pressing needs and troubles, as David says in Psalm 32: "You are my refuge in all the trouble that surrounds me; You are my comfort, keeping me safe from all the evil around me." [Ps. 32:7] Similarly, in Psalm 142: "I cried out to the Lord with my voice; I made my supplication to the Lord. I shared my complaints with Him; I laid my troubles before Him." [Ps. 142:2] During the Mass, a Christian should reflect on their shortcomings or excesses and openly express all of these to God with weeping and groaning, as desperately as possible, to their faithful Father, who is ready to help. And if you don't recognize your needs or have no troubles, then know that you are in the worst situation. For the greatest trouble is to find yourself so hardened, cold-hearted, and indifferent that nothing disturbs you.
There is no better mirror in which to see your need than simply the Ten Commandments, in which you will find what you lack and what you should seek. If, therefore, you find in yourself a weak faith, small hope and little love toward God; and that you do not praise and honor God, but love your own honor and fame, think much of the favor of men, do not gladly hear mass and sermon, are indolent in prayer, in which things every one has faults, then you shall think more of these faults than of all bodily harm to goods, honor and life, and believe that they are worse than death and all mortal sickness. These you shall earnestly before God, lament and ask for help, and with all confidence expect help, and believe that you are heard and shall obtain help and mercy.
There’s no better way to recognize your needs than by looking at the Ten Commandments, where you’ll discover what you’re missing and what you should be pursuing. So, if you notice in yourself weak faith, little hope, and a lack of love for God; if you find that you don’t praise and honor God, but instead love your own reputation and status, care too much about what others think, don’t enjoy attending mass or listening to sermons, and are lazy in your prayers—keep in mind that everyone has their flaws. You should focus more on these flaws than on any physical harm to your possessions, reputation, or life, and understand that these are worse than death or any terminal illness. You should sincerely lament these issues before God, seek His help earnestly, and confidently expect assistance, believing that you will be heard and will receive help and mercy.
Then go forward into the Second Table of the Commandments, and see how disobedient you have been and still are toward father and mother and all in authority; how you sin against your neighbor with anger, hatred and evil words; how you are tempted to unchastity, covetousness and injustice in word and deed against your neighbor; and you will doubtless find that you are full of all need and misery, and have reason enough to weep even drops of blood, if you could.[28]
Then move on to the Second Table of the Commandments, and notice how disobedient you've been and still are toward your parents and others in authority; how you sin against your neighbor with anger, hatred, and hurtful words; how you're tempted by lust, greed, and wrongdoing in your words and actions against your neighbor; and you'll surely realize that you're filled with all kinds of need and misery, and have plenty of reasons to weep even tears of blood, if you could.
[Sidenote: Prayer for Holiness, not Because of Holiness]
[Sidenote: Prayer for Holiness, not Because of Holiness]
X. But I know well that many are so foolish as not to want to ask for such things, unless they first be conscious that they are pure, and believe that God hears no one who is a sinner. All this is the work, of those false preachers, who teach men to begin, not with faith and trust in God's favor, but with their own works.
X. But I know that many are so foolish that they won't ask for such things unless they first feel they are pure and believe that God doesn’t listen to anyone who is a sinner. All of this comes from those false preachers who teach people to start not with faith and trust in God’s favor, but with their own actions.
Look you, wretched man! if you have broken a leg, or the peril of death overtakes you, you call upon God, this Saint and that, and do not wait until your leg is healed, or the danger is past: you are not so foolish as to think that God hears no one whose leg is broken, or who is in bodily danger. Nay, you believe that God shall hear most of all when you are in the greatest need and fear. Why, then, are you so foolish here, where there is immeasurably greater need and eternal hurt, and do not want to ask for faith, hope, love, humility, obedience, chastity, gentleness, peace, righteousness, unless you are already free of all your unbelief, doubt, pride, disobedience, unchastity, anger, covetousness and unrighteousness. Although the more you find yourself lacking in these things, the more and more diligently you ought to pray or cry.
Look, you miserable man! If you've broken a leg or are facing death, you call on God, this saint or that one, and you don’t wait until your leg is healed or the danger is gone: you’re not so naive as to think that God ignores people with broken legs or those in physical danger. No, you believe that God listens most intently when you're in your deepest need and fear. So why are you so foolish here, where there's an even greater need and eternal harm, and you hesitate to ask for faith, hope, love, humility, obedience, chastity, gentleness, peace, and righteousness unless you’re already free of all your disbelief, doubt, pride, disobedience, lust, anger, greed, and wrongdoing? The more you realize you're lacking in these areas, the more urgently you should pray or cry out.
So blind are we: with our bodily sickness and need we run to God; with the soul's sickness we run from Him, and are unwilling to come back before we are well, exactly as if there could be one God who could help the body, and another God who could help the soul; or as if we would help ourselves in spiritual need, although it really is greater than the bodily need. Such plan and counsel is of the devil.
So blind are we: when we are sick in body and need help, we rush to God; but when our souls are sick, we turn away from Him and don’t want to return until we feel better, as if there could be one God who heals the body and another who heals the soul; or as if we could fix our spiritual problems ourselves, even though those are much bigger than our physical issues. That way of thinking is from the devil.
Not so, my good man! If you wish to be cured of sin, you must not withdraw from God, but run to Him, and pray with much more confidence than if a bodily need had overtaken you. God is not hostile to sinners, but only to unbelievers, that is, to such as do not recognize and lament their sin, nor seek help against it from God, but in their own presumption wish first to purify themselves, are unwilling to be in need of His grace, and will not suffer Him to be a God Who gives to everyone and takes nothing in return.
Not so, my friend! If you want to be freed from sin, you shouldn't turn away from God but instead run to Him and pray with even more confidence than if you were dealing with a physical need. God isn't against sinners; He’s only against unbelievers—those who don’t acknowledge and regret their sins, or who don’t seek His help to overcome them. Instead, in their arrogance, they try to purify themselves first, refuse to admit they need His grace, and won't accept that He is a God who gives freely without expecting anything in return.
[Sidenote: Common Prayer]
[Sidenote: Common Prayer]
XI. All this has been said of prayer for personal needs, and of prayer in general. But the prayer which really belongs to this Commandment and is called a work of the Holy Day, is far better and greater, and is to be made for all Christendom, for all the need of all men, of foe and friend, especially for those who belong to the parish or bishopric.
XI. Everything mentioned so far has been about prayer for personal needs and prayer in general. However, the prayer that truly aligns with this Commandment and is considered a work of the Holy Day is much better and more significant. It should be made for all Christians, for everyone's needs, both friends and enemies, especially for those who belong to the parish or diocese.
Thus St. Paul commanded his disciple Timothy: "I exhort thee, that thou see to it, that prayers and intercessions be made for all men, for kings, and for all that are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour." [1 Tim. 2:1 ff.] For this reason Jeremiah, chapter xxix, commanded the people of Israel to pray for the city and land of Babylon, because in the peace thereof they should have peace. [Jer. 29:7] And Baruch i: "Pray for the life of the king of Babylon and for the life of his son, that we may live in peace under their rule." [Bar. 1:21 f.]
Thus St. Paul instructed his disciple Timothy: "I urge you to ensure that prayers and intercessions are made for everyone, for kings, and for all those in authority, so that we can lead a calm and peaceful life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and pleasing in the sight of God our Savior." [1 Tim. 2:1 ff.] For this reason, Jeremiah, chapter xxix, told the people of Israel to pray for the city and land of Babylon, because their peace would mean their peace. [Jer. 29:7] And Baruch i: "Pray for the life of the king of Babylon and for the life of his son, so that we may live in peace under their reign." [Bar. 1:21 f.]
This common prayer is precious and the most powerful, [Isa. 56:7] and it is for its sake that we come together. For this reason also the Church is called a House of Prayer [Matt. 21:13], because in it we are as a congregation with one accord to consider our need and the needs of all men, present than before God, and call upon Him for mercy. But this must be done with heart-felt emotion and sincerity, so that we feel in our hearts the need of all men, and that we pray with true empathy for them, in true faith and confidence. Where such prayers are not made in the mass, it were better to omit the mass. For what sense is there in our coming together into a House of Prayer, which coming together shows that we should make common prayer and petition for the entire congregation, if we scatter these prayers, and so distribute them that everyone prays only for himself, and no one has regard for the other, nor concerns himself for another's need? How can that prayer be of help, good, acceptable and a common prayer, or a work of the Holy Day and of the assembled congregation, which they make who make their own petty prayers, one for this, the other for that, and have nothing but self-seeking, selfish prayers, which God hates?
This common prayer is precious and incredibly powerful, [Isa. 56:7] and it's for this reason that we gather together. The Church is referred to as a House of Prayer [Matt. 21:13] because, as a congregation, we come together in unity to acknowledge our needs and the needs of all people, present them before God, and call on Him for mercy. However, this must be done with genuine emotion and sincerity so that we truly feel the needs of all, and that we pray with real empathy for them, in genuine faith and confidence. If such prayers are not offered during the mass, it would be better to skip the mass altogether. What’s the point of coming together in a House of Prayer, where we should be united in prayer and petitions for the whole congregation, if we spread out our prayers so that everyone prays only for themselves, with no regard or concern for one another’s needs? How can those prayers be helpful, good, acceptable, and representative of a communal prayer or a work of the Holy Day, when individuals only make their own trivial prayers, some for one thing, others for another, focused solely on their own selfish desires, which God detests?
XII. A suggestion of this common prayer has been retained from ancient practice, when at the end of the sermon the Confession of Sins is said and prayer is made on the pulpit for all Christendom. But this should not be the end of the matter, as is now the custom and fashion; it should be an exhortation to pray throughout the entire mass for such need as the preacher makes us feel; and in order that we may pray worthily, he first exhorts us because of our sin, and thereby makes us humble. This should be done as briefly as possible, that then the entire congregation may confess their own sin and pray for every one with earnestness and faith.
XII. A suggestion for this common prayer has been carried forward from ancient times, where at the end of the sermon, the Confession of Sins is said and a prayer is offered from the pulpit for all Christians. However, this shouldn’t just be the conclusion, as is the current trend; it should encourage prayer throughout the entire mass for the needs the preacher highlights. To help us pray meaningfully, he first encourages us to reflect on our sins, which helps us stay humble. This should be done as briefly as possible so that the whole congregation can confess their sins and pray for everyone with sincerity and faith.
[Sidenote: The Power of Common Prayer]
[Sidenote: The Power of Common Prayer]
Oh, if God granted that any congregation at all heard mass and prayed in this way, so that a common earnest heart-cry of the entire people would rise up to God, what immeasurable virtue and help would result from such a prayer! What more terrible thing could happen to all the evil spirits? What greater work could be done on earth, whereby so many pious souls would be preserved, so many sinners converted?
Oh, if God granted that any congregation heard mass and prayed like this, so that a united heartfelt plea from everyone would rise to God, what incredible blessings and support would come from such a prayer! What could be more devastating for all the evil spirits? What greater impact could be made on earth, preserving so many righteous souls and converting so many sinners?
For, indeed, the Christian Church on earth has no greater power or work than such common prayer against everything that may oppose it. This the evil spirit knows well, and therefore he does all that he can to prevent such prayer. Gleefully he lets us go on building churches, endowing many monastic houses, making music, reading, singing, observing many masses, and multiplying ceremonies beyond all measure. This does not grieve him, nay, he helps us do it, that we may consider such things the very best, and think that thereby we have done our whole duty. But in that meanwhile this common, effectual and fruitful prayer perishes and its omission is unnoticed because of such display, in this he has what he seeks. For when prayer languishes, no one will take anything from him, and no one will withstand him. But if he noticed that wished to practise this prayer, even if it were under a straw roof or in a pig-sty, he would indeed not endure it, but would fear such a pig-sty far more than all the high, big and beautiful churches, towers and bells in existence, if such prayer be not in them. It is indeed not a question of the places and buildings in which we assemble, but only of this unconquerable prayer, that we pray it and bring it before God as a truly common prayer.
For the truth is, the Christian Church on earth has no greater power or purpose than collective prayer against everything that opposes it. The evil spirit knows this well, and he does everything he can to stop such prayer. He happily allows us to build churches, fund many monasteries, create music, read, sing, observe many masses, and multiply ceremonies without end. This doesn't bother him at all; in fact, he encourages it so that we think these activities are the best and believe we've fulfilled our obligations. Meanwhile, this collective, effective, and fruitful prayer fades away, and its absence goes unnoticed because of all the show, which is exactly what he wants. When prayer weakens, no one will challenge him, and no one will stand against him. But if he noticed that people wanted to engage in this prayer, even if it was under a thatched roof or in a pigsty, he would not tolerate it and would dread that pigsty far more than all the grand, beautiful churches, towers, and bells in existence, if such prayer is absent from them. It's really not about the places and buildings where we gather, but about this unbeatable prayer, that we pray it and present it before God as a truly collective prayer.
[Sidenote: Proof From the Scriptures]
[Sidenote: Evidence From the Scriptures]
XIII. The power of this prayer we see in the fact that in olden times Abraham prayed for the five cities, Sodom, Gomorrah, etc., Genesis xviii [Gen. 18:32], and accomplished so much, that if there had been ten righteous people in them, two in each city, God would not have destroyed them. What then could many men do, if they united in calling upon God earnestly and with sincere confidence?
XIII. The power of this prayer is evident from the fact that in ancient times, Abraham prayed for the five cities, Sodom, Gomorrah, etc., Genesis xviii [Gen. 18:32], and achieved so much that if there had been ten righteous people in total—two in each city—God would not have destroyed them. So, what could many people accomplish if they came together to earnestly and sincerely call upon God?
St. James also says: "Dear brethren, pray for one another, that ye may be saved. For the prayer of a righteous man availeth much, a prayer that perseveres and does not cease" [Jas. 5:16 ff.] (that is, which does not cease asking ever more and more, although what it asks is not immediately granted, as some timid men do). And as an example in this matter he sets before us Elijah, the Prophet, "who was a man," he says, "as we are, and prayed, that it might not rain; and it rained not by the space of three years and months. And he prayed again, and it rained, and everything became fruitful." There are many texts and examples in the Scriptures which urge us to pray, only that it be done with earnestness and faith. As David says, "The eyes of the Lord are upon the righteous, and His ears are open unto their cry." [Ps. 33:18] Again, "The Lord is nigh unto all them that call upon Him, to all that call upon Him in truth." [Ps. 145:18] Why does he add, "call upon Him in truth"? Because that is not prayer nor calling upon God when the mouth alone mumbles.
St. James also says: "Dear brothers, pray for each other so that you may be saved. The prayer of a righteous person is powerful and effective, a prayer that keeps on asking without giving up" [Jas. 5:16 ff.] (meaning it keeps asking more and more, even when what is requested isn’t given right away, unlike some fearful individuals). As an example, he points out Elijah, the Prophet, "who was a man," he says, "just like us, and prayed that it wouldn't rain; and it didn’t rain for three years and months. Then he prayed again, and it rained, and everything became fruitful." There are many verses and examples in the Scriptures that encourage us to pray, provided that we do it with sincerity and faith. As David says, "The eyes of the Lord are on the righteous, and His ears are open to their cries." [Ps. 33:18] Again, "The Lord is close to all who call on Him, to all who call on Him in truth." [Ps. 145:18] Why does he add, "call on Him in truth"? Because simply mumbling words with your mouth isn’t real prayer or calling on God.
[Sidenote: Thoughtless Prayer]
[Note: Mindless Prayer]
What should God do, if you come along with your mouth, book or Paternoster,[29] and think of nothing except that you may finish the words and complete the number? So that if some one were to ask you what it all was about, or what it was that you prayed for, you yourself would not know; for you had not thought of laying this or that matter before God or desiring it. Your only reason for praying is that you are commanded to pray this and so much, and this you intend to do in full. What wonder that thunder and lightning frequently set churches on fire, because we thus make of the House of Prayer a house of mockery, and call that prayer in which we bring nothing before God and desire nothing from Him.
What should God do if you show up with your mouth, a book, or a Paternoster,[29] only focused on finishing the words and hitting the right count? If someone were to ask you what it was all about or what you were praying for, you wouldn’t even know because you didn't bother to bring any specific thoughts or desires before God. Your only reason for praying is that you’re told to pray a certain way, and you plan to do just that. Is it any surprise that thunder and lightning often strike churches? We turn the House of Prayer into a place of mockery when we just go through the motions without presenting anything to God or wanting anything from Him.
But we should do as they do who wish to ask a favor of great princes. These do not plan merely to babble a certain number of words, for the prince would think they mocked him, or were insane; but they put their request very plainly, and present their need earnestly, and then leave it to his mercy, in good confidence that he will grant it. So we must deal with God of definite things, namely, mention some present need, commend it to His mercy and good-will, and not doubt that it is heard; for He has promised to hear such prayer, which no earthly lord has done.
But we should approach God like those who want to ask a favor from powerful leaders. They don’t just ramble on without purpose, because the leader would think they were either mocking him or out of their minds; instead, they make their request clear and express their need genuinely, then trust that he will respond with kindness. Similarly, we should present specific needs to God, entrust them to His mercy and goodwill, and have no doubt that He hears us; for He has promised to listen to such prayers, something no worldly ruler can claim.
[Sidenote: Earnest Prayer]
[Sidenote: Serious Prayer]
XIV. We are masters in this form of prayer when suffer bodily need; when we are sick we call here upon St. Christopher, there upon St. Barbara[30]; we vow a pilgrimage to St. James[31], to this place and to that; then we make earnest prayer, have a good confidence and every good kind of prayer. But when we are in our churches during mass, we stand like images of saints;[32] know nothing to speak of or to lament; the beads rattle, the pages rustle and the mouth babbles; and that is all there is to it.
XIV. We really take charge of this kind of prayer when we're in physical need; when we're sick, we turn to St. Christopher here and St. Barbara there; we promise to make a pilgrimage to St. James, to this place and that; then we pray earnestly, have strong faith, and engage in all kinds of good prayers. But when we're in our churches during mass, we stand like statues of saints; we don’t know what to say or complain about; the beads clack, the pages rustle, and our mouths move without meaning, and that’s all there is to it.
But if you ask what you shall speak of and lament in your prayer, you can easily learn from the Ten Commandments and the Lord's Prayer. Open your eyes and look into your life and the life of all Christians, especially of the Spiritual estate, and you will find how faith, hope, love, obedience, chastity and every virtue languish, and all manner of heinous vices reign; what a lack there is of good preachers and prelates; how only knaves, children, fools and women rule. Then you will see that there were need every hour without ceasing to pray everywhere with tears of blood to God, Who is so terribly angry with men. And it is true that it has never been more necessary to pray than at this time, and it will be more so from now on to the end of the world. If such terrible crimes do not move you to lament and complain, do not permit yourself to be led astray by your rank, station, good works at prayer: there is no Christian vein or trait in you, however righteous you may be. But it has all been foretold, that when God's anger is greatest and Christendom suffers the greatest need, then petitioners and supplicants before God shall not be found, as Isaiah says with tears, chapter lxiv: "Thou art angry with us, and there is none that calleth upon Thy Name, that stirreth up himself to take hold of Thee." [Isa. 64:7] Likewise, Ezekiel xxii: "I sought for a man among them, that should make up the hedge, and stand in the gap before me for the land, that I should not destroy it; but I found none. Therefore have I poured out Mine indignation upon them; I have consumed them with the fire of My wrath." [Ezek. 22:30] With these words God indicates how He wants us to withstand Him and turn away His anger from one another [Ex. 32:11 ff.], as it is frequently written of the Prophet Moses, that he restrained God, [Num. 14:13 ff., 21:7] lest His anger should overwhelm the people of Israel. [Ps. 106:23]
But if you ask what you should talk about and mourn in your prayers, you can easily learn from the Ten Commandments and the Lord's Prayer. Open your eyes and reflect on your life and the lives of all Christians, especially those in spiritual roles, and you'll see how faith, hope, love, obedience, chastity, and every virtue are suffering, and how all sorts of terrible vices are thriving; notice the lack of good preachers and church leaders; how only the dishonest, children, fools, and women seem to be in charge. Then you'll realize that there's a need to pray without ceasing, everywhere, with tears of blood to God, who is so incredibly angry with humanity. It's true that there has never been a greater need for prayer than now, and it will only become more urgent from here on until the end of time. If such horrific crimes don’t move you to mourn and complain, don’t let your status, position, or good deeds deceive you into thinking you’re fine: there’s no true Christian spirit in you, no matter how righteous you appear. But it has all been predicted that when God's anger is at its peak and Christendom is in its greatest need, then there will be no petitioners or supplicants before God, as Isaiah laments in chapter 64: "You are angry with us, and there is no one who calls on Your Name, who stirs himself up to take hold of You." [Isa. 64:7] Similarly, Ezekiel 22 says: "I searched for a man among them who would make a wall and stand in the gap before Me on behalf of the land, so that I would not destroy it; but I found no one. Therefore, I have poured out My fury on them; I have consumed them with the fire of My wrath." [Ezek. 22:30] With these words, God shows how He wants us to stand up to Him and redirect His anger away from one another [Ex. 32:11 ff.], as it is often written about the Prophet Moses, that he restrained God, [Num. 14:13 ff., 21:7] so that His anger would not overwhelm the people of Israel. [Ps. 106:23]
[Sidenote: The Indifference of Man]
[Sidenote: The Apathy of Humanity]
XV. But what will they do, who not only do not regard such misfortune of Christendom, and do not pray against Men it, but laugh at it, take pleasure in it, condemn, malign, sing and talk of their neighbor's sin, and yet dare, unafraid and unashamed, go to church, hear mass, say prayers, and regard themselves and are regarded as pious Christians? These truly are in need that we pray twice for them, if we pray once for those whom they condemn, talk about and laugh at. That there would be such is also prophesied by Luke the thief on Christ's left band, who blasphemed Him in His suffering, weakness and need; [Luke 23:39, 35] also by all those who reviled Christ on the Cross, when they should most of all have helped Him.
XV. But what will happen to those who not only ignore the misfortunes facing Christianity, and don’t pray against them, but actually laugh about it, take pleasure in it, condemn, gossip about, and sing songs about their neighbor's sins, and yet have the audacity to go to church, attend mass, say their prayers, and see themselves—and be seen by others—as devout Christians? These individuals truly need us to pray for them twice if we are to pray even once for those they condemn, gossip about, and mock. It has been prophesied that such people would exist, just like the thief on Christ's left side, who insulted Him during His suffering, weakness, and need; [Luke 23:39, 35] as well as all those who mocked Christ on the Cross when they should have been offering Him support instead.
O God, how blind, nay, how insane have we Christians become! When will there be an end of wrath, O heavenly Father? That we mock at the misfortune of Christendom, to pray for which we gather together in Church and at the mass, that we blaspheme and condemn men, this is the fruit of our mad materialism.[33] If the Turk destroys cities, country and people, and ruins churches, we think a great injury has been done Christendom. Then we complain, and urge kings and princes to war. But when faith perishes, love grows cold, God's Word is neglected, and all manner of sin flourishes, then no one thinks of fighting, nay, pope, bishops, priests and clergy, who ought to be generals, captains and standard-bearers in this spiritual warfare against these spiritual and many times worse Turks, these are themselves the very princes and leaders of such Turks and of the devil host, just as Judas was the leader of the Jews when they took Christ [Luke 24:47]. It had to be an apostle, a bishop, a priest, one of the number of the best, who began the work of slaying Christ. So also must Christendom be laid waste by no others than those who ought to protect it, and yet are so insane that they are ready to eat up the Turk, and at home themselves set house and sheep-cote on fire and let them burn up with the sheep and all other contents, and none the less worry about the wolf in the woods. Such are our times, and this is the reward we have earned by our ingratitude toward the endless grace which Christ has won for us freely with His precious blood, grievous labor and bitter death.
O God, how blind and insane we Christians have become! When will this anger end, O heavenly Father? We laugh at the misfortunes of Christendom, for which we gather in church and at mass to pray, and we blaspheme and condemn others—this is the result of our crazy materialism. If the Turk destroys cities, lands, and people, and tears down churches, we think a great injustice has been done to Christendom. Then we complain and urge kings and princes to go to war. But when faith fades, love grows cold, God's Word is ignored, and all kinds of sin flourish, no one thinks of fighting. In fact, the pope, bishops, priests, and clergy—who should be the generals, captains, and standard-bearers in this spiritual battle against these spiritual foes, often worse than the Turks—are themselves the very leaders of these Turks and the devil's army, just like Judas led the Jews when they took Christ. It had to be an apostle, a bishop, a priest, someone among the best, who started the process of killing Christ. Likewise, Christendom must be laid waste by none other than those who should be protecting it, yet so crazily are they ready to devour the Turk while at home they set their own houses and barns on fire, letting them burn along with the sheep and everything else, all the while worrying about the wolf in the woods. Such are our times, and this is the reward we've earned for our ingratitude toward the endless grace that Christ has freely won for us with His precious blood, painful toil, and bitter death.
[Sidenote: Prayer Better than Good Works]
[Sidenote: Prayer Better than Good Works]
XVI. Lo! where are the idle ones, who do not know how to do good works? Where are they who run to Rome, to St. James, hither and thither? Take up this one single work of the mass, look on your neighbor's sin and ruin, and have pity on him; let it grieve you, tell it to God, and pray over it. Do the same for every other need of Christendom, especially of the rulers, whom God, for the intolerable punishment and torment of us all, allows to fall and be misled so terribly. If you do this diligently, be assured you are one of the best fighters and captains, not only against the Turks, but also against the devils and the powers of hell. But if you do it not, what would it help you though you performed all the miracles of the saints, and murdered all the Turks, and yet were found guilty of having disregarded your neighbor's need and of having thereby sinned against love? For Christ at the last day will not ask how much you have prayed, fasted, pilgrimaged, done this or that yourself, but how much good you have done to others, even the very least. [Matt. 25:40, 45]
XVI. Look! Where are the idle ones who don't know how to do good deeds? Where are those who rush to Rome, to St. James, here and there? Focus on just this one task of the mass: notice your neighbor's sin and suffering, and feel compassion for them; let it sadden you, share it with God, and pray about it. Do the same for every other need in Christendom, especially for the leaders, whom God allows to fall and be misled in terrible ways, causing unbearable suffering for all of us. If you do this diligently, you can be sure you are one of the best fighters and leaders, not just against the Turks, but also against the devils and the forces of hell. But if you neglect this, what good will it do you if you perform all the miracles of the saints, defeat all the Turks, yet are guilty of ignoring your neighbor's needs and sinned against love? Because on the last day, Christ will not ask how much you prayed, fasted, or went on pilgrimages, but how much good you did for others, even for the very least. [Matt. 25:40, 45]
Now without doubt among the "least" are also those who are in sin and spiritual poverty, captivity and need, of whom there are at present far more than of those who suffer bodily need. Therefore take heed: our own self-assumed good works lead us to and into ourselves, that we seek only our own benefit and salvation; but God's commandments drive us to our neighbor, that we may thereby benefit others to their salvation. Just as Christ on the Cross prayed not for Himself alone, but rather for us, when He said, "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do," [Luke 23:14] so we also must pray for one another. From which every man may know that the slanderers, frivolous judges and despisers of other people are a perverted, evil race, who do nothing else than heap abuse on those for whom they ought to pray; in which vice no one is sunk so deep as those very men who do many good works of their own, and seem to men to be something extraordinary, and are honored because of their beautiful, splendid life in manifold good works.
Now, without a doubt, among the "least" are also those who are trapped in sin and spiritual poverty, held captive and in need, and there are currently far more of them than those who suffer physical need. Therefore, be careful: our self-assumed good deeds tend to lead us back to ourselves, making us focus only on our own benefit and salvation; but God's commandments push us to think of our neighbors, so that we can help others in their journey to salvation. Just as Christ on the Cross prayed not just for Himself, but for us when He said, "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do," [Luke 23:14], we must also pray for one another. From this, anyone can see that slanderers, careless judges, and those who look down on others are a corrupted, evil lot, who do nothing but insult those they should be praying for; and no one is deeper in this vice than those who perform many good deeds and seem extraordinary to others, while being honored for their beautiful, impressive lives filled with good works.
[Sidenote: The Lord's Day]
The Lord's Day
XVII. Spiritually understood, this Commandment has a yet far higher work, which embraces the whole nature of man. Here it must be known that in Hebrew "Sabbath" means "rest," because on the seventh day God rested and ceased from all His works, which He had made. Genesis ii [Gen. 2:3]. Therefore He commanded also that the seventh day should be kept holy and that we cease from our works which we do the other six days. This Sabbath has now for us been changed into the Sunday, and the other days are called work-days; the Sunday is called rest-day or holiday or holy day. And would to God that in Christendom there were no holiday except the Sunday; that the festivals of Our Lady and of the Saints were all transferred to Sunday; then would many evil vices be done away with through the labor of the work-days, and lands would not be so drained and impoverished. But now we are plagued with many holidays, to the destruction of souls, bodies and goods; of which matter much might be said.
XVII. Spiritually understood, this Commandment has a much greater purpose that encompasses the entire nature of humanity. It's important to recognize that in Hebrew "Sabbath" means "rest," because on the seventh day God rested and stopped all His work, which He had created. Genesis ii [Gen. 2:3]. Therefore, He also commanded that the seventh day should be kept holy and that we should stop our work during the other six days. This Sabbath has now been changed to Sunday for us, while the other days are referred to as workdays; Sunday is known as the day of rest, holiday, or holy day. If only in Christendom there were no holiday except Sunday; if the feasts of Our Lady and the Saints were all moved to Sunday, then many harmful vices could be eliminated through the labor of the workdays, and the land would not be so exhausted and impoverished. But now we suffer from too many holidays, which harm our souls, bodies, and resources; a lot could be said about this issue.
This rest or ceasing from labors is of two kinds, bodily and spiritual. For this reason this Commandment is also to be understood in two ways.
This rest or stopping from work comes in two forms: physical and spiritual. That's why this Commandment can also be understood in two ways.
[Sidenote: The Rest of the Body]
[Sidenote: The Rest of the Body]
The bodily rest is that of which we have spoken above, namely, that we omit our business and work, in order that we may gather in the church, see mass, hear God's Word and make common prayer. This rest is indeed bodily and in Christendom no longer commanded by God, as the Apostle says, Colossians ii, "Let no man obligate you to any holiday whatever" [Col. 2:16]—for they were of old a figure, but now the truth has been fulfilled, so that all days are holy days, as Isaiah says, chapter lxvi, "One holy day shall it follow the other" [Is. 66:23]; on the other hand, all days are workdays. Yet it is a necessity and ordained by the Church for the sake of the imperfect laity and working people, that they also may be able to come to hear God's Word. For, as we see, the priests and clergy celebrate mass every day, pray at all hours and train themselves in God's Word by study, reading and hearing. For this reason also they are freed from work before others, supported by tithes and have holy-day every day, and every day do the works of the holy-day, and have no work-day, but for them one day is as the other. And if we were all perfect, and knew the Gospel, we might work every day if we wished, or rest if we could. For a day of rest is at present not necessary nor commanded except only for the teaching of God's Word and prayer.
The physical rest we talked about earlier means that we set aside our jobs and tasks so we can gather in church, attend mass, hear God’s Word, and pray together. This type of rest is indeed physical, and in Christianity, it’s no longer mandated by God, as the Apostle says in Colossians 2, "Let no one judge you regarding a holiday" [Col. 2:16]—because those were once just symbols, but now the truth has been realized, making every day a holy day, as Isaiah says in chapter 66, "One holy day will follow another" [Is. 66:23]; meanwhile, all days are also workdays. However, it is necessary and established by the Church for the sake of ordinary people and workers so they can come and hear God’s Word. As we observe, priests and clergy celebrate mass daily, pray at all times, and educate themselves in God’s Word through study, reading, and listening. For this reason, they are relieved of work before others, supported by tithes, and have every day as a holy day; they do the activities of a holy day daily, treating every day the same. If we were all perfect and understood the Gospel fully, we could choose to work every day or rest when we could. Currently, a day of rest is not necessary or commanded, except for the purpose of teaching God’s Word and prayer.
[Sidenote: The Rest of the Soul]
[Sidenote: The Rest of the Soul]
The spiritual rest, which God particularly intends in this Commandment, is this: that we not only cease from our labor and trade, but much more, that we let God alone work in us and that we do nothing of our own with all our powers. But how is this done? In this way: Man, corrupted by sin, has much wicked love and inclination toward all sins, as the Scriptures say, Genesis viii, "Man's heart and senses incline always to the evil," [Gen. 8:21] that is, to pride, disobedience, anger, hatred, covetousness, unchastity, etc., and summa summarum, in all that he does and leaves undone, he seeks his own profit, will and honor rather than God's and his neighbor's. Therefore all his works, all his words, all his thoughts, all his life are evil and not godly.
The spiritual rest that God especially wants from this Commandment is this: that we not only stop our work and business, but even more importantly, that we allow God to work through us and that we do nothing on our own with all our abilities. But how does this happen? Here's how: Humanity, tainted by sin, has a lot of wicked love and tendencies towards all kinds of sin, as the Scriptures say in Genesis 8, "Man's heart and senses incline always to the evil," [Gen. 8:21], meaning towards pride, disobedience, anger, hatred, greed, lust, and so on. Essentially, in everything he does or doesn't do, he seeks his own benefit, will, and honor rather than God's and his neighbor's. Therefore, all his actions, all his words, all his thoughts, and all his life are evil and not godly.
Now if God is to work and to live in him, all this vice and wickedness must be choked and up-rooted, so that there may be rest and a cessation of all our works, thoughts and life, and that henceforth (as St. Paul says, Galatians ii. [Gal. 2:20]) it may be no longer we who live, but Christ Who lives, works and speaks in us. This is not accomplished with comfortable, pleasant days, but here, we must hurt our nature and let it be hurt. [Gal. 5:17] Here begins the strife between the spirit and the flesh; here the spirit resists anger, lust, pride, while the flesh wants to be in pleasure, honor and comfort. Of this St. Paul says, Galatians v, "They that are our Lord Christ's have crucified the flesh with its affections and lusts." [Gal. 5:24] Then follow the good works,—fasting, watching, labor, of which some say and write so much, although they know neither the source nor the purpose of these good works. Therefore we will now also speak of them.
Now, if God is to work and live in us, all this vice and wickedness must be choked and uprooted, so there can be rest and a stop to all our actions, thoughts, and life. From now on (as St. Paul says, Galatians ii. [Gal. 2:20]), it should no longer be us who live, but Christ who lives, works, and speaks in us. This doesn’t happen during comfortable, pleasant days; instead, we have to challenge our nature and allow it to be challenged. [Gal. 5:17] Here begins the struggle between the spirit and the flesh; the spirit resists anger, lust, and pride, while the flesh seeks pleasure, honor, and comfort. St. Paul mentions this in Galatians v, saying, "Those who belong to Christ have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires." [Gal. 5:24] Then come the good works—fasting, watchfulness, and labor—about which some talk and write so much, even though they don’t understand the source or purpose of these good works. So, let's discuss them now.
[Sidenote: The Two Means to the Rest of the Soul]
[Sidenote: The Two Means to the Rest of the Soul]
XVIII. This rest, namely, that our work cease and God alone work in us, is accomplished in two ways. First, through our own effort, secondly, through the effort or urging of others.
XVIII. This rest, which means that we stop working and let God work in us, happens in two ways. First, through our own effort, and second, through the encouragement or influence of others.
Our own effort is to be so made and ordered that, in the first place, when we see our flesh, senses, will and thoughts tempting us, we resist them and do not heed them, as the Wise Man says: "Follow not thine own desires." [Sir. 18:30] And Moses, Deuteronomy xii: "Thou shalt not do what is right in thine own eyes." [Deut. 12:8]
Our goal is to shape our actions in a way that, first and foremost, when we notice our desires, senses, will, and thoughts trying to lead us astray, we push back against them and ignore them, just like the Wise Man advises: "Do not follow your own desires." [Sir. 18:30] And as Moses says in Deuteronomy: "You should not do what seems right to you." [Deut. 12:8]
Here a man must make daily use of those prayers which David prays: "Lord, lead me in Thy path, and let me not walk in my own ways," [Ps. 110:35, 37] and many like prayers, which are all summed up in the prayer, "Thy kingdom come." For the desires are so many, so various, and besides at times so nimble, so subtle and specious, through the suggestions of the evil one, that it is not possible for a man to control himself in his own ways. He must let hands and feet go, commend himself to God's governance, and entrust nothing to his reason, as Jeremiah says, "O Lord, I know that the way of man is not in his own power." [Jer. 10:26] We see proof of this, when the children of Israel went out of Egypt through the Wilderness, where there was no way, no food, no drink, no help. Therefore God went before them, by day in a bright cloud, by night in a fiery pillar [Ex. 13:21; 16:4 f.], fed them with manna from heaven, and kept their garments and shoes that they waxed not old [Deut. 29:5 f.], as we read in the Books of Moses. For this reason we pray: "Thy kingdom come, that Thou rule us, and not we ourselves," for there is nothing more perilous in us than our reason and will—And this is the first and highest work of God in us and the best training, that we cease from our works, that we let our reason and will be idle, that we rest and commend ourselves to God in all things, especially when they seem to be spiritual and good.
Here, a person must use the prayers that David prayed daily: "Lord, guide me in Your path, and don’t let me follow my own ways," [Ps. 110:35, 37] along with many other similar prayers, all summed up in the prayer, "Your kingdom come." Our desires are numerous, varied, and sometimes quick, subtle, and deceptive, influenced by the evil one, making it impossible for a person to control their own path. They must let go of their hands and feet, submit to God's guidance, and rely on nothing but His wisdom, as Jeremiah says, "O Lord, I know that the way of man is not in his own power." [Jer. 10:26] We see this when the children of Israel left Egypt and wandered through the Wilderness, where there were no paths, no food, no water, and no help. So God led them, by day as a bright cloud and by night as a fiery pillar [Ex. 13:21; 16:4 f.], fed them with manna from heaven, and preserved their clothes and shoes so they didn’t wear out [Deut. 29:5 f.], as we read in the Books of Moses. That’s why we pray: "Your kingdom come, so that You lead us and not we ourselves," because there’s nothing more dangerous in us than our reasoning and will. This is the first and greatest work of God within us and the best training: to stop relying on our own efforts, to let our reason and will rest, and to trust ourselves to God in all things, especially when they seem spiritual and good.
[Sidenote: Fasting]
[Fasting]
XIX. After this comes the discipline of the flesh, to kill its gross, evil lust, to give it rest and relief. This we must kill and quiet with fasting, watching and labor, and from this we learn how much and why we shall fast, watch and labor.
XIX. After this comes the discipline of the body, to eliminate its intense, harmful cravings, to provide it rest and relief. We must suppress and calm this through fasting, vigilance, and hard work, and from this, we learn how much and why we should fast, be watchful, and exert ourselves.
There are, alas! many blind men, who practise their castigation, whether it be fasting, watching or labor, only because they think these are good works, intending by them to gain much merit. Far blinder still are they who measure their fasting not only by the quantity or duration, as these do, but also by the nature of the food, thinking that it is of far greater worth if they do not eat meat, eggs or butter. Beyond these are those who fast according to the saints, and according to the days; one fasting on Wednesday, another on Saturday, another on St. Barbara's day, another on St. Sebastian's day,[34] and so on. These all seek in their fasting nothing beyond the work itself: when they have performed that, they think they have done a good work. I will here say nothing of the fact that some fast in such a way that they none the less drink themselves full; some fast by eating fish and other foods so lavishly that they would come much nearer to fasting if they ate meat, eggs and butter, and by so doing would obtain far better results from their fasting. For such fasting is not fasting, but a mockery of fasting and of God.
Unfortunately, there are many blind people who practice self-discipline—whether through fasting, staying awake, or hard work—just because they believe these are good deeds, hoping to earn a lot of merit from them. Even more misguided are those who gauge their fasting not just by how much or how long they do it, but also by what they choose not to eat, thinking it’s more valuable if they avoid meat, eggs, or butter. Then there are those who fast according to the saints or specific days; one person fasts on Wednesday, another on Saturday, one on St. Barbara's Day, another on St. Sebastian's Day, and so on. They all focus on the act of fasting itself: once they’ve completed it, they believe they’ve done something good. I won’t even mention the fact that some people fast while still consuming large amounts of other beverages, and others fast by eating fish and other foods so excessively that they would achieve better results if they simply ate meat, eggs, and butter instead. Such fasting isn’t true fasting; it’s just a mockery of the practice and of God.
Therefore I allow everyone to choose his day, food and quantity for fasting, as he will, on condition that he do not stop with that, but have regard to his flesh; let him put upon it fasting, watching and labor according to its lust and wantonness, and no more, although pope, Church, bishop, father-confessor or any one else whosoever have commanded it. For no one should measure and regulate fasting, watching and labor according to the character or quantity of the food, or according to the days, but according to the withdrawal or approach of the lust and wantonness of the flesh, for the sake of which alone the fasting, watching and labor is ordained, that is, to kill and to subdue them. If it were not for this lust, eating were as meritorious as fasting, sleeping as watching, idleness as labor, and each were as good as the other without all distinction.
Therefore, I let everyone choose their own day, food, and amount for fasting, as they wish, as long as they don’t stop there but also consider their body; they should engage in fasting, watching, and work according to their desires and temptations, and nothing more, even if a pope, the Church, a bishop, a confessor, or anyone else has commanded otherwise. No one should measure or dictate fasting, watching, and labor based on the type or amount of food or the days, but rather according to the presence or absence of the desires and temptations of the body, which is the sole reason for fasting, watching, and labor—to overcome and control them. If it weren’t for these desires, eating would be just as valuable as fasting, sleeping just as valuable as watching, idleness just as valuable as work, and each would be equal without any distinction.
[Sidenote: The Limitation of Fasting]
[Fasting Limitations]
XX. Now, if some one should find that more wantonness arose in his flesh from eating fish than from eating eggs and meat, let him eat meat and not fish. Again, if he find that his head becomes confused and crazed or his body and stomach injured through fasting, or that it is not needful to kill the wantonness of his flesh, he shall let fasting alone entirely, and eat, sleep, be idle as is necessary for his health, regardless whether it be against the command of the Church, or the rules of monastic orders: for no commandment of the Church, no law of an order can make fasting, watching and labor of more value than it has in serving to repress or to kill the flesh and its lusts. Where men go beyond this, and the fasting, eating, sleeping, watching are practised beyond the strength of the body, and more than is necessary to the killing of the lust, so that through it the natural strength is ruined and the head is racked; then let no one imagine that he has done good works, or excuse himself by citing the commandment of the Church or the law of his order. He will be regarded as a man who takes no care of himself, and, as far as in him lies, has become his own murderer.
XX. Now, if someone notices that eating fish makes them feel more restless than eating eggs and meat, they should stick to meat and avoid fish. If they find that fasting causes confusion in their mind or harms their body and stomach, or if it's not necessary to control their urges, they should stop fasting altogether and eat, sleep, and relax as needed for their health, regardless of whether it goes against the Church’s commands or the rules of monastic life. No command from the Church or law of an order can make fasting, staying awake, and working more valuable than they are in helping to control or eliminate the flesh and its desires. When people push beyond this and engage in fasting, eating, sleeping, or staying awake to an extent that exceeds their body's capacity and is more than what is needed to control their desires, leading to their natural strength being depleted and their minds suffering; then no one should think they have done good works or justify their actions by quoting the Church’s commandments or their order's laws. They will be seen as someone who neglects their well-being and, as far as they are concerned, has effectively become their own murderer.
For the body is not given us that we should kill its natural life or work, but only that we kill its wantonness; unless its wantonness were so strong and great that we could not sufficiently resist it without ruin and harm to the natural life. For, as has been said, in the practice of fasting, watching and labor, we are not to look upon the works in themselves, not on the days, not on the number, not on the food, but only on the wanton and lustful Adam, that through them he may be cured of his evil appetite.
For our bodies aren't meant for us to destroy their natural functions or efforts, but only to control their excesses; unless those excesses are so overwhelming that we can't resist them without causing damage to our natural lives. As previously mentioned, in practicing fasting, staying awake, and working hard, we shouldn't focus on the actions themselves, the days, the quantity, or the food, but solely on the indulgent and lustful side of ourselves, so that through these practices, we can overcome our bad desires.
[Sidenote: Foolish Fasting and Foolish Neglect of Fasting]
[Sidenote: Foolish Fasting and Foolish Neglect of Fasting]
XXI. From this we can judge how wisely or foolishly some women act when they are with child, and how the sick are to be treated. For the foolish women cling so firmly to their fasting that they run the risk of great danger to the fruit of their womb and to themselves, rather than not to fast when the others fast. They make a matter of conscience where there is none, and where there is matter of conscience they make none. This is all the fault of the preachers, because they continually prate of fasting, and never point out its true use, limit, fruit, cause and purpose. So also the sick should be allowed to eat and to drink every day whatever they wish. In brief, where the wantonness of the flesh ceases, there every reason for fasting, watching, laboring, eating this or that, has already ceased, and there no longer is any binding commandment at all.
XXI. From this, we can see how wisely or foolishly some women behave when they are pregnant, and how the sick should be treated. Foolish women are so obsessed with fasting that they endanger both their unborn child and themselves rather than skip fasting when others do. They make a big deal out of something that isn't a matter of conscience, while ignoring real matters of conscience. This is entirely the fault of the preachers, who keep talking about fasting without explaining its true purpose, limits, benefits, cause, and intent. Similarly, the sick should be free to eat and drink whatever they want every day. In short, once the cravings of the flesh are under control, there's no longer any reason for fasting, vigil, hard work, or choosing this food over that; there are no binding commandments left at all.
But then care must be taken, lest out of this freedom there grow a lazy indifference about killing the wantonness of the flesh; for the roguish Adam is exceedingly tricky in looking for permission for himself, and in pleading the ruin of the body or of the mind; so some men jump right in and say it is neither necessary nor commanded to fast or to mortify the flesh, and are ready to eat this and that without fear, just as if they had for a long time had much experience of fasting, although they have never tried it.
But we need to be careful, or this freedom can lead to a careless attitude about controlling our desires; because the mischievous side of human nature is really good at finding excuses for itself and justifying harm to the body or mind. Some people dive right in and claim it’s neither necessary nor required to fast or practice self-discipline, and they’re quick to eat whatever they want without worry, as if they’ve had a lot of experience with fasting, even though they’ve never actually done it.
No less are we to guard against offending those who, not sufficiently informed, regard it a great sin if we do not fast or eat as they do. These we must kindly instruct, and not haughtily despise, nor eat this or that in despite of them, but we must tell them the reason why it is right to do so, and thus gradually lead them to a correct understanding. But if they are stubborn and will not listen, we must let them alone, and do as we know it is right to do.
We should also be careful not to upset those who, not fully informed, see it as a serious wrong if we don’t fast or eat differently than they do. We need to patiently educate them, avoiding arrogance or dismissing their beliefs, and explain why our choices are acceptable. By doing this, we can gradually help them understand correctly. However, if they refuse to listen and remain stubborn, we should leave them be and continue to do what we know is right.
[Sidenote: Suffering]
[Sidenote: Struggle]
XXII. The second form of discipline which we receive at the hands of others, is when men or devils cause us suffering, as when our property is taken, our body sick, and our honor taken away; and everything that may move us to anger, impatience and unrest. For God's work rules in us according to His wisdom, not according to our wisdom, according to His purity and chastity, not according to the wantonness of our flesh; for God's work is wisdom and purity, our work is foolishness and impurity, and these shall rest: so in like manner it should rule in us according to His peace, not our anger, impatience and lack of peace. For peace too is God's work, impatience is the work of our flesh; this shall rest and be dead, that we thus in every way keep a spiritual holiday, let our works stand idle, and let God work in us.
XXII. The second type of discipline that we experience from others is when people or evil forces cause us pain, like when our possessions are taken, our bodies are sick, or our honor is tarnished; and everything that prompts us to feel angry, impatient, and unsettled. God's work guides us according to His wisdom, not ours; according to His purity and integrity, not the desires of our flesh. God's work represents wisdom and purity, while our actions tend to be foolish and impure, and those need to be set aside. Similarly, it should guide us according to His peace, not our anger, impatience, and lack of inner calm. Peace is also God's work, while impatience is driven by our flesh; that needs to be set aside and put to rest, so we can keep a spiritual break in every way, letting our actions pause and allowing God to work in us.
Therefore in order to kill our works and the Adam in us, God heaps many temptations upon us, which move us to anger, many sufferings, which rouse us to impatience, and last of all death and the world's abuse; whereby He seeks nothing else than that He may drive out anger, impatience and lack of peace, and attain to His work, that is, to peace, in us. Thus says Isaiah xxviii, "He does the work of another that He may come to His own work." [Is. 28:21] What does this mean? He sends us suffering and trouble that He may teach us to have patience and peace; He bids us die that He may make us live, until a man, thoroughly trained, becomes so peaceful and quiet that he is not disturbed, whether it go well or ill with him, whether he die or live, be honored or dishonored. There God Himself dwells alone, and there are no works of men. This is rightly keeping and hallowing the day of rest; then a man does not guide himself, then he desires nothing for himself, then nothing troubles him; but God Himself leads him, there is naught but godly pleasure, joy and peace with all other works and virtues.
Therefore, to help us overcome our flaws and the part of us that is human, God puts many temptations in our path that provoke our anger and various sufferings that test our patience, and ultimately, He brings death and the challenges of the world; through this, He aims to remove anger, impatience, and unrest, allowing us to achieve true peace within ourselves. As Isaiah 28:21 says, "He does the work of another that He may come to His own work." What does this mean? He sends us suffering and obstacles to teach us patience and peace; He tells us to let go so that we can truly live, until someone who has been fully trained becomes so calm and composed that they are not shaken, regardless of whether things are going well or badly, whether they live or die, whether they are honored or disrespected. There, God dwells alone, free from human distractions. This is the true way to keep and honor the day of rest; in this state, a person doesn't steer their own course, desires nothing for themselves, and feels no turmoil; instead, God leads them, and there exists only divine pleasure, joy, and peace alongside all other virtues.
[Sidenote: The Holiness of Adversity]
The Value of Struggle
XXIII. These works He considers so great that He commands us not only to keep the day of rest, but also to hallow it or regard it as holy, whereby He declares that there are no more precious things than suffering, dying, and all manner of misfortune.[35] For they are holy and sanctify a man from his works to God's works, just as a church is consecrated from natural works to the worship of God. Therefore a man shall also recognise them as holy things, be glad and thank God when they come upon him. For when they come they make him holy, so that he fulfils this Commandment and is saved, redeemed from all his sinful works. Thus says David: "Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of His saints." [Ps. 116:15]
XXIII. He views these actions as so significant that He instructs us not only to observe the day of rest but also to treat it as sacred, highlighting that there is nothing more valuable than suffering, dying, and every form of hardship.[35] These experiences are holy and set a person apart from their own actions to God's work, just as a church is dedicated from worldly activities to the worship of God. Therefore, a person should also acknowledge these experiences as sacred, be grateful, and thank God when they occur. For when they happen, they sanctify him, allowing him to fulfill this Commandment and be saved, redeemed from all his sinful deeds. David states, "Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of His saints." [Ps. 116:15]
In order to strengthen us thereto He has not only commanded us to keep such a rest (for nature is very unwilling to die and to suffer, and it is a bitter day of rest for it to cease from its works and be dead); but He has also comforted us in the Scriptures with many words and told us, Psalm xci, "I will be with him in all his trouble, and will deliver him." [Ps. 91:15] Likewise Psalm xxxiv: "The Lord is nigh unto all them that suffer, and will help them." [Ps. 34:18]
To help us with this, He has not only commanded us to take a day of rest (since our nature really struggles with dying and suffering, and it feels harsh to stop our efforts and be inactive); but He has also reassured us in the Scriptures with many words, telling us in Psalm 91, "I will be with him in all his troubles and will rescue him." [Ps. 91:15] Also, in Psalm 34: "The Lord is close to all who are hurting and will support them." [Ps. 34:18]
As if this were not enough, He has given us a powerful, strong example of it, His only, dear Son, Jesus Christ, our Lord, who on the Sabbath lay in the tomb the entire day of rest, free from all His works, and was the first to fulfil this Commandment, although He needed it not for Himself, but only for our comfort, that we also in all suffering and death should be quiet and have peace. Since, as Christ was raised up after His rest and henceforth lives only in God and God in Him, so also shall we by the death of our Adam, which is perfectly accomplished only through natural death and burial, be lifted up into God, that God may live and work in us forever. Lo! these are the three parts of man: reason, desire, aversion; in which all his works are done. These, therefore, must be slain by these three exercises, God's governance, our self-mortification, the hurt done to us by others; and so they must spiritually rest before God, and give Him room for His works.
As if that weren't enough, He has given us a strong example of it: His only beloved Son, Jesus Christ, our Lord, who spent the entire Sabbath in the tomb, resting from all His works. He was the first to fulfill this Commandment, although He didn't need it for Himself, but only for our comfort, so that we too might find peace amid all suffering and death. Just as Christ was raised after His rest and now lives only in God and God in Him, we too will be lifted up into God through the death of our old self, which is fully realized only through natural death and burial, allowing God to live and work in us forever. Look! These are the three parts of a person: reason, desire, aversion; and all our actions come from these. Therefore, they must be put to rest through three practices: God's governance, our self-discipline, and the harm done to us by others, so they can spiritually rest before God and make room for His works.
[Sidenote: The Circle of the Three Commandments]
[Sidenote: The Circle of the Three Commandments]
XXIV. But such works are to be done and such sufferings to be endured in faith and in sure confidence of God's favor, in order that, as has been said,[36] all works remain in the First Commandment and in faith, and that faith, for the sake of which all other commandments and works are ordained, exercise and strengthen itself in them. See, therefore, what a pretty, golden ring these three Commandments and their works naturally form, and how from the First Commandment and faith the Second flows on to the Third, and the Third in turn drives through the Second up into the First. For the first work is to believe, to have a good heart and confidence toward God. From this Sows the second good work, to praise God's Name, to confess His grace, to give all honor to Him alone. Then follows the third, to worship by praying, hearing God's Word, thinking of and considering God's benefits, and in addition chastising one's self, and keeping the body under.
XXIV. But these actions need to be taken and these hardships endured with faith and a strong confidence in God's favor, so that, as mentioned, all actions align with the First Commandment and faith, and that faith—which is the foundation for all other commandments and actions—can grow and strengthen through them. Look at how beautifully these three Commandments and their actions naturally connect, how the Second Commandment flows from the First and the Third then connects back up through the Second to the First. The first action is to believe, to have a good heart and trust in God. This leads to the second good action, which is to praise God's Name, acknowledge His grace, and give all honor to Him alone. Then comes the third action, which involves worshiping through prayer, listening to God's Word, reflecting on and appreciating God's blessings, as well as self-discipline and taking care of oneself.
But when the evil spirit perceives such faith, such honoring of God and such worship, he rages and stirs up persecution, attacks body, goods, honor and life, brings upon us sickness, poverty, shame and death, which God so permits and ordains. See, here begins the second work, or the second rest of the Third Commandment; by this faith is very greatly tried, even as gold in the fire. [Ecclus. 2:5] For it is a great thing to retain a sure confidence in God, although He sends us death, shame, sickness, poverty; [1 Pet. 4:12] and in this cruel form of wrath to regard Him as our all-gracious Father, as must be done in this work of the Third Commandment. Here suffering contains faith, that it must call upon God's Name and praise it in such suffering, and so it comes through the Third Commandment into the Second again; and through that very calling on the Name of God and praise, faith grows, and becomes conscious of itself, and so strengthens itself, through the two works of the Third and of the Second Commandment. Thus faith goes out into the works and through the works comes to itself again; just as the sun goes forth into its setting and comes again unto its rising. [Ps. 19:6] For this reason the Scriptures associate the day with peaceful living in works, the night with passive living in adversity, and faith lives and works, goes out and comes in, in both, as Christ says, John ix. [John 9:4]
But when the evil spirit sees such faith, such reverence for God, and such worship, he becomes furious and incites persecution, attacking our bodies, possessions, honor, and lives, bringing upon us sickness, poverty, shame, and death—things that God allows and ordains. Here begins the second task, or the second rest of the Third Commandment; through this faith, we are tested greatly, just like gold in the fire. [Ecclus. 2:5] It’s a big deal to maintain strong confidence in God, even when He brings us death, shame, sickness, and poverty; [1 Pet. 4:12] and in this harsh form of wrath, we must see Him as our all-gracious Father, as required in this work of the Third Commandment. Here, suffering contains faith, which must call upon God’s Name and praise it in such suffering, and so it moves from the Third Commandment back to the Second again; through that very calling on God's Name and praise, faith grows and becomes aware of itself, thus strengthening itself through the two tasks of the Third and Second Commandments. Faith reaches out into actions and through these actions returns to itself again, just as the sun sets and then rises again. [Ps. 19:6] For this reason, the Scriptures link the day with peaceful living through actions, the night with passive living in adversity, and faith lives and acts, reaching out and returning in both instances, as Christ says, John ix. [John 9:4]
[Sidenote: The Parallel with the Lord's Prayer]
[Sidenote: The Parallel with the Lord's Prayer]
XXV. This order of good works we pray in the Lord's Prayer. The first is this, that we say: "Our Father, Who art in heaven"; these are the words of the first work of faith, which, according to the First Commandment, does not doubt that it has a gracious Father in heaven. The second: "Hallowed be Thy Name," in which faith asks that God's Name, praise and honor be glorified, and calls upon it in every need, as the Second Commandment says. The third: "Thy kingdom come," in which we pray for the true Sabbath and rest, peaceful cessation of our works, that God's work alone be done in us, and so God rule in us as in His own kingdom, as He says, Luke xvii, "Behold, God's kingdom is nowhere else except within you." [Luke 17:21] The fourth petition is "Thy will be done"; in which we pray that we may keep and have the Seven Commandments of the Second Table, in which faith is exercised toward our neighbor; just as in the first three it is exercised in works toward God alone. And these are the petitions in which stands the word "Thou, Thy, Thy, Thy," because they seek only what belongs to God; all the others say "our, us, our," etc.; for in them we pray for our goods and blessedness.
XXV. We express this order of good works in the Lord's Prayer. The first part is: "Our Father, Who art in heaven”; these words represent the first act of faith, which, according to the First Commandment, believes that it has a loving Father in heaven. The second part is: "Hallowed be Thy Name," where faith asks for God's Name, praise, and honor to be glorified, calling upon it in every need, as stated in the Second Commandment. The third part is: "Thy kingdom come," in which we pray for true rest and peace, that God's work be done in us, allowing Him to rule in us as in His own kingdom, as He says in Luke xvii, "Behold, God's kingdom is nowhere else except within you." [Luke 17:21] The fourth request is "Thy will be done"; here we pray to follow and live by the Seven Commandments of the Second Table, focusing on how we treat our neighbor; just as the first three focus on our relationship with God alone. These petitions use the words "Thou, Thy, Thy, Thy" because they only seek what pertains to God; all the others use "our, us, our," etc.; since they involve praying for our own well-being and blessings.
Let this, then, suffice as a plain, hasty explanation of the First Table of Moses, pointing out to simple folk what are the highest of good works.
Let this be a quick and clear explanation of the First Table of Moses, showing ordinary people what the greatest good deeds are.
[Sidenote: Second Table]
[Sidenote: Second Table]
The Second Table follows.
The Second Table follows.
[Sidenote: The Fourth Commandment]
The Fourth Commandment
"Thou shalt honor thy father and thy mother."
"You shall honor your father and your mother."
From this Commandment we learn that after the excellent works of the first three Commandments there are no better works than to obey and serve all those who are set over us as superiors. For this reason also disobedience is a greater sin than murder, unchastity, theft and dishonesty, and all that these may include. For we can in no better way learn how to distinguish between greater and lesser sins than by noting the order of the Commandments of God, although there are distinctions also within the works of each Commandment. For who does not know that to curse is a greater sin than to be angry, to strike than to curse, to strike father and mother more than to strike any one else? Thus these seven Commandments teach us how we are to exercise ourselves in good works toward men, and first of all toward our superiors.
From this Commandment, we understand that after the important teachings of the first three Commandments, there are no better actions than to obey and serve those in positions of authority over us. This is why disobedience is considered a greater sin than murder, adultery, theft, dishonesty, and everything they encompass. We can learn to differentiate between greater and lesser sins by observing the order of God's Commandments, although there are also distinctions within the actions of each Commandment. Who doesn’t realize that cursing is a bigger sin than being angry, striking someone is worse than cursing, and hitting one's parents is more serious than hitting anyone else? Thus, these seven Commandments guide us in how to practice good deeds toward others, especially toward our superiors.
[Sidenote: Obedience and Honor to Parents]
[Sidenote: Obedience and Honor to Parents]
The first work is that we honor our own father and mother. And this honor consists not only in respectful demeanor, but in this: that we obey them, look up to, esteem and heed their words and example, accept what they say, keep silent and endure their treatment of us, so long as it is not contrary to the first three Commandments; in addition, when they need it, that we provide them with food, clothing and shelter. For not for nothing has He said: "Thou shalt honor them"; He does not say: "Thou shalt love them," although this also must be done. But honor is higher than mere love and includes a certain fear, which unites with love, and causes a man to fear offending them more than he fears the punishment. Just as there is fear in the honor we pay a sanctuary, and yet we do not flee from it as from a punishment, but draw near to it all the more. Such a fear mingled with love is the true honor; the other fear without any love is that which we have toward things which we despise or flee from, as we fear the hangman or punishment. There is no honor in that, for it is a fear without all love, nay, fear that has with it hatred and enmity. Of this we have a proverb of St. Jerome: What we fear, that we also hate. With such a fear God does not wish to be feared or honored, nor to have us honor our parents; but with the first, which is mingled with love and confidence.
The first thing is that we honor our own parents. This honor isn’t just about being respectful; it means we obey them, look up to them, value their words and example, accept what they say, stay silent, and put up with how they treat us, as long as it doesn't go against the first three Commandments. Additionally, when they need it, we should provide them with food, clothing, and shelter. It’s not for nothing that He said, "You shall honor them"; He doesn’t say, "You shall love them," though that’s important too. However, honor is more significant than just love and includes a certain kind of respect, which combines with love and makes us more afraid of disappointing them than of facing consequences. Just as we have a certain fear when we honor a sacred place, we don’t shy away from it like a punishment, but rather draw closer. This kind of fear mixed with love is true honor; the other kind of fear, which is devoid of love, is similar to our fear of things we disdain or avoid, like executioners or punishment. There’s no honor in that, as it’s a fear without love—indeed, a fear laced with hatred and resentment. St. Jerome has a saying: What we fear, we also hate. God doesn’t want us to be afraid in that way, nor does He want us to honor our parents like that; He wants us to honor them with a fear that mixes love and trust.
[Sidenote: Despising of Parents]
[Sidenote: Disrespecting Parents]
II. This work appears easy, but few regard it aright. For where the parents are truly pious and love their children not according to the flesh, but (as they ought) instruct and direct them by words and works to serve God according to the first three Commandments, there the child's own will is constantly broken, and it must do, leave undone, and suffer what its nature would most gladly do otherwise; and thereby it finds occasion to despise its parents, to murmur against them, or to do worse things. There love and fear depart, unless they have God's grace. In like manner, when they punish and chastise, as they ought (at times even unjustly, which, however, does not harm the soul's salvation), our evil nature resents the correction. Beside all this, there are some so wicked that they are ashamed of their patents because of poverty, lowly birth, deformity or dishonor, and allow these things to influence them more than the high Commandment of God, Who is above all things, and has with benevolent intent given them such parents, to exercise and try them in His Commandment. But the matter becomes still worse when the child has children of its own; then love descends to them, and detracts very much from the love and honor toward the parents.
II. This work seems easy, but few see it the right way. When parents are truly devoted and love their children not just physically, but (as they should) teach and guide them through words and actions to serve God according to the first three Commandments, the child's own will is often restricted. The child has to do things it might prefer not to do and avoid what it naturally would want, which leads to feelings of resentment towards the parents, complaints, or even worse behavior. In that environment, love and respect fade away unless there’s divine grace. Similarly, when parents punish and discipline as they should (sometimes even unfairly, which doesn't affect the child's spiritual salvation), our flawed nature resents the correction. On top of that, some are so wicked that they feel ashamed of their parents due to poverty, humble origins, deformity, or disgrace, letting these feelings weigh more than God's high Commandments, who is above everything, and has kindly given them such parents to challenge and test them in His Commandment. It gets even worse when the child has children of their own; then love is redirected towards them, significantly reducing the love and respect for the grandparents.
But what is said and commanded of parents must also be understood of those who, when the parents are dead or absent, take their place, such as relatives, god-parents, sponsors, temporal lords and spiritual fathers. For every one must be ruled and be subject to other men. Wherefore we here see again how many good works are taught in this Commandment, since in it all our life is made subject to other men. Hence it comes that obedience is so highly praised and all virtue and good works are included in it.
But what is said and required of parents also applies to those who, when the parents are gone or not around, step in to take their place, like relatives, godparents, mentors, earthly leaders, and spiritual guides. Everyone is expected to be governed and to be accountable to others. Therefore, we can see once more how many meaningful actions are taught in this Commandment, as it establishes that our entire lives are subject to other people. This is why obedience is so greatly valued, and all virtues and good deeds are encompassed within it.
[Sidenote: Love without Fear]
Love Without Fear
III. There is another dishonoring of parents, much more dangerous and subtle than this first, which adorns itself and passes for a real honor; that is, when a child has its own way, and the parents through natural love allow it. Here there is indeed mutual honor, here there is mutual love, and on all sides it is a precious thing, parents and child take mutual pleasure in one another.
III. There's another way of dishonoring parents that's much more dangerous and subtle than the first, which disguises itself as true honor. This happens when a child gets their way, and the parents, out of natural love, allow it. In this situation, there is mutual honor, mutual love, and it’s a wonderful thing all around; both parents and child find joy in each other.
This plague is so common that instances of the first form of dishonoring[37] are very seldom seen. This is due to the fact that the parents are blinded, and neither know nor honor God according to the first three Commandments; hence also they cannot see what the children lack, and how they ought to teach and train them. For this reason they train them for worldly honors, pleasure and possessions, that they may by all means please men and reach high positions: this the children like, and they obey very gladly without gainsaying.
This problem is so widespread that cases of the first type of dishonor are rarely seen. This happens because the parents are unaware and do not recognize or respect God according to the first three Commandments; as a result, they cannot see what their children are missing or how they should educate and guide them. Therefore, they focus on preparing their kids for worldly success, pleasure, and material things, trying to make them win approval from others and attain high status. The children enjoy this and happily comply without question.
Thus God's Commandment secretly comes to naught while all seems good, and that is fulfilled which is written in the Prophets Isaiah and Jeremiah, that the children are destroyed by their own parents [Is. 57:5, Jer. 7:31; 32:35], and they do like the king Manasseh, who sacrificed his own son to the idol Moloch and burned him, II. Kings xxi [2 Kings 21:6]. What else is it but to sacrifice one's own child to the idol and to burn it, when parents train their children more in the way of the world than in the way of God? let them go their way, and be burned up in worldly pleasure, love, enjoyment, possessions and honor, but let God's love and honor and the desire of eternal blessings be quenched in them?
So God's Commandment quietly becomes meaningless while everything appears fine, and what’s written in the Prophets Isaiah and Jeremiah comes true, that children are harmed by their own parents [Is. 57:5, Jer. 7:31; 32:35], and they behave like King Manasseh, who sacrificed his own son to the idol Moloch and burned him, II. Kings xxi [2 Kings 21:6]. What else is it but to sacrifice one’s own child to an idol and burn it, when parents raise their children more in the ways of the world than in the ways of God? Let them follow their own paths and get consumed by worldly pleasures, love, enjoyment, possessions, and honor, while God’s love and honor and the desire for eternal blessings are extinguished in them?
O how perilous it is to be a father or a mother, where flesh and blood are supreme! For, truly, the knowledge and fulfilment of the first three and the last six Commandments depends altogether upon this Commandment; since parents are commanded to teach them to their children, as Psalm lxxviii. says, "How strictly has He commanded our fathers, that they should make known God's Commandments to their children, that the generation to come might know them and declare them to their children's children." [Ps. 78:5] This also is the reason why God bids us honor our parents, that is, to love them with fear; for that other love is without fear, therefore it is more dishonor than honor.
O how risky it is to be a father or a mother, where family ties are everything! Because, honestly, understanding and following the first three and the last six Commandments relies entirely on this Commandment; parents are told to teach them to their kids, as Psalm 78 says, "How seriously He has commanded our fathers to make God's Commandments known to their children, so that the next generation might know them and pass them on to their children." [Ps. 78:5] This is also why God tells us to honor our parents, which means loving them with respect; because that other kind of love, without respect, is more of a dishonor than an honor.
Now see whether every one does not have good works enough to do, whether he be father or child. But we blind men leave this untouched, and seek all sorts of other works which are not commanded.
Now see if everyone has enough good things to do, whether they are a parent or a child. But we blind people ignore this and look for all sorts of other tasks that are not required.
[Sidenote: The Folly of Parents]
The Mistake of Parents
IV. Now where parents are foolish and train their children after the fashion of the world, the children are in no way to obey them; for God, according to the first three Commandments, is to be more highly regarded than the parents [Acts 5:29]. But training after the fashion of the world I call it, when they teach them to seek no more than pleasure, honor and possessions of this world or its power.
IV. When parents act foolishly and raise their children according to worldly standards, the children shouldn't feel obligated to obey them; because, according to the first three Commandments, God should be prioritized over parents [Acts 5:29]. I refer to this worldly training when parents teach their children to pursue nothing more than pleasure, status, and material wealth or power.
To wear decent clothes and to seek an honest living is a necessity, and not sin. Yet the heart of a child must be taught to be sorry that this miserable earthly life cannot well be lived, or even begun, without the striving after more adornment and more possessions than are necessary for the protection of the body against cold and for nourishment. Thus the child must be taught to grieve that, without its own will, it must do the world's will and play the fool with the rest of men, and endure such evil for the sake of something better and to avoid something worse. So Queen Esther wore her royal crown, and yet said to God, Esther xiv, "Thou knowest, that the sign of my high estate, which is upon my head, has never yet delighted me, and I abhor it as a menstruous rag, and never wear it when I am by myself, but when I must do it and go before the people." [Beth. 14:16 Vulgate] The heart that is so minded wears adornment without peril; for it wears and does not wear, dances and does not dance, lives well and does not live well. And these are the secret souls, hidden brides of Christ, but they are rare; for it is hard not to delight in great adornment and parade. Thus St. Cecilia[38] wore golden clothes at the command of her parents, but within against her body she wore a garment of hair.
To wear decent clothes and seek an honest living is necessary, not sinful. Yet, a child's heart must learn to feel sorry that this tough earthly life can't be lived, or even started, without striving for more adornment and possessions than just what's needed to protect the body from cold and to eat. Thus, the child must be taught to regret that, without its own will, it has to follow the world's expectations and play the fool like everyone else, enduring such hardships for something better and to avoid something worse. So Queen Esther wore her royal crown, but still said to God, Esther xiv, "You know that the sign of my high status on my head has never brought me joy, and I detest it like a menstrual rag, and I never wear it when I'm alone, only when I have to in front of others." [Beth. 14:16 Vulgate] A heart that thinks this way wears adornments without danger; it wears and doesn't wear, dances and doesn't dance, lives well and doesn't live well. These are the secret souls, hidden brides of Christ, but they are rare because it's hard not to take pleasure in great adornment and display. Therefore, St. Cecilia wore golden clothes at her parents' insistence, but underneath she wore a garment made of hair.
Here some men say: "How then could I bring my children into society, and marry them honorably? I must make some display." Tell me, are not these the words of a heart which despairs of God, and trusts more on its own providing than on God's care? Whereas St. Peter teaches and says, I. Peter v, "Cast all your care upon Him, and be certain that He cares for you." [1 Pet. 5:7] It is a sign that they have never yet thanked God for their children, have never yet rightly prayed for them, have never yet commended them to Him; otherwise they would know and have experienced that they ought to ask God also for the marriage dower of their children, and await it from Him. Therefore also He permits them to go their way, with cares and worries, and yet succeed poorly.
Here some men say: "How can I bring my children into society and marry them off honorably? I need to show something." Tell me, are these not the words of someone who has lost faith in God and relies more on their own efforts than on God's care? Meanwhile, St. Peter teaches and says, I. Peter v, "Cast all your care upon Him, and be certain that He cares for you." [1 Pet. 5:7] It shows that they have never really thanked God for their children, have never truly prayed for them, and have never really entrusted them to Him; otherwise, they would know and have experienced that they should ask God for their children's marriage dowries and expect them from Him. That's why He allows them to continue down their path, burdened with cares and worries, yet still not succeeding well.
[Sidenote: Training Children a Good Work]
[Sidenote: Training Kids is a Good Thing]
V. Thus it is true, as men say, that parents, although they had nothing else to do, could attain salvation by training their own children; if they rightly train them to God's service, they will indeed have both hands full of good works to do. For what else are here the hungry, thirsty, naked, imprisoned, sick, strangers, [Matt 25:35] than the souls of your own children? with whom God makes of your house a hospital, and sets you over them as chief nurse, to wait on them, to give them good words and works as meat and drink, that they may learn to trust, believe and fear God, and to place their hope on Him, to honor His Name, not to swear nor curse, to mortify themselves by praying, fasting, watching, working, to attend worship and to hear God's Word, and to keep the Sabbath, that they may learn to despise temporal things, to bear misfortune calmly, and not to fear death nor to love this life.
V. So it’s true, as people say, that parents, even if they had nothing else to do, could achieve salvation by raising their own children; if they train them properly for God’s service, they will truly have their hands full of good deeds to perform. For who are the hungry, thirsty, naked, imprisoned, sick, and strangers, [Matt 25:35] if not the souls of your own children? God turns your home into a hospital and puts you in charge as the main caregiver, to care for them, to provide them with encouraging words and actions as nourishment, so they can learn to trust, believe in, and respect God, to put their hope in Him, to honor His Name, not to swear or curse, to discipline themselves through prayer, fasting, being vigilant, and working, to attend worship, listen to God’s Word, and observe the Sabbath, so they can learn to look down on temporary things, to handle hardships with grace, and not to fear death or cling to this life.
See, what great lessons are these, how many good works you have before you in your home, with your child, that needs all these things like a hungry, thirsty, naked, poor, imprisoned, sick soul. O what a blessed marriage and home were that where such parents were to be found! Truly it would be a real Church, a chosen cloister, yea, a paradise. Of such says Psalm cxxviii: "Blessed are they that fear God, and walk in His Commandments; thou shalt eat of the labor of thine hands; therefore thou shalt be happy, and it shall be well with thee. Thy wife shall be as a fruitful vine in thine house, and thy children shall be as the young scions of laden olive trees about thy table. Behold, thus shall the man be blessed, that feareth the Lord," [Ps. 128:1-4] etc. Where are such parents? Where are they that ask after good works? Here none wishes to come. Why? God has commanded it; the devil, flesh and blood pull away from it; it makes no show, therefore it counts for nothing. Here this husband runs to St. James, that wife vows a pilgrimage to Our Lady; no one vows that he will properly govern and teach himself and his child to the honor of God; he leaves behind those whom God has commanded him to keep in body and soul, and would serve God in some other place, which has not been commanded him. Such perversity no bishop forbids, no preacher corrects; nay, for covetousness' sake they confirm it and daily only invent more pilgrimages, elevations of saints,[39] indulgence-fairs. God have pity on such blindness.
Look at these incredible lessons and all the good work you have waiting for you at home with your child, who needs all these things just like a hungry, thirsty, naked, poor, imprisoned, or sick soul. Oh, what a blessed marriage and home it would be if such parents were found! It would truly be a real Church, a chosen sanctuary, indeed a paradise. As Psalm 128 says: "Blessed are those who fear the Lord and walk in His commandments; you will eat the fruits of your labor; therefore, you will be happy, and it will go well with you. Your wife will be like a fruitful vine in your house, and your children like the young shoots of olive trees around your table. Look, that’s how the man will be blessed who fears the Lord," [Ps. 128:1-4] etc. Where are such parents? Where are those who seek out good works? No one wants to come forward here. Why? God has commanded it; the devil, the flesh, and blood pull away from it; it doesn’t garner attention, so it’s considered worthless. Here, this husband runs to St. James, that wife vows to make a pilgrimage to Our Lady; no one promises to properly govern and teach themselves and their child for the honor of God; they leave behind those whom God has commanded them to care for in body and soul and instead try to serve God elsewhere, which hasn’t been commanded. Such folly goes unchallenged by any bishop, and no preacher corrects it; in fact, for the sake of greed, they support it and create even more pilgrimages, saintly gatherings, and indulgence fairs. God have pity on such blindness.
[Sidenote: Neglect of Children a Cause for Condemnation]
[Sidenote: Neglect of Children a Cause for Condemnation]
VI. On the other hand, parents cannot earn eternal punishment in any way more easily than by neglecting their own children in their own home, and not teaching them the things which have been spoken of above. Of what help is it, that they kill themselves with fasting, praying, making pilgrimages, and do all manner of good works? God will, after all, not ask them about these things at their death and in the day of judgment, but will require of them the children whom He entrusted to them. This is shown by that word of Christ, Luke xxiii, "Ye daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but for yourselves and for your children. The days are coming, in which they shall say; Blessed are the wombs that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck." [Luke 23:28 f.] Why shall they lament, except because all their condemnation comes from their own children? If they had not had children, perhaps they might have been saved. Truly, these words ought to open the eyes of parents, that they may have regard to the souls of their children, so that the poor children be not deceived by their false, fleshly love, as if they had rightly honored their parents when they are not angry with them, or are obedient in worldly matters, by which their self-will is strengthened; although the Commandment places the parents in honor for the very purpose that the self-will of the children may be broken, and that the children may become humble and meek.
VI. On the other hand, parents can’t earn eternal punishment more easily than by neglecting their own children in their own home and failing to teach them the things mentioned above. What good does it do if they kill themselves with fasting, praying, going on pilgrimages, and doing all kinds of good works? God won’t ask them about these things when they die or on judgment day, but will hold them accountable for the children He entrusted to them. This is highlighted by Christ's words in Luke 23:28, "Daughters of Jerusalem, don't weep for me, but weep for yourselves and your children. The days are coming when they will say, 'Blessed are the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed.'" [Luke 23:28 f.] Why should they mourn, unless all their condemnation comes from their own children? If they hadn’t had children, perhaps they might have been saved. Truly, these words should open the eyes of parents so they pay attention to their children’s souls, ensuring the poor kids aren’t misled by their false, selfish love, thinking they’ve done right by their parents as long as they’re not angry with them or are obedient in worldly matters, which only strengthens their own desires. The Commandment honors parents specifically to break the children’s willfulness and help them become humble and meek.
Just as it has been said of the other Commandments, that they are to be fulfilled in the chief work,[40] so here too let no one suppose that the training and teaching of his children is sufficient of itself, except it be done in confidence of divine favor, so that a man doubt not that he is well-pleasing to God in his works, and that he let such works be nothing else than an exhortation and exercise of his faith, that he trust God and look to Him for blessings and a gracious will; without which faith no work lives, or is good and acceptable; for many heathen have trained their children beautifully, but it is all lost, because of their unbelief.
Just like it has been said about the other Commandments, that they are to be fulfilled in the main task,[40] let no one think that just training and teaching their children is enough on its own. It must be done with the confidence of divine favor, so that a person does not doubt that he is pleasing to God in his actions. Those actions should be nothing but an encouragement and practice of his faith, trusting God and looking to Him for blessings and goodwill; without this faith, no action is alive, or good and acceptable. Many non-believers have raised their children well, but it all amounts to nothing because of their lack of faith.
[Sidenote: Obedience to the Church]
[Sidenote: Following the Church]
VII. The second work of this Commandment is to honor and obey the spiritual mother, the holy Christian Church, the spiritual power, so that we conform to what she commands, forbids, appoints, orders, binds and looses, and honor, fear and love the spiritual authority as we honor, love and fear our natural parents, and yield to it in all things which are not contrary to the first three Commandments.
VII. The second part of this Commandment is to respect and follow the spiritual mother, the holy Christian Church, the spiritual authority, so that we adhere to what she commands, forbids, appoints, orders, binds, and looses. We should honor, fear, and love this spiritual authority just as we honor, love, and fear our biological parents, and submit to it in all matters that don’t go against the first three Commandments.
[Sidenote: The Neglected Duty of the Church]
[Sidenote: The Neglected Duty of the Church]
Now with regard to this work, things are almost worse than with regard to the first. The spiritual authority should punish sin with the ban and with laws, and constrain its spiritual children to be good, in order that they might have reason to do this work and to exercise themselves in obeying and honoring it. Such zeal one does not see now; they act toward their subjects like the mothers who forsake their children and run after their lovers, as Hosea ii. [Hos. 2:5] says; they do not preach, they do not teach, they do not hinder, they do not punish, and there is no spiritual government at all left in Christendom.
Now about this work, things are almost worse than with the first. The spiritual authority should deal with sin through bans and laws, pushing its followers to be good, so they have reason to do this work and practice obedience and respect for it. You don’t see that kind of enthusiasm now; they treat their followers like mothers who abandon their children to chase after lovers, as Hosea 2:5 says. They don’t preach, they don’t teach, they don’t intervene, they don’t punish, and there’s no real spiritual leadership left in Christianity.
What can I say of this work? A few fast-days and feast-days are left, and these had better be done away with. But no one gives this a thought, and there is nothing left except the ban for debt, and this should not be. But spiritual authority should look to it, that adultery, unchastity, usury, gluttony, worldly show, excessive adornment, and such like open sin and shame might be most severely punished and corrected; and they should properly manage the endowments, monastic houses, parishes and schools, and earnestly maintain worship in them, provide for the young people, boys and girls, in schools and cloisters, with learned, pious men as teachers, that they might all be well trained, and so the older people give a good example and Christendom be filled and adorned with fine young people. So St. Paul teaches his disciple Titus, that he should rightly instruct and govern all classes, young and old, men and women. [Tit. 2:1-10] But now he goes to school who wishes; he is taught who governs and teaches himself; nay, it has, alas! come to such a pass that the places where good should be taught have become schools of knavery, and no one at all takes thought for the wild youth.
What can I say about this work? There are a few fast days and feast days left, and it would be better to get rid of them. But no one thinks about that, and all that's left is the debt ban, which shouldn’t exist. Spiritual authority should ensure that adultery, unchastity, usury, gluttony, worldly display, excessive adornment, and similar blatant sins are severely punished and corrected. They should properly manage the endowments, monasteries, parishes, and schools, and work hard to maintain worship in these places, providing for young people, both boys and girls, in schools and cloisters, with knowledgeable and pious teachers to ensure they are well-educated. This way, the older generation can set a good example, and Christendom can be filled and enriched with wonderful young people. St. Paul instructs his disciple Titus to properly teach and guide all groups—young and old, men and women. [Tit. 2:1-10] But now, anyone can go to school if they want; they learn from those who govern and teach themselves. Sadly, it has come to such a point that the places meant for good teaching have turned into schools of dishonesty, and no one at all cares for the wayward youth.
[Sidenote: The Worldliness of the Church]
[Sidenote: The Worldliness of the Church]
VIII. If the above order prevailed, one could say how honor and obedience should be given to the spiritual authority. But now the case is like that of the natural parents who let their children do as they please; at present the spiritual authority threatens, dispenses, takes money, and pardons more than it has power to pardon. I will here refrain from saying more; we see more of it than is good; greed holds the reins, and just what should be forbidden is taught; and it is clearly seen that the spiritual estate is in all things more worldly than the worldly estate itself. Meanwhile Christendom must be ruined, and this Commandment perish.
VIII. If the previous order was respected, we could discuss how honor and obedience should be given to spiritual authority. But now it's like natural parents who let their kids do whatever they want; right now, spiritual authority threatens, makes demands, takes money, and grants forgiveness beyond its actual ability to do so. I won’t say more here; we see more of this than is healthy; greed is in control, and what should be off-limits is being taught. It’s obvious that the spiritual realm is much more focused on worldly matters than the secular world itself. Meanwhile, Christendom is heading for destruction, and this Commandment is at risk of disappearing.
If there were a bishop who would zealously provide for all these classes, supervise, make vitiations and be faithful as he ought, truly, one city would be too much for him. For in the time of the Apostles, when Christendom was at its best estate, each city had a bishop, although the smallest part of the inhabitants were Christians. How may things go when one bishop wants to have so much, another so much, this one the whole world, that one the fourth of it.
If there were a bishop who passionately cared for all these groups, supervised, made visits, and was as faithful as he should be, truly, one city would be too much for him. In the time of the Apostles, when Christianity was at its peak, each city had a bishop, even though only a small part of the population were Christians. How can things work when one bishop wants so much, another wants a different amount, one wants the whole world, and another wants a quarter of it?
It is time that we pray God for mercy. Of spiritual power we have much; but of spiritual government nothing or little. Meanwhile may he help who can, that endowments, monastic houses, parishes and schools be well established and managed; and it would also be one of the works of the spiritual authority that it lessen the number of endowments, monastic houses and schools, where they cannot be cared for. It is much better that there be no monastic house or endowment than that there be evil government in them, whereby God is the more provoked to anger.[41]
It's time for us to pray to God for mercy. We have plenty of spiritual strength, but we're lacking in spiritual leadership. In the meantime, may He help in ensuring that endowments, monasteries, parishes, and schools are well-established and well-managed. It would also be beneficial for spiritual authorities to reduce the number of endowments, monasteries, and schools where proper care cannot be provided. It's far better to have no monastery or endowment at all than to have poor management, which only draws more of God's anger.
[Sidenote: Abuses in the Church]
[Sidenote: Church Abuses]
IX. Since, then, the authorities so entirely neglect their work, and are perverted, it must assuredly follow that they misuse their power, and undertake other and evil works, just as parents do when they give some command contrary to God. Here we must be wise; for the Apostle has said, that those times shall be perilous in which such authorities shall rule. [1 Tim. 4:1 ff.] For it seems as if we resisted their power if we do not do and leave undone all that they prescribe. [2 Tim. 3:1 ff.] Therefore we must take hold of the first three Commandments and the First Table, and be certain that no man, neither bishop, nor pope, nor angel, may command or determine anything that is contrary to or hinders these three Commandments, or does not help them; and if they attempt such things, it is not valid and amounts to nothing; and we also sin if we follow and obey, or even tolerate such acts.
IX. Since the authorities are completely neglecting their responsibilities and are corrupt, it is clear that they are misusing their power and engaging in harmful actions, just like parents do when they give commands that go against God. We need to be careful here; as the Apostle has said, these will be dangerous times when such authorities are in charge. [1 Tim. 4:1 ff.] It seems like we are resisting their power if we don’t do everything they tell us to or stop doing what they say we should. [2 Tim. 3:1 ff.] Therefore, we must cling to the first three Commandments and the First Table, making sure that no one—neither a bishop, pope, nor angel—has the right to command or require anything that goes against or undermines these three Commandments or that doesn't support them. If they try to do so, it is invalid and means nothing; and we also sin if we follow, obey, or even tolerate such actions.
From this it is easy to understand that the commands of fasting do not include the sick, the pregnant women, or those who for other reasons cannot fast without injury. And, to rise higher, in our time nothing comes from Rome but a fair of spiritual wares, which are openly and shamelessly bought and sold, indulgences, parishes, monastic houses, bishoprics, provostships, benefices, and every thing that has ever been founded to God's service far and wide; whereby not only is all money and wealth of the world drawn and driven to Rome (for this would be the smallest harm), but the parishes, bishoprics and prelacies are torn to pieces, deserted, laid waste, and so the people are neglected, God's Word and God's Name and honor come to naught, and faith is destroyed, so that at last such institutions and offices fall into the hands not only of unlearned and unfit men, but the greater part into the hands of the Romans, the greatest villains in the world. Thus what has been founded for God's service, for the instruction, government and improvement of the people, must now serve the stable-boys, mule-drivers, yea, not to use plainer language, Roman whores and knaves; yet we have no more thanks than that they mock us for it as fools.
From this, it's easy to see that the rules about fasting don't apply to the sick, pregnant women, or anyone else who can't fast without harming themselves. In our time, all we see coming from Rome is a marketplace of spiritual goods, openly and shamelessly bought and sold—indulgences, parishes, monasteries, bishoprics, provostships, benefices, and everything else that's ever been established for God's service. This not only pulls all the money and wealth of the world to Rome (which would be a minor issue), but it also tears apart parishes, bishoprics, and church leadership, leaving them empty and wasted. The people are neglected; God's Word and honor are disregarded, and faith is destroyed. Eventually, these institutions and positions fall into the hands of not only unqualified and unfit individuals but mainly into the hands of the Romans, the biggest villains in the world. What was meant for God's service, to teach, govern, and uplift the people, now serves stable hands, mule drivers, and, plainly speaking, Roman prostitutes and crooks; yet we receive no gratitude for it, only mockery as fools.
[Sidenote: The Duty of Resisting Abuses in the Church]
[Sidenote: The Responsibility to Stand Up Against Abuses in the Church]
X. If then such unbearable abuses are all carried on in the Name of God and St. Peter, just as if God's Name and the spiritual power were instituted to blaspheme God's honor, to destroy Christendom, body and soul: we are indeed in duty bound to resist in a proper way as much as we can. And here we must do like pious children whose parents have become insane, and first see by what right that which has been founded for God's service in our lands, or has been ordained to provide for our children, must be allowed to do its work in Rome, and to lapse here, where it ought to serve. How can we be so foolish?
X. If these unbearable abuses are all happening in the Name of God and St. Peter, as if God's Name and spiritual authority were meant to insult God's honor and ruin Christendom, both body and soul: we are indeed obligated to resist as best as we can. Here, we should act like faithful children whose parents have lost their minds, and first consider by what right that which was established for God's service in our lands, or meant to care for our children, must operate in Rome and fail here, where it should serve. How can we be so foolish?
Since then bishops and spiritual prelates stand idle in this matter, offer no opposition or are afraid, and thus allow Christendom to perish, it is our duty first of all humbly to call upon God for help to prevent this thing, then to put our hand to work to the same end, send the courtesans[42] and those who bear letters from Rome about their business, in a reasonable, gentle way inform them that, if they wish to care for their parishes properly, they shall live in them and improve the people by preaching or by good example; or if not, and they do live in Rome or elsewhere, lay waste and debauch the churches, then let the pope feed them, whom they serve. It is not fitting that we support the pope's servants, his people, yes, his knaves and whores, to the destruction and injury of our souls.
Since then, bishops and spiritual leaders have stood by idly in this matter, offering no resistance or being too afraid, allowing Christendom to fall apart. It is our duty, first of all, to humbly ask God for help to prevent this from happening, and then to take action ourselves. We should send the courtesans and those carrying letters from Rome about their business, and in a reasonable, gentle way, inform them that if they want to properly care for their parishes, they should live among the people and improve them through preaching or setting a good example. If not, and they choose to stay in Rome or elsewhere, neglecting and corrupting the churches, then let the pope take care of them, as that’s who they serve. It’s not right for us to support the pope's servants, his people, yes, his scoundrels and prostitutes, at the cost of our own souls.
Lo! these are the true Turks, whom the kings, princes and the nobility ought to attack first: not seeking thereby their own benefit, but only the improvement of Christendom, and the prevention of the blasphemy and disgracing of the divine Name; and so to deal with the clergy as with a father who has lost his sense and wits; who, if one did not restrain him and resist him (although with all humility and honor), might destroy child, heir and everybody. Thus we are to honor Roman authority as our highest father; and yet, since they have gone mad and lost their senses, not allow them to do what they attempt, lest Christendom be destroyed thereby.
Look, these are the real Turks that kings, princes, and nobles should confront first: not for their own gain, but for the betterment of Christendom and to prevent the blasphemy and disgrace of the divine Name. They should treat the clergy like a father who has lost his mind; if we don't restrain him and stand against him (while maintaining all humility and respect), he could ruin child, heir, and everyone else. We are to honor Roman authority as our highest father; however, since they have gone mad and lost their senses, we must not let them carry out their plans, or else Christendom could be destroyed as a result.
[Sidenote: The Hopelessness of General Councils]
[Sidenote: The Hopelessness of General Councils]
XI. Some think, this should be referred to a General Council. To this I say: No! For we have had many councils in which this has been proposed, namely, at Constance, Basel and the last Roman Council;[43] but nothing has been accomplished, and things have grown ever worse. Moreover, such councils are entirely useless, since Roman wisdom has contrived the device that the kings and princes must beforehand take an oath to let the Romans remain what they are and keep what they have, and so has put up a bar to ward off all reformation, to retain protection and liberty for all their knavery, although this oath is demanded, forced and taken contrary to God and the law, and by it the doors are locked against the Holy Spirit, Who should rule the councils.[44] But this would be the best, and also the only remedy remaining, if kings, princes, nobility, cities and communities themselves began and opened a way for reformation, so that the bishops and clergy, who now are afraid, would have reason to follow. For here nothing else shall and must be considered except God's first three Commandments, against which neither Rome, nor heaven nor earth can command or forbid anything. And the ban or threatening with which they think they can prevent this, amounts to nothing; just as it amounts to nothing if an insane father severely threatens the son who restrains him or locks him up.[45]
XI. Some believe this should be taken to a General Council. To this, I say: No! We have had many councils where this has been suggested, like at Constance, Basel, and the last Roman Council;[43] but nothing has changed, and things have only gotten worse. Moreover, such councils are completely pointless, as the Roman authorities have set it up so that kings and princes must first swear an oath to maintain the status quo and protect their interests, which puts up a barrier against any real reform, giving them cover for all their wrongdoing. This oath is demanded, forced, and taken against God and the law, effectively shutting out the Holy Spirit, Who should guide the councils.[44] However, the best and only remaining solution would be for the kings, princes, nobility, cities, and communities to take the initiative and pave the way for reform, so that the bishops and clergy, who are currently scared, would have a reason to follow. Here, the only thing that should be considered are God's first three Commandments, against which neither Rome, heaven, nor earth has the authority to command or forbid anything. The threats they think will stop this mean nothing; just like it means nothing if a deranged father harshly threatens the son who tries to calm or restrain him.[45]
[Sidenote: Obedience to the Temporal Authorities]
[Sidenote: Obedience to the Temporal Authorities]
XII. The third work of this Commandment is to obey the temporal authority, as Paul teaches, Romans xiii [Rom. 13:1], and Titus iii [Tit. 3:1], and St. Peter, I. Peter ii [1 Pet. 2:14 f.]: "Submit yourselves to the king as supreme, and to the princes as his ambassadors, and to all the ordinances of the worldly power." But it is the work of the temporal power to protect its subjects, and to punish thievery, robbery, and adultery, as St. Paul says, Romans xiii: "It beareth not the sword in vain; it serves God with it, to the terror of evil doers, and to the protection of the good." [Rom. 13:4]
XII. The third duty of this Commandment is to follow the earthly authority, as Paul teaches in Romans 13 [Rom. 13:1] and Titus 3 [Tit. 3:1], and St. Peter in 1 Peter 2 [1 Pet. 2:14 f.]: "Submit yourselves to the king as the highest authority, and to the governors as his representatives, and to all the laws of the civil power." However, it is the responsibility of the earthly authority to safeguard its citizens and to punish theft, robbery, and adultery, as St. Paul states in Romans 13: "For it does not bear the sword for nothing; it is God's servant to bring punishment on the wrongdoer and to protect those who do good." [Rom. 13:4]
Here men sin in two ways. First, if they lie to the government, deceive it, and are disloyal, neither obey nor do as it has ordered and commanded, whether with their bodies or their possessions. For even if the government does injustice, as the King of Babylon did to the people of Israel, yet God would have it obeyed, without treachery and deception. Secondly, when men speak evil of the government and curse it, and when a man cannot revenge himself and abuses the government with grumbling and evil words, publicly or secretly.
Here, people sin in two ways. First, by lying to the government, deceiving it, and being disloyal, as well as not obeying or following its orders, whether with their actions or their belongings. Even if the government is unjust, like the King of Babylon was to the people of Israel, God still expects obedience without treachery or deception. Second, when people speak negatively about the government and curse it, and when someone can't take revenge and instead complains about the government with grumbling and harsh words, whether openly or privately.
In all this we are to regard that which St. Peter bids us regard, namely, that its power, whether it do right or wrong, cannot harm the soul, but only the body and property; unless indeed it should try openly to compel us to do wrong against God or men; [1 Pet. 2:19 ff.] as in former days when the magistrates were not yet Christians, and as the Turk is now said to do. For to suffer wrong destroys no one's soul, nay, it improves the soul, although it inflicts loss upon the body and property; but to do wrong, that destroys the soul, although it should gain all the world's wealth.
In all this, we need to keep in mind what St. Peter tells us to consider: that its power, whether it does good or bad, cannot harm the soul, only the body and possessions; unless it tries to force us to do wrong against God or others, as was the case in earlier times when the magistrates weren't Christians, and as is said to happen with the Turk today. Suffering wrong doesn't destroy anyone's soul; in fact, it can improve the soul, even if it causes loss to the body and possessions. But doing wrong does destroy the soul, even if it gains all the wealth in the world.
[Sidenote: Why Temporal Authority Dare not, though Spiritual
Authority Must, be Resisted]
[Sidenote: Why Temporal Authority Shouldn't, but Spiritual
Authority Must, be Resisted]
XIII. This also is the reason why there is not such great danger in the temporal power as la the spiritual, when it does wrong. For the temporal power can do no harm, since it has nothing to do with preaching and faith and the first three Commandments. But the spiritual power does harm not only when it does wrong, but also when it neglects its duty and busies itself with other things, even if they were better than the very best works of the temporal power. Therefore, we must resist it when it does not do right, and not resist the temporal power although it does wrong. For the poor people believe and do as they see the spiritual power believing and doing; if they are not set an example and are not taught, then they also believe nothing and do nothing; since this power is instituted for no other reason than to lead the people in faith to God. All this is not found in the temporal power; for it may do and leave undone what it will, my faith to God still goes its way and works its works, because I need not believe what it believes.
XIII. This is also why there isn’t as much danger in temporal power as there is in spiritual power when it goes wrong. The temporal power cannot cause much harm since it’s not involved with preaching, faith, or the first three Commandments. However, the spiritual power can cause harm not only when it makes mistakes but also when it neglects its responsibilities and focuses on other things, even if those things are better than the best actions of temporal power. Therefore, we need to stand against it when it goes wrong, but we shouldn't resist temporal power even if it does wrong. The common people believe and act based on what they see the spiritual power believing and doing; if they aren't given a proper example and taught, they also believe nothing and do nothing, since this power exists solely to guide the people in faith toward God. All of this is absent in temporal power; it can act however it wants, but my faith in God will still follow its path and carry out its actions, because I don’t have to believe what it believes.
Therefore, also, the temporal power is a very small thing in God's sight, and far too slightly regarded by Him, that for its sake, whether it do right or wrong, we should resist, become disobedient and quarrel. On the other hand, the spiritual power is an exceeding great blessing, and far too precious in His eyes, that the very least of Christians should endure and keep silent, if it departs a hair's breadth from its own duty, not to say when it does the very opposite of its duty, as we now see it do every day.
Therefore, the temporary power is insignificant in God’s eyes and He thinks too little of it for us to resist, disobey, or argue over it, whether it’s right or wrong. In contrast, the spiritual power is a tremendous blessing and far too valuable to Him, so even the smallest of Christians should tolerate and remain silent if it strays even slightly from its own duty, let alone when it completely goes against its duty, as we witness happening every day.
[Sidenote: The Errors of Temporal Authority]
[Sidenote: The Errors of Temporal Authority]
XIV. In this power also there is much abuse. First, when it follows the flatterers, which is a common and especially harmful plague of this power, against which no one can sufficiently guard and protect himself. Here it is led by the nose, and oppresses the common people, becomes a government of the like of which a heathen says: "The spider-webs catch the small flies, but the mill-stones roll through." So the laws, ordinances and government of one and the same authority hold the small men, and the great are free; and where the prince is not himself so wise that he needs nobody's advice, or has such a standing that they fear him, there will and must be (unless God should do a special wonder) a childish government.
XIV. This power also has a lot of abuses. First, it tends to follow the flatterers, which is a widespread and particularly harmful issue with this power, and it's something no one can fully defend against. Here, it’s easily manipulated and ends up oppressing ordinary people. It becomes a government like the saying goes: "The spider-web catches the small flies, but the millstones roll over them." In this way, the laws, regulations, and governance from one authority control the small folks, while the powerful go unchallenged. And when the prince isn't wise enough to stand on his own or doesn’t have a reputation that commands fear, there will inevitably be a foolish government—unless, of course, God intervenes in a miraculous way.
For this reason God has considered evil, unfit rulers the greatest of plagues, as He threatens, Isaiah iii, "I will take away from them every man of valor, and will give children to be their princes and babes to rule over them." [Is. 3:2] Four plagues God has named in Scripture, Ezekiel xiv. [Ezek. 14:13 ff.] the first and slightest, which also David chose [2 Sam. 24:13 f.], is pestilence, the second is famine, the third is war, the fourth is all manner of evil beasts, such as lions, wolves, serpents, dragons; these are the wicked rulers. For where these are, the land is destroyed, not only in body and property, as in the others, but also in honor, discipline, virtue and the soul's salvation. For pestilence and famine make people good and rich; but war and wicked rulers bring to naught everything that has to do with temporal and eternal.
For this reason, God has viewed evil, unfit rulers as the worst of plagues, as He states in Isaiah 3, "I will take away from them every man of valor, and will give children to be their princes and babies to rule over them." [Is. 3:2] God identifies four plagues in Scripture, as mentioned in Ezekiel 14. [Ezek. 14:13 ff.] The first and least severe one, which David also chose [2 Sam. 24:13 f.], is pestilence. The second is famine, the third is war, and the fourth involves various wild beasts, like lions, wolves, serpents, and dragons; these symbolize the wicked rulers. Wherever these exist, the land suffers destruction, not just in terms of physical damage and property loss, as with the others, but also in honor, discipline, virtue, and the salvation of the soul. Pestilence and famine may lead people to become virtuous and prosperous; however, war and wicked rulers ruin everything related to both the temporal and the eternal.
[Sidenote: Wisdom Needed in the Exercise of Authority]
[Sidenote: Wisdom Needed in the Exercise of Authority]
XV. A prince must also be very wise and not at all times undertake to enforce his own will, although he may have the authority and the very best cause. For it is a far nobler virtue to endure wrong to one's authority than to risk property and person, if it is advantageous to the subjects; since worldly rights attach only to temporal goods.
XV. A prince should be wise and not always try to impose his will, even if he has the authority and a solid reason. It’s a much nobler virtue to tolerate wrongs against one's authority than to put property and people's safety at risk, especially when it benefits the subjects; because worldly rights are tied only to material possessions.
Hence, it is a very foolish saying: I have a right to it, therefore I will take it by storm and keep it, although all sorts of misfortune may come to others thereby. So we read of the Emperor Octavianus,[46] that he did not wish to make war, however just his cause might be, unless there were sure indications of greater benefit than harm, or at least that the harm would not be intolerable, and said: "War is like fishing with a golden net; the loss risked is always greater than the catch can be." For he who guides a wagon must walk far otherwise than if he were walking alone; when alone he may walk, jump, and do as he will; but when he drives, he must so guide and adapt himself that the wagon and horses can follow him, and regard that more than his own will. So also a prince leads a multitude with him and must not walk and act as he wills, but as the multitude can, considering their need and advantage more than his will and pleasure. For when a prince rules after his own mad will and follows his own opinion, he is like a mad driver, who rushes straight ahead with horse and wagon, through bushes, thorns, ditches, water, up hill and down dale, regardless of roads and bridges; he will not drive long, all will go to smash.
So, it’s a really foolish saying: I have a right to it, so I’ll just take it and keep it, no matter what misfortunes might come to others because of it. We read about Emperor Octavian, who didn’t want to go to war, no matter how justified his cause was, unless he was sure the benefits would outweigh the harm, or at least that the harm wouldn’t be unbearable. He said, "War is like fishing with a golden net; the potential loss is always greater than what you might catch." A person guiding a wagon has to walk a lot differently than if they were just walking alone. When you’re by yourself, you can walk, jump, and do as you please, but when you’re driving a wagon, you have to lead and adjust yourself so that the wagon and horses can follow, focusing on that more than your own desires. Similarly, a prince leads a crowd and can’t act just as he wants, but has to consider how the crowd can follow, keeping their needs and benefits in mind more than his own will and enjoyment. When a prince rules only by his wild desires and follows his own opinions, he’s like a reckless driver who charges ahead with horse and wagon through bushes, thorns, ditches, water, up hills and down valleys, ignoring roads and bridges; he won’t drive far before everything will fall apart.
Therefore it would be most profitable for rulers, that they read, or have read to them, from youth on, the histories, both in sacred and in profane books, in which they would find more examples and skill in ruling than in all the books of law; as we read that the kings of Persia did, Esther vi. [Esth. 6:1 ff.] For examples and histories benefit and teach more than the laws and statutes: there actual experience teaches, here untried and uncertain words.
Therefore, it would be most beneficial for rulers to read, or have read to them, from a young age, the histories, both sacred and secular, where they would discover more examples and skills in leadership than in all the legal texts; just as we read that the kings of Persia did in Esther vi. [Esth. 6:1 ff.] For examples and histories provide more benefit and learning than laws and statutes: here actual experience teaches, while there are only untested and uncertain words.
[Sidenote: Good Works for Rulers]
Good Deeds for Leaders
[Sidenote: Economic Reforms: Gluttony]
Economic Reforms: Overindulgence
XVI. Three special, distinct works all rulers might do in our times, particularly in our lands. First, to make an end of the horrible gluttony and drunkenness, not only because of the excess, but also because of its expense. For through seasonings and spices and the like, without which men could well live, no little loss of temporal wealth has come and daily is coming upon our lands. To prevent these two great evils would truly give the temporal power enough to do, for the inroads they have made are wide and deep. And how could those in power serve God better and thereby also improve their own land?
XVI. Three important and distinct actions that all rulers could take today, especially in our regions. First, to put an end to the terrible overindulgence in food and drink, not just because of the excess, but also due to the financial burden. The use of seasonings and spices, and similar luxuries that people can manage without, has caused a significant loss of wealth in our lands, and continues to do so. Addressing these two major issues would certainly provide enough work for those in power, as their impact is broad and profound. And how could those in authority serve God better and also benefit their own regions?
[Sidenote: Luxury]
Luxury
[Sidenote: Rent-charges]
[Note: Rent charges]
Secondly, to forbid the excessive cost of clothing, whereby so much wealth is wasted, and yet only the world and the flesh are served; it is fearful to think that such abuse is to be found among the people who have been pledged, baptised and consecrated to Christ, the Crucified, and who should bear the Cross after Him and prepare for the life to come by dying daily. If some men erred through ignorance, it might be borne; but that it is practised so freely, without punishment, without shame, without hindrance, nay, that praise and fame are sought thereby, this is indeed an unchristian thing. Thirdly, to drive out the usurious buying of rent-charges,[47] which in the whole world ruins, consumes and troubles all lands, peoples and cities through its cunning form, by which it appears not to be usury, while in truth it is worse than usury, because men are not on their guard against it as against open usury. See, these are the three Jews, as men say, who suck the whole world dry. Here princes ought not to sleep, nor be lazy, if they would give a good account of their office to God.
Secondly, to prohibit the excessive spending on clothing, which wastes so much wealth and only serves worldly desires; it’s alarming to think that such behavior can be found among people who have been pledged, baptized, and dedicated to Christ, the Crucified, and who are called to take up the Cross after Him and prepare for the afterlife by dying to themselves daily. If some individuals were misguided out of ignorance, it might be manageable; but the fact that it is practiced so openly, without consequence, without shame, without restriction, and even sought after for praise and reputation, is truly unchristian. Thirdly, to eliminate the usurious buying of rent-charges, which devastates, consumes, and troubles all lands, peoples, and cities worldwide through its deceptive nature, making it seem not like usury while, in reality, it is worse than usury since people do not guard against it like they would against overt usury. Look, these are the three Jews, as people say, who drain the world dry. Here, princes should not be complacent or lazy if they want to give a good account of their responsibilities to God.
[Sidenote: Exections of the Church]
[Side note: Exemptions of the Church]
XVII. Here too ought to be mentioned the knavery which is practised by officiales[48] and other episcopal and spiritual officers, who ban, load, hunt and drive the poor people with great burdens, as long as a penny remains. This ought to be prevented by the temporal sword, since there is no other help or remedy.
XVII. Here too, we should mention the trickery practiced by officiales[48] and other church officials, who impose, overburden, exploit, and harass the poor as long as they have even a single penny left. This should be stopped by force, since there’s no other help or solution.
[Sidenote: Vice]
[Sidenote: Vice]
O, would God in heaven, that some time a government might be established that would do away with the public bawdy-houses, as was done among the people of Israel! It is indeed an unchristian sight, that public houses of are maintained among Christians, a thing formerly altogether unheard of. It should be a rule that boys and girls should be married early and such vice be prevented. Such a rule and custom ought to be sought for by both the spiritual and the temporal power. If it was possible among the Jews, why should it not also be possible among Christians? Nay, if it is possible in villages, towns and some cities, as we all see, why should it not be possible everywhere?
Oh, I wish that someday a government could be established that would eliminate public brothels, just as it was done among the people of Israel! It's truly an unchristian sight to see public houses tolerated among Christians, something that was previously completely unheard of. There should be a standard that encourages boys and girls to marry young to prevent such vice. This kind of rule and custom should be pursued by both religious and secular authorities. If it was possible among the Jews, why shouldn't it also be achievable among Christians? In fact, if it's happening in villages, towns, and some cities, as we can all see, why shouldn't it be possible everywhere?
But the trouble is, there is no real government in the world. No one wants to work, therefore the mechanics must give their workmen holiday: then they are free and no one can tame them. But if there were a rule that they must do as they are bid, and no one would give them work in other places, this evil would to a large extent be mended. God help us! I fear that here the wish is far greater than the hope; but this does not excuse us.
But the problem is, there’s no real government in the world. No one wants to work, so the mechanics have to give their workers time off: then they’re free, and no one can control them. But if there were a rule that they had to follow orders, and no one would hire them elsewhere, this issue would mostly be fixed. God help us! I worry that here, the desire is much stronger than the hope; but that doesn’t excuse us.
Now see, here only a few works of magistrates are indicated, but they are so good and so many, that they have superabundant good works to do every hour and could constantly serve God. But these works, like the others, should also be done in faith, yea, be an exercise of faith, so that no one expect to please God by the works, but by confident trust in His favor do such works only to the honor and praise of his gracious God, thereby to serve and benefit his neighbor.
Now look, here are just a few examples of the work done by magistrates, but they are so good and so numerous that they have more than enough good deeds to accomplish every hour and could continuously serve God. However, just like the others, these works should also be done in faith; they should be an expression of faith, so that no one expects to please God through their actions, but instead, they carry out those actions with confident trust in His favor, solely for the honor and praise of their gracious God, and to serve and benefit their neighbor.
[Sidenote: Obedience to Masters]
[Sidenote: Following Your Leaders]
XVIII. The fourth work of this Commandment is obedience of servants and workmen toward their lords and ladies, masters and mistresses. Of this St. Paul says, Titus ii: "Thou shalt exhort servants that they highly honor their masters, be obedient, do what pleases them, not cheating them nor opposing them" [Tit. 2:9 f. 8]; for this reason also: because they thereby bring the doctrine of Christ and our faith into good repute, that the heathen cannot complain of us and be offended [1 Tim. 6:1]. St. Peter also says: "Servants, be subject to your masters, for the fear of God, not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward and harsh. For this is acceptable with God, if a man suffers harshness, being innocent." [1 Pet. 2:18 f.]
XVIII. The fourth duty of this Commandment is the obedience of servants and workers to their lords and ladies, masters and mistresses. St. Paul says in Titus 2: "You should encourage servants to honor their masters, be obedient, do what pleases them, and not cheat or defy them" [Tit. 2:9 f. 8]; this is important because it reflects well on the teachings of Christ and our faith, so that non-believers cannot complain about us or be offended [1 Tim. 6:1]. St. Peter also mentions: "Servants, submit to your masters with respect for God, not just to the kind and gentle, but also to the difficult and harsh. For this is pleasing to God, if someone endures hardships while being innocent." [1 Pet. 2:18 f.]
Now there is the greatest complaint in the world about servants and working men, that they are disobedient, unfaithful, unmannerly, and over-reaching; this is a plague sent of God. And truly, this is the one work of servants whereby they may be saved; truly they need not make pilgrimages or do this thing or the other; they have enough to do if their heart is only set on this, that they gladly do and leave undone what they know pleases their masters and mistresses, and all this in a simple faith [Eph. 6:5]; not that they would by their works gain much merit, but that they do it all in the confidence of divine favor [Col. 3:22] (in which all merits are to be found), purely for nothing, out of the love and good-will toward God which grows out of such confidence. And all such works they should think of as an exercise and exhortation ever to strengthen their faith and confidence more and more. For, as has now been frequently said, this faith makes all works good, yea, it must do them and be the master-workman.
Now there is a big complaint in the world about servants and laborers, that they are disobedient, untrustworthy, rude, and greedy; this is a problem sent by God. And honestly, this is the main task for servants through which they can find salvation; they don’t need to go on pilgrimages or do this or that; they have more than enough to do if their hearts are focused on simply doing what pleases their masters and mistresses, and leaving aside what doesn’t, all with a sincere faith [Eph. 6:5]; not that they expect to earn much merit through their actions, but that they do it all with the confidence of divine favor [Col. 3:22] (where all merits are found), purely for the sake of love and goodwill towards God that spring from that confidence. They should think of all these acts as a practice and encouragement to strengthen their faith and confidence even more. As has been said many times, this faith makes all actions good; yes, it must perform them and be the primary driver.
[Sidenote: Duties of Masters]
[Duties of Masters]
XIX. On the other hand, the masters and mistresses should not rule their servants, maids and workingmen roughly, not look to all things too closely, occasionally overlook something, and for peace' sake make allowances. For it is not possible that everything be done perfectly at all times among any class of men, as long as we live on earth in imperfection. Of this St. Paul says, Colossians iv, "Masters, do unto your servants that which is just and equal, knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven." [Col. 4:1] Therefore as the masters do not wish God to deal too sharply with them, but that many things be overlooked through grace, they also should be so much the more gentle toward their servants, and overlook some things, and yet have a care that the servants do right and learn to fear God.
XIX. On the flip side, employers and bosses shouldn't treat their employees, maids, and workers harshly. They need to be mindful not to nitpick every little thing, occasionally let some things slide, and for the sake of harmony, show some understanding. It's impossible for everything to be done perfectly all the time among any group of people, as long as we're living in an imperfect world. St. Paul says in Colossians iv, "Masters, treat your servants fairly and equally, knowing that you also have a Master in heaven." [Col. 4:1] Therefore, just as bosses wouldn't want God to judge them too strictly but hope that many shortcomings are overlooked out of grace, they should also be more forgiving with their employees, letting some things go while still ensuring their workers do their jobs well and learn to respect God.
But see now, what good works a householder and a mistress can do, how finely God offers us all good works so near at hand, so manifold, so continuously, that we have no need of asking after good works, and might well forget the other showy, far-off, invented works of men, such as making pilgrimages, building churches, seeking indulgence, and the like.
But look now, at the good things a homeowner and a hostess can do, how beautifully God presents us with so many good deeds right within reach, constantly available, that we don't even need to search for good works, and might as well overlook the flashy, distant, made-up deeds of people, like going on pilgrimages, constructing churches, seeking indulgences, and so on.
[Sidenote: Husband and Wife]
[Note: Husband and Wife]
Here I ought naturally also to say how a wife ought to be obedient, subject to her husband as to her superior, give way to him, keep silent and give up to him, where it is a matter not contrary to God's commands. On the other hand, the husband should love his wife, overlook a little, and not deal strictly with her, of which matter St. Peter [1 Pet. 3:6 ff.] and St. Paul [Eph. 5:22 ff., Col. 3:18 ff.] have said much. But this has its place in the further explanation of the Ten Commandments, and is easily inferred from these passages.
Here, I should naturally mention how a wife should be obedient and submissive to her husband as her superior, yielding to him, remaining silent, and giving in to him when it doesn’t go against God's commands. On the other hand, the husband should love his wife, be forgiving, and not be overly strict with her, as emphasized by St. Peter [1 Pet. 3:6 ff.] and St. Paul [Eph. 5:22 ff., Col. 3:18 ff.]. This will be further explained in the context of the Ten Commandments and is easily understood from these passages.
[Sidenote: Summary]
[Sidenote: Summary]
XX. But all that has been said of these works is included in these two, obedience and considerateness.[49] Obedience is the duty of subjects, considerateness that of masters, that they take care to rule their subjects well, deal kindly with them, and do everything whereby they may benefit and help them. That is their way to heaven, and these are the best works they can do on earth; with these they are more acceptable to God than if without these they did nothing but miracles. So says St. Paul, Romans ii: "He that ruleth, let him do it with diligence"; [Rom. 12:8] as who should say: "Let him not allow himself to be led astray by what other people or classes of people do; let him not look to this work or to that, whether it be splendid or obscure; but let him look to his own position, and think only how he may benefit those who are subject to him; by this let him stand, nor let himself be torn from it, although heaven stood open before him, nor be driven from it, although hell were chasing him. This is the right road that leads him to heaven."
XX. But everything that has been said about these actions can be summed up in two ideas: obedience and consideration. Obedience is the responsibility of those under authority, while consideration is the responsibility of those in power, ensuring they govern their subjects well, treat them kindly, and do everything that can benefit and help them. This is their path to heaven, and these are the most meaningful actions they can take on earth; with these actions, they are more pleasing to God than if they performed miracles without them. St. Paul says in Romans ii: "He who leads should do so with diligence"; as if to say: "Do not be swayed by what others or different social groups do; do not focus on this task or that one, whether it is impressive or humble; instead, concentrate on your own role and think only about how you can benefit those under your care; hold firmly to this, regardless of whether heaven is open before you or if hell is pursuing you. This is the right path that leads to heaven."
Oh, if a man were so to regard himself and his position, and attended to its duties alone, how rich in good works would he be in a short time, so quietly and secretly that no one would notice it except God alone! But now we let all this go, and one runs to the Carthusians,[50] another to this place, a third to that, just as if good works and God's Commandments had been thrown into corners and hidden; although it is written in Proverbs i, that divine wisdom crieth out her commandments publicly in the streets, in the midst of the people and in the gates of the cities; [Prov. 1:20 f.] which means that they are present in profusion in all places, in all stations of life and at all times, and we do not see hem, but in our blindness look for them elsewhere. This Christ declared, Matthew xxiv: "If they shall say unto you: Lo, here is Christ, or there, believe it not. If they shall say: Behold, He is in the desert, go not forth; behold. He is in the secret chambers, believe it not; they are false prophets and false Christs." [Matt. 24:23-26]
Oh, if a person were to truly consider themselves and their role, focusing solely on their responsibilities, how abundant they would be in good deeds in no time, so quietly and secretly that no one would notice except for God! But now we neglect all this, and one person runs to the Carthusians, another goes here, a third goes there, as if good deeds and God's commandments have been tossed aside and hidden away; even though it says in Proverbs 1 that divine wisdom publicly calls out her commandments in the streets, among the people, and at the city gates, which means they are everywhere, in every walk of life and at all times, yet we fail to see them and, in our blindness, look for them elsewhere. This is what Christ stated in Matthew 24: "If they say to you, 'Look, here is Christ,' or 'There,' do not believe it. If they say, 'He is in the desert,' do not go out; if they say, 'He is in the inner rooms,' do not believe it; for false prophets and false Christs will arise."
XXI. Again, obedience is the duty of subjects, that they direct all their diligence and effort to do and to leave undone what their over-lords desire of them, that they do not allow themselves to be torn or driven from this, whatever another do. Let no man think that he lives well or does good works, whether it be prayer or fasting, or by whatever name it may be called, if he does not earnestly and diligently exercise himself in this.
XXI. Again, obedience is the responsibility of those under authority, as they should focus all their attention and effort on doing and refraining from what their superiors want from them, and not let themselves be swayed from this, no matter what others do. Let no one believe that they live well or perform good deeds, whether it’s through prayer, fasting, or by any other name, if they don’t seriously and consistently engage in this.
[Sidenote: The Limits of Obedience]
[Sidenote: The Limits of Obeying]
But if it should happen, as it often does, that the temporal power and authorities, as they are called, should urge a subject to do contrary to the Commandments of God, or hinder him from doing them, there obedience ends, and that duty is annulled. Here a man must say as St. Peter says to the rulers of the Jews: "We ought to obey God rather than men." [Acts 5:29] He did not say: "We must not obey men"; for that would be wrong; but he said: "God rather than men." Thus, if a prince desired to go to war, and his cause was manifestly unrighteous, we should not follow nor help him at all; since God has commanded that we shall not kill our neighbor, nor do him injustice. Likewise, if he bade us bear false witness, steal, lie or deceive and the like. Here we ought rather give up goods, honor, body, and life, that God's Commandments may stand.
But if it should happen, as it often does, that the temporal power and authorities, as they are called, pressure someone to act against the Commandments of God, or prevent him from following them, obedience ends there, and that duty is void. In such cases, a person should say what St. Peter said to the Jewish leaders: "We ought to obey God rather than men." [Acts 5:29] He didn’t say: "We must not obey men"; that would be wrong. Instead, he said: "God rather than men." Therefore, if a ruler wanted to go to war, and the reason was clearly unjust, we should not support him at all; since God has commanded us not to kill our neighbor or do him harm. Similarly, if he instructed us to bear false witness, steal, lie, or deceive, we should be willing to give up our possessions, honor, body, and life, so that God's Commandments may prevail.
[Sidenote: The Fifth Commandment]
[Sidenote: The 5th Commandment]
The four preceding Commandments have their works in the understanding, that is, they take a man captive, rule him and make him subject, so that he rule not himself, approve not himself, think not highly of himself; but in humility know himself and allow himself to be led, that pride be prevented. The following Commandments deal with the passions and lust of men, that these also be killed.
The four preceding Commandments operate in the mind; they take a person captive, govern them, and make them submissive, so they don’t govern themselves, don’t approve of themselves, and don’t think too highly of themselves; instead, they should humbly know themselves and allow themselves to be guided, preventing pride. The next Commandments address human passions and desires, aiming to eliminate those as well.
[Sidenote: The Duty of Meekness]
The Responsibility of Humility
[Sidenote: False Meekness]
[Sidenote: Fake Humility]
I. The passions of anger and revenge, of which the Fifth Commandment says, "Thou shalt not kill." This Commandment has one work, which however includes many and dispels many vices, and is called meekness.[51] Now this is of two kinds. The one has a beautiful splendor, and there is nothing back of it. This we practice toward our friends and those who do us good and give us pleasure with goods, honor and favor, or who do not offend us with words nor with deeds. Such meekness irrational animals have, lions and snakes, Jews, Turks, knaves, murderers, bad women. These are all content and gentle when men do what they want, or let them alone; and yet there are not a few who, deceived by such worthless meekness, cover over their anger and excuse it, saying: "I would indeed not be angry, if I were left alone." Certainly, my good man, so the evil spirit also would be meek if he had his own way. Dissatisfaction and resentment overwhelm you in order that they may show you how full of anger and wickedness you are, that you may be admonished to strive after meekness and to drive out anger.
I. The feelings of anger and revenge, which the Fifth Commandment states, "You shall not kill." This Commandment has a purpose, which also addresses various issues and is known as meekness.[51] Meekness comes in two forms. One has a beautiful shine, but nothing lies behind it. We show this toward our friends and those who treat us well, bringing us joy with their kindness, honor, and support, or who don’t offend us with words or actions. Even irrational animals, like lions and snakes, along with Jews, Turks, scoundrels, murderers, and bad women, can display such meekness. They are calm and gentle when people do what they want or leave them alone; yet many who are misled by this false meekness hide their anger and justify it by saying, "I wouldn’t be angry if I were just left alone." Indeed, my friend, the evil spirit would also appear meek if he got his way. Discontent and resentment take hold of you to reveal just how full of anger and wickedness you truly are, urging you to seek true meekness and rid yourself of anger.
[Sidenote: True Meekness]
[Sidenote: True Humility]
The second form of meekness is good through and through, that which is shown toward opponents and enemies, does them no harm, does not revenge itself, does not curse nor revile, does not speak evil of them, does not meditate evil against them, although they had taken away goods, honor, life, friends and everything. Nay, where it is possible, it returns good for evil, speaks well of them, thinks well of them, prays for them. Of this Christ says, in Matthew v: "Do good to them that despitefully use you. Pray for them that persecute you and revile you." [Matt. 5:44] And Paul, Romans xii: "Bless them which curse you, and by no means curse them, but do good to them." [Rom. 12:14 f.]
The second type of meekness is completely good, the kind shown toward opponents and enemies. It doesn’t harm them, seek revenge, curse, insult, or speak ill of them, nor does it wish evil upon them, even if they have taken away possessions, honor, life, friends, and everything else. Instead, when possible, it returns good for evil, speaks positively about them, thinks kindly of them, and prays for them. Christ said in Matthew 5: "Do good to those who mistreat you. Pray for those who persecute and insult you." [Matt. 5:44] And Paul wrote in Romans 12: "Bless those who curse you, and do not curse them back, but do good to them." [Rom. 12:14 f.]
II. Behold how this precious, excellent work has been lost among Christians, so that nothing now everywhere prevails except strife, war, quarreling, anger, hatred, envy, back-biting, cursing, slandering, injuring, vengeance, and all manner of angry works and words; and yet, with all this, we have our many holidays, hear masses, say our prayers, establish churches, and more such spiritual finery, which God has not commanded. We shine resplendently and excessively, as if we were the most holy Christians there ever were. And so because of these mirrors and masks we allow God's Commandment to go to complete ruin, and no one considers or examines himself, how near or how far he be from meekness and the fulfilment of this Commandment; although God has said, that not he who does such works, but he who keeps his Commandments, shall enter into eternal life. [John 14:15, 21; 15:10]
II. Look at how this valuable and important work has been lost among Christians, so that now all we see is conflict, war, arguments, anger, hatred, jealousy, gossip, curses, slander, harm, revenge, and every kind of angry behavior and speech. Yet, despite all this, we still have our many holidays, attend masses, say our prayers, build churches, and engage in other forms of spiritual showiness that God hasn't commanded. We shine brightly and show off, as if we are the holiest Christians to ever exist. Because of these false appearances, we let God's Commandments fall into ruin, and no one takes the time to reflect on how close or how far they are from being kind and following this Commandment; even though God has said that it’s not the one who does these works, but the one who keeps His Commandments, who will enter into eternal life. [John 14:15, 21; 15:10]
[Sidenote: Enemies an Occasion for Good Works]
[Sidenote: Enemies an Occasion for Good Works]
How, since no one lives on earth upon whom God does not bestow an enemy and opponent as a proof of his own anger and wickedness, that is, one who afflicts him in goods, honor, body or friends, and thereby tries whether anger is still present, whether he can be well-disposed toward his enemy, speak well of him, do good to him, and not intend any evil against him; let him come forward who asks what he shall do that he may do good works, please God and be saved. Let him set his enemy before him, keep him constantly before the eyes of his heart, as an exercise whereby he may curb his spirit and train his heart to think kindly of his enemy, wish him well, care for him and pray for him; and then, when opportunity offers, speak well of him and do good to him. Let him who will, try this and if he find not enough to do all his life long, he may convict me of lying, and say that my contention was wrong. But if this is what God desires, and if He will be paid in no other coin, of what avail is it, that we busy ourselves with other great works which are not commanded, and neglect this? Therefore God says, Matthew v, "I say unto you, that whosoever is angry with his neighbor, is in danger of the judgment; but whosoever shall say to his brother, Thou fool (that is, all manner of invective, cursing, reviling, slandering), he shall be in danger of everlasting fire." [Matt. 5:22] What remains then for the outward act, striking, wounding, killing, injuring, etc., if the thoughts and words of anger are so severely condemned?
How is it that no one on earth escapes having an enemy or opponent as proof of God's anger and evil, someone who causes harm to their possessions, honor, body, or friends, testing whether their anger still exists, whether they can feel positively toward their enemy, speak well of them, do good for them, and not wish them harm? Let anyone who wants to know how to do good works, please God, and find salvation step forward. They should keep their enemy in sight, always before their heart's eyes, as a way to control their spirit and train their heart to think kindly of their enemy, to wish them well, care for them, and pray for them; and then, when the chance arises, speak well of them and do good for them. Whoever wants to try this and finds that they can engage with it for their entire life can call me a liar and say I was wrong. But if this is what God desires and He won't accept anything else, what good is it for us to occupy ourselves with other great works that aren't commanded, while neglecting this? Therefore, God says in Matthew 5, "I say to you, that anyone who is angry with their neighbor will be in danger of judgment; but whoever says to their brother, 'You fool' (meaning any kind of insult, cursing, slandering), will be in danger of everlasting fire." [Matt. 5:22] So what remains of outward actions like hitting, wounding, killing, or harming, if even thoughts and words of anger are so strongly condemned?
III. But where there is true meekness, there the heart is pained at every evil which happens to one's enemy. And these are the true children and heirs of God and brethren of Christ, Whose heart was so pained for us all when He died on the holy Cross. Even so we see a pious judge passing sentence upon the criminal with sorrow, and regretting the death which the law imposes. Here the act seems to be one of anger and harshness. So thoroughly good is meekness that even in such works of anger it remains, nay, it torments the heart most sorely when it must be angry and severe.
III. But where there is true humility, the heart aches at every wrong that happens to an enemy. These are the genuine children and heirs of God and brothers and sisters of Christ, whose heart was deeply troubled for all of us when He died on the holy Cross. Similarly, we see a compassionate judge delivering a sentence to the criminal with sadness, regretting the death that the law requires. In this situation, the action may appear to be one of anger and strictness. Meekness is so fundamentally good that even in moments of anger, it still exists; in fact, it torments the heart even more when it has to be angry and harsh.
[Sidenote: The Limits of Meekness]
[Sidenote: The Limits of Humility]
But here we must watch, that we be not meek contrary to God's honor and Commandment. For it is written of Moses that he was the very meekest man on earth, and yet, when the Jews had worshiped the golden calf and provoked God to anger [Sir. 45:4], he put many of them to death, and thereby made atonement before God. [Ex. 32:28] Likewise it is not fitting that the magistrates should be idle and allow sin to have sway, and that we say nothing. My own possessions, my honor, my injury, I must not regard, nor grow angry because of them; but God's honor and Commandment we must protect, and injury or injustice to our neighbor we must prevent, the magistrates with the sword, the rest of us with reproof and rebuke, yet always with pity for those who have merited the punishment.
But here we need to be careful not to be overly passive in a way that disrespects God's honor and commandments. It’s said that Moses was the most humble man on earth, and yet, when the Jews worshiped the golden calf and angered God, he had many of them executed to make atonement before God. Similarly, it's not appropriate for those in authority to remain inactive while sin runs rampant without saying anything. I shouldn't focus on my own possessions, honor, or injuries, nor should I get angry about them; instead, we must defend God's honor and commandments and prevent harm or injustice to our neighbors. The authorities should act with force, while the rest of us should respond with correction and rebuke, always with compassion for those who deserve punishment.
This high, noble, sweet work can easily be learned, if we perform it in faith, and as an exercise of faith. For if faith does not doubt the favor of God nor question that God is gracious, it will become quite easy for a man to be gracious and favorable to his neighbor, however much he may have sinned; for we have sinned much more against God. Behold, a short Commandment this, but it presents a long, mighty exercise of good works and of faith.
This noble and uplifting task can be easily learned if we approach it with faith and treat it as a practice of that faith. If faith does not doubt God’s favor or question His grace, it will become quite simple for a person to be kind and forgiving toward others, no matter how much they have sinned, since we have sinned far more against God. This is a brief commandment, yet it offers an extensive and powerful challenge of good deeds and faith.
Thou shalt not commit adultery.
You shall not commit adultery.
[Sidenote: The Sixth Commandment: The Duty of Purity]
[Sidenote: The Sixth Commandment: The Duty of Purity]
In this Commandment, too a good work is commanded, which includes much and drives away much vice; it is called purity, or chastity, of which much is written and preached, and it is well known to every one, only that it is not as carefully observed and practised as other works which are not commanded. So ready are we to do what is not commanded and to leave undone what is commanded. We see that the world is full of shameful works of unchastity, indecent words, tales and ditties, temptation to which is daily increased through gluttony and drunkenness, idleness and frippery. Yet we go our way as if we were Christians; when we have been to church, have said our little prayer, have observed the fasts and feasts, then we think our whole duty is done.
In this commandment, a good action is required, which encompasses a lot and eliminates a lot of wrongdoing; it’s referred to as purity or chastity. There's a lot written and preached about it, and it’s well known to everyone, but unfortunately, it’s not upheld as diligently as other actions that aren't required. We’re quick to engage in what’s not asked of us while neglecting what is. The world is filled with disgraceful acts of unchastity, inappropriate words, stories, and songs, and the temptation to indulge in these has only grown due to overeating, drinking, laziness, and trivial pursuits. Yet, we carry on as if we are Christians; after attending church, saying our brief prayers, and observing the fasts and celebrations, we believe we’ve fulfilled our entire obligation.
Now, if no other work were commanded but chastity alone, we would all have enough to do with this one; so perilous and raging a vice is unchastity. It rages in all our members: in the thoughts of our hearts, in the seeing of our eyes, in the hearing of our ears, in the words of our mouth, in the works of our hands and feet and all our body. To control all these requires labor and effort; and thus the Commandments of God teach us how great truly good works are, nay, that it is impossible for us of our own strength to conceive a good work, to say nothing of attempting or doing it. St Augustine says, that among all the conflicts of the Christian the conflict of chastity is the hardest, for the one reason alone, that it continues daily without ceasing, and chastity seldom prevails. This all the saints have wept over and lamented, as St. Paul does, Romans vii: "I find in me, that is in my flesh, no good thing." [Rom. 7:18]
Now, if we were only required to focus on chastity, we would have enough to keep us busy with just that one issue; unchastity is a dangerous and consuming vice. It affects every part of us: our thoughts, our sight, our hearing, our words, and all our actions. Managing all of this takes hard work and dedication; thus, God's Commandments show us just how significant true good works are. In fact, it's impossible for us to come up with a good deed on our own, let alone try or accomplish it. St. Augustine noted that among all the struggles Christians face, the struggle for chastity is the toughest, simply because it persists every day without end, and chastity rarely wins. All the saints have mourned over this, just as St. Paul expresses in Romans 7: "I find in me, that is in my flesh, no good thing." [Rom. 7:18]
[Sidenote: Helps Against Unchastity]
[Sidenote: Helps Against Impurity]
II. If this work of chastity is to be permanent, it will drive to many other good works, to fasting and temperance over against gluttony and drunkenness, to watching and early rising over against laziness and excessive sleep, to work and labor over against idleness. For gluttony, drunkenness, lying late abed, loafing and being without work are weapons of unchastity, with which chastity is quickly overcome. [Rom. 13:12 f.] On the other hand, the holy Apostle Paul calls fasting, watching and labor godly weapons, with which unchastity is mastered; but, as has been said above, these exercises must do no more than overcome unchastity, and not pervert nature.
II. If this commitment to purity is going to last, it will lead to many other good actions: fasting and moderation instead of overeating and drinking too much, staying alert and waking up early instead of being lazy and sleeping too much, working and being productive instead of being idle. Overindulgence, excessive drinking, sleeping in, being inactive, and lacking purpose are all tools of temptation that can quickly undermine purity. [Rom. 13:12 f.] On the flip side, the Apostle Paul refers to fasting, vigilance, and hard work as righteous tools to conquer temptation; but, as mentioned earlier, these practices should only aim to defeat temptation and not distort our true nature.
Above all this, the strongest defence is prayer and the Word of God; namely, that when evil lust stirs, a man flee to prayer, call upon God's mercy and help, read and meditate on the Gospel, and in it consider Christ's sufferings. Thus says Psalm cxxxvii: "Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth the little ones of Babylon against the rock," [Ps. 137:9] that is, if the heart runs to the Lord Christ with its evil thoughts while they are yet young and just beginning; for Christ is a Rock, on which they are ground to powder and come to naught.
Above all else, the best protection is prayer and the Word of God; that is, when evil desires arise, a person should turn to prayer, call on God's mercy and help, read and reflect on the Gospel, and think about Christ's sufferings. As Psalm 137:9 says: "Happy shall he be, that takes and dashes the little ones of Babylon against the rock," meaning that if the heart seeks the Lord Christ with its evil thoughts while they are still young and just starting, Christ is a Rock, on which they are crushed and rendered powerless.
See, here each one will find enough to do with himself, and more than enough, and will be given many good works to do within himself. But now no one uses prayer, fasting, watching, labor for this purpose, but men stop in these works as if they were in themselves the whole purpose, although they should be arranged so as to fulfil the work of this Commandment and purify us daily more and more. Some have also indicated more things which should be avoided, such as soft beds and clothes, that we should avoid excessive adornment, and neither associate nor talk with members of the opposite sex, nor even look upon them, and whatsoever else may be conducive to chastity. In all these things no one can fix a definite rule and measure. Each one must watch himself and see what things are needful to him for chastity, in what quantity and how long they help him to be chaste, that he may thus choose and observe them for himself; if he cannot do this, let him for a time give himself up to be controlled by another, who may hold him to such observance until he can learn to rule himself. This was the purpose for which the monastic houses were established of old, to teach young people discipline and purity.
See, here everyone will find plenty to work on for themselves, and even more than that, and will be given many good deeds to do within themselves. But right now, nobody really uses prayer, fasting, vigilance, or effort for this purpose; instead, people get stuck in these practices as if they were the entire point, when they should actually be organized to fulfill the work of this Commandment and purify us more and more each day. Some have also pointed out more things to avoid, like comfy beds and clothes, that we should steer clear of excessive decoration, and not associate or talk with members of the opposite sex, or even look at them, along with anything else that might help maintain chastity. In all these matters, no one can set a specific rule or measure. Each person must keep an eye on themselves to see what is necessary for their own chastity, in what amounts and for how long these practices help them remain chaste, so that they can choose and stick to them personally; if they can't do this, they should temporarily allow someone else to guide them, who can help them stay on track until they learn to manage themselves. This was the reason monastic communities were established long ago, to teach young people discipline and purity.
[Sidenote: Faith as a Help to Chastity]
[Sidenote: Faith as a Help to Chastity]
III. In this work a good strong faith is a great help, more noticeably so than in almost any other; so that for this reason also Isaiah xi. says that "faith is a girdle of the reins," [Is. 11:5] that is, a guard of chastity. For he who so lives that he looks to God for all grace, takes pleasure in spiritual purity; therefore he can so much more easily resist fleshly impurity: and in such faith the spirit tells him of a certainty how he shall avoid evil thoughts and everything that is repugnant to chastity. For as the faith in divine favor lives without ceasing and works in all works, so it also does not cease its admonitions in all things that are pleasing to God or displease Him; as St. John says in his Epistle: "Ye need not that any man teach you: for the divine anointing, that is, the Spirit of God, teacheth you of all things." [1 John 2:27]
III. In this work, a strong faith is a major asset, even more so than in almost any other situation. This is why Isaiah 11:5 says, "faith is a girdle of the reins," meaning it's a protection for chastity. Someone who lives in a way that relies on God for all grace takes joy in spiritual purity, making it much easier for them to resist temptations to impurity. With this faith, the spirit clearly guides them on how to avoid evil thoughts and anything that goes against chastity. Just as faith in divine favor continues without pause and influences all actions, it also constantly advises on matters that please or displease God. As St. John says in his Epistle: "You need not that any man teach you: for the divine anointing, that is, the Spirit of God, teaches you all things." [1 John 2:27]
Yet we must not despair if we are not soon rid of the temptation, nor by any means immune that we are free from it as long as we live, and we must regard it only as an incentive and admonition to prayer, fasting, watching, laboring, and to other exercises for the quenching of the flesh, especially to the practice and exercise of faith in God. For that chastity is not precious which is at ease, but that which is at war with unchastity, and fights, and without ceasing drives out all the poison with which the flesh and the evil spirit attack it. Thus St. Peter says, "I beseech you, abstain from fleshly desires and lusts, which war always against the soul." [1 Pet. 2:11] And St Paul, Romans vi, "Ye shall not obey the body in its lusts." [Rom. 6:12] In these and like passages it is shown that no one is without evil lust; but that everyone shall and must daily fight against it. But although this brings uneasiness and pain, it is none the less a work that gives pleasure, in which we shall have our comfort and satisfaction. For they who think they make an end of temptation by yielding to it, only set themselves on fire the more; and although for a time it is quiet, it comes again with more strength another time, and finds the nature weaker than before.
Yet we shouldn’t lose hope if we’re not rid of temptation right away, nor should we think we’re immune to it as long as we live. Instead, we should see it as a motivation and reminder to pray, fast, stay vigilant, work hard, and engage in other practices that help control the flesh, especially the practice and exercise of faith in God. True chastity isn’t valuable when it’s comfortable, but rather when it actively fights against unchastity and tirelessly pushes away all the negative influences from the flesh and the evil spirit. As St. Peter says, "I urge you, abstain from fleshly desires and lusts, which constantly wage war against the soul." [1 Pet. 2:11] And St. Paul in Romans 6 says, "You must not let your body obey its desires." [Rom. 6:12] These passages show that no one is free from evil desires; instead, everyone needs to fight against them every day. While this struggle can be uncomfortable and painful, it’s also a worthwhile endeavor that brings comfort and satisfaction. Those who think they can end temptation by giving in only fuel the fire; even if it is quiet for a while, it returns stronger each time, catching the nature off guard and weaker than before.
Thou shalt not steal.
You shall not steal.
[Sidenote: The Seventh Commandment: The Duty of Benevolence]
[Sidenote: The Seventh Commandment: The Duty of Kindness]
This Commandment also has a work, which embraces very many good works, and is opposed to many vices, and is called in German Mildigkeit, "benevolence;" which is a work ready to help and serve every one with one's goods. And it fights not only against theft and robbery, but against all stinting in temporal goods which men may practise toward one another: such as greed, usury, overcharging and plating wares that sell as solid, counterfeit wares, short measures and weights, and who could tell all the ready, novel, clever tricks,[52] which multiply daily in every trade, by which every one seeks his own gain through the other's loss, and forgets the rule which says; "What ye wish that others do to you, that do ye also to them." [Matt. 7:12] If every one kept this rule before his eyes in his trade, business, and dealings with his neighbor, he would readily find how he ought to buy and sell, take and give, lend and give for nothing, promise and keep his promise, and the like. And when we consider the world in its doings, how greed controls all business, we would not only find enough to do, if we would make an honorable living before God, but also be overcome with dread and fear for this perilous, miserable life, which is so exceedingly overburdened, entangled and taken captive with cares of this temporal life and dishonest seeking of gain.
This Commandment involves a lot of good actions and stands against many wrongdoings. It's referred to in German as Mildigkeit, meaning "benevolence;" it’s about being willing to help and serve everyone with what you have. It fights not just against theft and robbery but also against all forms of being stingy with material goods that people might show each other, like greed, usury, overcharging, selling counterfeit goods as if they were genuine, using short measures and weights, and who knows how many new, clever tricks,[52] which keep appearing in every trade, where everyone tries to benefit at someone else’s expense, forgetting the rule that says, "Treat others as you want to be treated." [Matt. 7:12] If everyone kept this rule in mind while trading, running their businesses, and dealing with their neighbors, they would easily see how they should buy and sell, give and take, lend and give away for free, make promises, and keep them, and so on. When we look at the world and its actions, as greed dominates all business, we would find not just enough to do if we aimed to live honorably before God, but we would also be overwhelmed with fear and concern for this dangerous, miserable life that is so heavily burdened, tangled, and trapped by worries about material life and dishonest pursuits of gain.
[Sidenote: Greed]
[Sidenote: Greed]
II. Therefore the Wise Man says not in vain: "Happy is the rich man, who is found without blemish, who does not run after gold, and has not set his confidence in the treasures of money. Who is he? We will praise him, that he has done wondrous things in his life." [Sir. 31:8 f.] As if he would say; "None such is found, or very few indeed." Yea, they are very few who notice and recognise such lust for gold in themselves. For greed has here a very beautiful, fine cover for its shame, which is called provision for the body and natural need, under cover of which it accumulates wealth beyond all limits and is never satisfied; so that he who would in this matter keep himself clean, must truly, as he says, do miracles or wondrous things in his life.
II. So the Wise Man says for good reason: "Blessed is the rich man who is without fault, who doesn’t chase after gold and hasn’t put his trust in money’s riches. Who is he? Let’s celebrate him for doing amazing things in his life." [Sir. 31:8 f.] It’s as if he’s saying, "There are very few like him." In fact, there are few who realize and acknowledge their own greed for gold. Greed disguises itself with a pretty, fancy mask called providing for one’s needs, under which it gathers wealth endlessly and is never satisfied; so anyone who wants to stay pure in this regard truly must, as he says, perform miracles or remarkable deeds in their life.
Now see, if a man wish not only to do good works, but even miracles, which God may praise and be pleased with, what need has he to look elsewhere? Let him take heed to himself, and see to it that he run not after gold, nor set his trust on money, but let the gold run after him, and money wait on his favor, and let him love none of these things nor set his heart on them; then he is the true, generous, wonder-working, happy man, as Job xxxi says: "I have never yet relied upon gold, and never yet made gold my hope and confidence." [Job 31:24] And Psalm lxii: "If riches increase, set not your heart upon them." [Ps. 62:10] So Christ also teaches, Matthew vi, that we shall take no thought, what we shall eat and drink and wherewithal we shall be clothed, since God cares for this, and knows that we have need of all these things. [Matt. 6:31 f.]
Now, if a person wants to do good deeds and even perform miracles that God would praise and be pleased with, what more do they need? They should focus on themselves and not chase after money or put their trust in it. Instead, let wealth pursue them, and let money show them favor. They shouldn’t love these things or let their hearts be set on them. Then, they truly become a generous, miraculous, and happy person, just like Job says: “I have never relied on gold, nor made gold my hope and confidence.” [Job 31:24] And in Psalm 62: “If riches increase, do not set your heart upon them.” [Ps. 62:10] Christ also teaches us in Matthew 6 not to worry about what we will eat, drink, or wear, because God takes care of these needs and knows we require all these things. [Matt. 6:31 f.]
But some say: "Yes, rely upon that, take no thought, and see whether a roasted chicken will fly into your mouth!" I do not say that a man shall not labor and seek a living; but he shall not worry, not be greedy, not despair, thinking that he will not have enough; for in Adam we are all condemned to labor, when God says to him, Genesis iii, "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread." [Gen. 3:19] And Job v, "As the birds to flying, so is man born into labor." [Job 5:7 Vulgate] Now the birds fly without worry and greed, and so we also should labor without worry and greed; but if you do worry and are greedy, wishing that the roasted chicken fly into your mouth: worry and be greedy, and see whether you will thereby fulfil God's Commandment and be saved!
But some say: "Sure, depend on that, don't think about it, and see if a roasted chicken will just fly into your mouth!" I'm not saying a person shouldn't work hard and make a living; but you shouldn't stress, be greedy, or lose hope, thinking you won't have enough. We're all destined to work, just as God told Adam in Genesis iii, "You'll eat bread by the sweat of your brow." [Gen. 3:19] And as it says in Job v, "Just as birds fly, humans are born to work." [Job 5:7 Vulgate] Birds fly without worry or greed, and we should also work without those feelings; but if you do stress and are greedy, wishing for that roasted chicken to magically appear in your mouth: go ahead and worry and be greedy, and see if that helps you follow God's Commandment and be saved!
[Sidenote: Faith the Source of Benevolence]
[Sidenote: Faith the Source of Kindness]
III. This work faith teaches of itself. For if the heart looks for divine favor and relies upon it, how is it possible that a man should be greedy and worry? He must be sure beyond a doubt that God cares for him; therefore he does not cling to money; he uses it also with cheerful liberality for the benefit of his neighbor, and knows well that he will have enough, however much he may give away. For his God, Whom he trusts, will not lie to him nor forsake, him, as it is written, Psalm xxxvii: "I have been young, and now am old; never have I seen a believing man, who trusts God, that is a righteous man, forsaken, or his child begging bread." [Ps. 37:25] Therefore the Apostle calls no other sin idolatry except covetousness [Col. 3:5], because this sin shows most plainly that it does not trust God for anything, expects more good from its money than from God; and, as has been said, it is by such confidence that God is truly honored or dishonored.
III. This work teaches about faith on its own. If someone’s heart seeks divine favor and relies on it, how can a person be greedy or anxious? They must be completely certain that God cares for them; that’s why they don’t cling to money. Instead, they use it generously to help others and know they’ll have enough, no matter how much they give away. Their God, whom they trust, won’t lie or abandon them, as it says in Psalm 37: “I have been young, and now I am old; I have never seen a righteous person who trusts God forsaken or their children begging for bread.” [Ps. 37:25] That’s why the Apostle refers to no sin as idolatry except for greed [Col. 3:5], because this sin clearly shows a lack of trust in God and expects more good from money than from Him; and, as mentioned, it is through this kind of trust that God is either truly honored or dishonored.
And, indeed, in this Commandment it can be dearly seen how all good works must be done in faith; for here every one most surely feels that the cause of covetousness is distrust and the cause of liberality is faith. For because a man trusts God, he is generous and does not doubt that he will always have enough; on the other hand, a man is covetous and worries because he does not trust God. Now, as in this Commandment faith is the master-workman and the doer of the good work of liberality, so it is also in all the other Commandments, and without such faith liberality is of no worth, but rather a careless squandering of money.
And, really, in this Commandment, it's clear that all good actions must be done with faith; because here everyone can clearly see that the reason for greed is a lack of trust, while the reason for generosity is faith. When a person trusts God, they are generous and believe they will always have enough; on the flip side, a person is greedy and anxious because they don’t trust God. Just like in this Commandment where faith is the key driver and creator of the good act of generosity, it holds true for all the other Commandments as well. Without such faith, generosity loses its value and turns into irresponsible spending.
[Sidenote: The Test of Liberality]
The Test of Liberality
IV. By this we are also to know that this liberality shall extend even to enemies and opponents. For what manner of good deed is that, if we are liberal only to our friends? As Christ teaches, Luke vi, even a wicked man does that to another who is his friend. [Luke 6:32 f.] Besides, the brute beasts also do good and are generous to their kind. Therefore a Christian must rise higher, let his liberality serve also the undeserving, evil-doers, enemies, and the ungrateful, even as his heavenly Father makes His sun to rise on good and evil, and the rain to fall on the grateful and ungrateful. [Matt. 5:45]
IV. We should also understand that this generosity should extend even to our enemies and opponents. What kind of good deed is it if we’re only generous to our friends? As Christ teaches in Luke 6, even a wicked person does that for someone they consider a friend. [Luke 6:32 f.] Furthermore, even animals do good and are generous to their kind. So, a Christian must aim higher; their generosity should also reach the undeserving, wrongdoers, enemies, and the ungrateful, just as our heavenly Father allows His sun to rise on both the good and the evil, and His rain to fall on both the grateful and the ungrateful. [Matt. 5:45]
But here it will be found how hard it is to do good works according to God's Commandment, how nature squirms, twists and writhes in its exposition to it, although it does the good works of its own choice easily and gladly. Therefore take your enemies, the ungrateful, and do good to them; then you will find how near you are to this Commandment or how far from it, and how all your life you will always have to do with the practice of this work. For if your enemy needs you and you do not help him when you can, it is just the same as if you had stolen what belonged to him, for you owed it to him to help him. So says St. Ambrose, "Feed the hungry; if you do not feed him, you have, as far as you are concerned, slain him." And in this Commandment are included the works of mercy, which Christ will require at men's hands at the last day. [Matt. 25:35 f.]
But here you will see how difficult it is to do good works according to God's Commandment, how nature writhes, twists, and struggles against it, even though it easily and willingly performs the good works it chooses. So, take your enemies, the ungrateful ones, and do good to them; then you will realize how close you are to this Commandment or how far away from it, and how throughout your life you will always have to engage in this practice. If your enemy needs your help and you don’t assist him when you can, it’s just like stealing from him, because you owe him your help. St. Ambrose said, "Feed the hungry; if you don’t feed him, you have, for all intents and purposes, killed him." This Commandment includes the works of mercy, which Christ will bring up on the last day. [Matt. 25:35 f.]
But the magistrates and cities ought to see to it that the vagabonds, pilgrims and mendicants from foreign lands be debarred, or at least allowed only under restrictions and rules, so that knaves be not permitted to run at large under the guise of mendicants, and their knavery, of which there now is much, be prohibited; I have spoken at greater length of this Commandment in the Treatise on Usury.[53]
But the magistrates and cities need to ensure that vagabonds, pilgrims, and beggars from other countries are either kept out or only allowed under certain restrictions and rules, so that tricksters aren't allowed to roam freely pretending to be beggars, and their deceitful behavior, which is quite common now, is stopped; I have discussed this Commandment in more detail in the Treatise on Usury.[53]
Thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
[Sidenote: The Eight Commandment: The Duty of Truthfulness]
[Sidenote: The Eight Commandment: The Duty of Truthfulness]
[Sidenote: In Worldly Matters]
[Sidenote: In Global Issues]
This Commandment seems small, and yet is so great, that he who would rightly keep it must risk and imperil life and limb, goods and honor, friends and all that he has; and yet it includes no more than the work of that small member, the tongue, and is called in German Wahrheit sagen, "telling the truth" and, where there is need, gainsaying lies; so that it forbids many evil works of the tongue. First: those which are committed by speaking, and those which are committed by keeping silent. By speaking, when a man has an unjust law-suit, and wants to prove and maintain his case by a false argument, catch his neighbor with subtilty, produce everything that strengthens and furthers his own cause, and withhold and discount everything that further his neighbor's good cause; in doing which he does not do to his neighbor as he would have his neighbor do to him. [Matt. 7:12] This some men do for the sake of gain, some to avoid loss or shame, thereby seeking their own advantage more than God's Commandment, and excuse themselves by saying: Vigilanti jura subveniunt, "the law helps him who watches"; just as if it were not as much their duty to watch for their neighbor's cause as for their own. Thus they intentionally allow their neighbor's cause to be lost, although they know that it is just. This evil is at present so common that I fear no court is held and no suit tried but that one side sins against this Commandment. And even when they cannot accomplish it, they yet have the unrighteous spirit and will, so that they would wish the neighbor's just cause to be lost and their unjust cause to prosper. This sin is most frequent when the opponent is a prominent man or an enemy. For a man wants to revenge himself on his enemy: but the ill will of a man of prominence he does not wish to bring upon himself; and then begins the flattering and fawning, or, on the other hand, the withholding of the truth. Here no one is willing to run the risk of disfavor and displeasure, loss and danger for the truth's sake; and so God's Commandment must perish. And this is almost universally the way of the world. He who would keep this Commandment, would have both hands full doing only those good works which concern the tongue. And then, how many are there who allow themselves to be fenced and swerved aside from the truth by presents and gifts! so that in all places it is truly a high, great, rare work, not to be a false witness against one's neighbor.
This Commandment might seem minor, yet it’s so significant that anyone who wants to truly follow it has to risk their life, safety, possessions, honor, friends, and everything they have. It revolves around the simple act of using the tongue, known in German as Wahrheit sagen, meaning "telling the truth," and when necessary, challenging falsehoods. It forbids many sinful uses of the tongue. First: those that come from speaking and those that come from silence. By speaking, when a person has an unjust lawsuit and tries to support their case with false arguments, deceitfully trapping their neighbor, presenting everything that benefits their own position while hiding or downplaying anything that supports their neighbor’s just cause; in doing so, they don’t treat their neighbor as they would want to be treated. [Matt. 7:12] Some people do this for personal gain, while others do it to avoid loss or shame, prioritizing their own advantage over God’s Commandment, justifying their actions by claiming, Vigilanti jura subveniunt, "the law helps those who are vigilant"; as if it weren’t equally their duty to look out for their neighbor’s cause as their own. Thus, they knowingly allow their neighbor’s just cause to fail. This wrongdoing is so widespread today that I fear no court session or lawsuit takes place without at least one side violating this Commandment. Even when they can't achieve their goals, they harbor an unrighteous spirit and intent, wishing for their neighbor's just cause to fail while their own unjust cause thrives. This sin is especially pronounced when the opponent is a prominent person or an enemy. A person wants to get back at their enemy but avoids drawing the anger of powerful individuals; this leads to flattery or, on the other hand, withholding the truth. Here, no one is willing to risk displeasure or danger for the sake of truth, and as a result, God's Commandment suffers. This seems to be the common state of the world. To truly uphold this Commandment, one would need both hands full just performing good deeds related to the tongue. And how many allow themselves to be swayed from the truth by gifts and bribes! Thus, everywhere it is genuinely a rare and significant achievement not to be a false witness against one's neighbor.
[Sidenote: In Spiritual Matters]
[Note: In Spiritual Matters]
II. There is a second bearing of witness to the truth, which is still greater, with which we must fight against the evil spirits; and this concerns not temporal matters, but the Gospel and the truth of faith, which the evil spirit has at no time been able to endure, and always so manages that the great among men, whom it is hard to resist, must oppose and persecute it. Of which it is written in Psalm lxxxii, "Rid the poor out of the hand of the wicked, and help the forsaken to maintain his just cause." [Ps. 82:3 f.]
II. There is another way to witness the truth, which is even more important, and we must fight against evil spirits with it; this isn't about temporary issues, but the Gospel and the truth of faith, which evil spirits have always been unable to tolerate. They constantly manipulate circumstances so that the powerful among us, who are difficult to stand against, end up opposing and persecuting it. As it is written in Psalm 82, "Rescue the poor from the hands of the wicked and help the forsaken defend their rightful cause." [Ps. 82:3 f.]
Such persecution, it is true, has now become infrequent; but that is the fault of the spiritual prelates, who do not stir up the Gospel, but let it perish, and so have abandoned the very thing because of which such witnessing and persecution should arise; and in its place they teach us their own law and what pleases them. For this reason the devil also does not stir, since by vanquishing the Gospel he has also vanquished faith in Christ, and everything goes as he wishes. But if the Gospel should be stirred up and be heard again, without doubt the whole world would be aroused and moved, and the greater portion of the kings, princes, bishops, doctors and clergy, and all that is great, would oppose it and rage against it, as has always happened when the Word of God has come to light; for the world cannot endure what comes from God. This is proved in Christ, Who was and is the very greatest and most precious and best of all that God has; yet the world not only did not receive Him, but persecuted Him more cruelly than all others who had ever come forth from God.
Such persecution has become rare these days; but that's because the spiritual leaders aren't promoting the Gospel, letting it fade away, and ultimately abandoning the very thing that should inspire such witnessing and persecution. Instead, they teach us their own rules and what they prefer. For this reason, the devil also remains inactive, since by defeating the Gospel, he has also defeated faith in Christ, and everything goes according to his wishes. However, if the Gospel were to be ignited and heard again, undoubtedly the whole world would be stirred and impacted, and most of the kings, princes, bishops, scholars, and clergy, as well as all those in power, would oppose it and become enraged, just as they always have when the Word of God has been revealed; the world cannot tolerate what comes from God. This is shown in Christ, who was and is the greatest, most precious, and best of all that God has; yet the world not only rejected Him but persecuted Him more brutally than anyone else who has ever come from God.
Therefore, as at that time, so at all times there are few who stand by the divine truth, and imperil and risk life and limb, goods and honor, and all that they have, as Christ has foretold: "Ye shall be hated of all men for My Name's sake." [Matt. 14:9 f.] And: "Many of them shall be offended in Me." Yea, if this truth were attacked by peasants, herdsmen, stable-boys and men of no standing, who would not be willing and able to confess it and to bear witness to it? But when the pope, and the bishops, together with princes and kings attack it, all men flee, keep silent, dissemble, in order that they may not lose goods, honor, favor and life.
Therefore, just like back then, there are always a few who stand by the divine truth, risking their lives, possessions, honor, and everything they have, just as Christ predicted: "You will be hated by everyone because of My name." [Matt. 14:9 f.] And: "Many will be offended by Me." Yes, if this truth were challenged by peasants, herdsmen, stable-boys, and people of no importance, who wouldn’t be willing and able to confess it and testify to it? But when the pope and bishops, along with princes and kings, attack it, everyone runs away, stays silent, and pretends to be something they’re not, so they don’t lose their possessions, honor, favor, or life.
[Sidenote: Witnessing to the Truth Demands Faith]
[Sidenote: Sharing the Truth Requires Faith]
III. Why do they do this? Because they have no faith in God, and expect nothing good from Him. For where such faith and confidence are, there is also a bold, defiant, fearless heart, that ventures and stands by the truth, though it cost life or cloak, though it be against pope or kings; as we see that the martyrs did. For such a heart is satisfied and rests easy because it has a gracious, loving God. Therefore it despises all the favor, grace, goods and honor of men, lets them come and go as they please; as is written in Psalm xv: "He contemneth them that contemn God, and honoreth them that fear the Lord" [Ps. 15:4]; that is, the tyrants, the mighty, who persecute the truth and despise God, he does not fear, he does not regard them, he despiseth them; on the other band, those who are persecuted for the truth's sake, and fear God more than men, to these he clings, these he defends, these he honors, let it vex whom it may; as it is written of Moses, Hebrews xi, that he stood by his brethren, regardless of the mighty king of Egypt. [Heb. 11:24 ff.]
III. Why do they do this? Because they have no faith in God and expect nothing good from Him. Where there is faith and confidence, there is also a bold, defiant, fearless heart that stands up for the truth, even if it costs their life or possessions, even if it means going against popes or kings; just like the martyrs did. Such a heart feels secure and at peace because it knows it has a gracious, loving God. Thus, it disregards all the favor, grace, wealth, and honor that come from people, letting them come and go as they please; as it says in Psalm xv: "He despises those who despise God, and honors those who fear the Lord" [Ps. 15:4]; in other words, he does not fear the tyrants, the powerful who persecute the truth and ignore God; he looks down on them. On the other hand, he takes a stand with those who are persecuted for the truth and fear God more than people; he supports them, defends them, and honors them, no matter who it annoys; just like it is said of Moses in Hebrews xi, that he stood by his people, not caring about the powerful king of Egypt. [Heb. 11:24 ff.]
Lo, in this Commandment again you see briefly that faith must be the master-workman in this work also, so that without it no one has courage to do this work: so, entirely are all works comprised in faith, has has now been often said. Therefore, apart from faith all works, are dead, however good the form and name they bear. For as no one does the work of this Commandment except he be firm and fearless in the confidence of divine favor: so also he does no work of any other Commandment without the same faith: thus every one may easily by this Commandment test and weigh himself whether he be a Christian and truly believe in Christ, and thus whether he is doing good works or no. Now we see how the Almighty God has not only set our Lord Jesus Christ before us that we should believe in Him with such confidence, but also holds before us in Him an example of this same confidence and of such good works, to the end that we should believe in Him, follow Him and abide in Him forever; as He says, John xiv: "I am the Way, the Truth and the life," [John 14:6]—the Way, in which we follow Him; the Truth, that we believe in Him; the life, that we live in Him forever.
Look, in this commandment you can see clearly that faith has to be the driving force behind this work as well, so that without it, no one has the courage to do it. All actions are completely rooted in faith, as has been said many times before. Therefore, without faith, all works are dead, no matter how good they may seem or what titles they carry. Just as no one can fulfill the work of this commandment without being strong and fearless in trusting God's favor, no one can fulfill any other commandment without the same faith. So, everyone can easily use this commandment to test and evaluate themselves to see if they are Christians who truly believe in Christ, and therefore whether they are doing good works or not. Now we see how the Almighty God has not only presented our Lord Jesus Christ to us so that we should believe in Him with such confidence, but also provides us with an example of that same confidence and those good works, so that we should believe in Him, follow Him, and remain in Him forever. As He says in John 14: "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life"—the Way, which we follow; the Truth, which we believe in; the Life, which we live in Him forever.
From all this it is now manifest that all other works, which are not commanded, are perilous and easily known: such as building churches, beautifying them, making pilgrimages, and all that is written at so great length in the Canon Law and has misled and burdened the world and ruined it, made uneasy consciences, silenced and weakened faith, and has not said how a man, although he neglect all else, has enough to do with all his powers to keep the Commandments of God, and can never do all the good works which he is commanded to do; why then does he seek others, which are neither necessary not commanded, and neglect those that are necessary and commanded?
From all this, it’s clear that all other actions, which are not required, are risky and easily recognized: like building churches, decorating them, going on pilgrimages, and everything that is discussed in detail in Canon Law, which has misled and burdened the world and caused harm. It has created troubled consciences, silenced and weakened faith, and hasn't explained how a person, even if they ignore everything else, has more than enough to do with all their strength to follow God's Commandments. They can never accomplish all the good deeds they are required to do; so why do they pursue other actions, which are neither necessary nor required, while ignoring those that are necessary and required?
[Sidenote: The Ninth and Tenth Commandments]
[Sidenote: The Ninth and Tenth Commandments]
The last two Commandments, which forbid evil desires of the body for pleasure and for temporal goods, are clear in themselves; these evil desires do no harm to our neighbor, and yet they continue unto the grave, and the strife in us against them endures unto death; therefore these two Commandments are drawn together by St. Paul into one, Romans vii, and are set as a goal unto which we do not attain, and only in our thoughts reach after until death. For no one has ever been so holy that he felt in himself no evil inclination, especially when occasion and temptation were offered. [Rom. 7:7] For original sin is born in us by nature and may be checked, but not entirely uprooted, except through the death of the body; which for this reason is profitable and a thing to be desired.[54] To this may God help us. Amen.
The last two Commandments, which prohibit harmful desires for pleasure and material things, are straightforward; these desires don't directly harm others, yet they persist until death, and our inner struggle against them lasts our whole lives. Because of this, St. Paul combines these two Commandments into one in Romans 7, presenting them as a goal we never fully reach, something we only aspire to in our thoughts until we die. No one has ever been so holy as to feel no evil inclinations, especially when faced with temptation. [Rom. 7:7] Original sin is inherent in our nature and can be restrained, but never completely eliminated, except through the death of the body; thus, this death is beneficial and something to be desired. [54] May God help us with this. Amen.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Col. 3:17. See above p. 25, note 1.
[1] Col. 3:17. See above p. 25, note 1.
[2] The Tessaradecas consolatoria, printed in the present volume, pp. 109-171.
[2] The Tessaradecas consolatoria, printed in this volume, pp. 109-171.
[3] Sexternlein.
Sexternlein.
[4] Questions debated in the schools.
[4] Questions debated in the schools.
[5] Here "the Faith" means the Creed, as a statement of faith.
[5] Here "the Faith" refers to the Creed, which serves as a declaration of belief.
[6] I.e., In faith.
In faith.
[7] A quality, state or condition, independent of works.
[7] A quality, state, or condition that exists independently of actions.
[8] St. Jacob di Compostella, a place in Spain, where the Apostle James, the son of Zebedee, who was killed in Jerusalem (Acts 12:2), is in Spanish tradition said to have died a martyr's death; since the Ninth Century a noted and much frequented goal of pilgrimages. The name Compostella is a corruption of Giacomo Postolo, that is "James the Apostle."
[8] St. Jacob di Compostella is a location in Spain where the Apostle James, the son of Zebedee, who was killed in Jerusalem (Acts 12:2), is said in Spanish tradition to have died as a martyr. Since the Ninth Century, it has been a popular and well-traveled pilgrimage destination. The name Compostella is derived from Giacomo Postolo, which means "James the Apostle."
[9] St. Bridget of Ireland, who died in 523, was considered a second Virgin Mary, the "Mary of the Irish." Perhaps here confused with another Bridget, or Brigita, who died 1373, a Scottish saint, who wrote several prayers, printed for the first time in 1492 and translated into almost all European languages.
[9] St. Bridget of Ireland, who passed away in 523, was seen as a second Virgin Mary, the "Mary of the Irish." She might be confused with another Bridget, or Brigita, who died in 1373, a Scottish saint who wrote several prayers that were first printed in 1492 and translated into almost all European languages.
[10] I.e., by us men.
By us guys.
[11] This translation indicates the imperfection of the German form of Bible quotation throughout this treatise.
[11] This translation shows the flaws in the German version of Bible quotes used throughout this document.
[12] Page 190.
[12] Page 190.
[13] Page 190.
[13] Page 190.
[14] A Jarmarkt; the reference here being to the bargaining common at such fairs.
[14] A Jarmarkt; the reference here is to the typical bargaining that happens at these fairs.
[15] The theme developed in the treatise De Libertate, 1520.
[15] The theme developed in the essay De Libertate, 1520.
[16] Page 190.
[16] Page 190.
[17] A gold coin, the value of which is very uncertain. It was an adaptation of the florin, which was first coined in Florence in the year 1252, and was worth about $2.50. Of the value of the gold gulden of Luther's time various estimates are given. Schaff, Church History, 3 vi., p. 470, calls it a guilder and says it was equal to about $4.00 of the present day. Preserved Smith, Life of Luther, p. 367, fixes its intrinsic value at about fifty cents, but believes its purchasing power was almost twenty times as great. To us a gold piece worth fifty cents seems almost impossible; but the New English Dictionary quotes, under the year 1611: "Florin or Franc: an ancient coin of gold in France, worth ij s. sterling." As the gold coins of those times were not made of pure gold, rarely 17 carats fine, the possibility may be granted. But in 1617, the Dictionary quotes "The Gold Rehnish Guldens of Germany are almost of the same standard as the Crowne Gold of England," and the Crown was worth at the time 6s. 3 1/2 d.—somewhat more than $1.50.
[17] A gold coin, whose value is quite uncertain. It was an adaptation of the florin, which was first minted in Florence in 1252 and was worth about $2.50. Various estimates exist for the value of the gold gulden during Luther's time. Schaff, in Church History, 3 vi., p. 470, refers to it as a guilder and states it was equivalent to about $4.00 today. Preserved Smith, in Life of Luther, p. 367, estimates its intrinsic value at about fifty cents but believes its purchasing power was nearly twenty times that. A gold piece valued at fifty cents seems almost unimaginable to us; however, the New English Dictionary cites from the year 1611: "Florin or Franc: an ancient gold coin in France, worth ij s. sterling." Since the gold coins of that era were not made of pure gold, often around 17 carats, it is conceivable. But in 1617, the Dictionary states, "The Gold Rhenish Guldens of Germany are almost of the same standard as the Crown Gold of England," and at that time, the Crown was worth 6s. 3 1/2 d.—a bit more than $1.50.
The later silver gulden, worth about forty cents was current in Europe until modern times, and a gulden, worth 48 1/2 cents, was, until recently, a standard coin in Austro-Hungary.
The later silver gulden, worth about forty cents, was in circulation in Europe until modern times, and a gulden, valued at 48 1/2 cents, was until recently a standard coin in Austro-Hungary.
[18] Grosse Hansen.
Grosse Hansen
[19] Men who exercised a delegated authority and acted as the representatives of pope and bishop in matters of church law.
[19] Men who held delegated authority and acted as representatives of the pope and bishop in matters of church law.
[20] See especially the Address to the Christian Nobility and the Babylonian Captivity.
[20] See especially the Address to the Christian Nobility and the Babylonian Captivity.
[21] On the number of the sections see the Introduction, p. 178.
[21] For the number of the sections, see the Introduction, p. 178.
[22] Here, as also in his Catechism, Luther departs from the Old Testament form of the Third Commandment. His restatement of it is extremely difficult to put into English, because of the various meanings of the word Feiertag. It may mean "day of rest," or "holiday," or "holy day." By the use of this word Luther avoids the difficulty of first retaining the Jewish Sabbath in the Commandment and then rejecting it in favor of the Christian Sunday in the explanation.
[22] Here, just like in his Catechism, Luther shifts away from the Old Testament version of the Third Commandment. His rephrasing is really hard to translate into English due to the different meanings of the word Feiertag. It can mean "day of rest," "holiday," or "holy day." By using this term, Luther sidesteps the challenge of keeping the Jewish Sabbath in the Commandment and then dismissing it for the Christian Sunday in his explanation.
[23] Gottesdienst.
Worship service.
[24] A reference to the Requiem Mass, sung both at the burial of the dead, and on the anniversary of the day of death. The word translated "memorial," Begängniss, is literally, "a burial service."
[24] A reference to the Requiem Mass, sung both at the burial of the dead and on the anniversary of the day of death. The word translated "memorial," Begängniss, literally means "a burial service."
[25] See also the Treatise on the New Testament, elsewhere in this volume.
[25] See also the Treatise on the New Testament, elsewhere in this volume.
[26] The sermons were frequently either scholastic arguments or popular, often comic tirades against current immorality; the materials were taken from the stories of the saints as much as from the Bible.
[26] The sermons were often either academic debates or popular, sometimes funny rants against the immorality of the day; the content was drawn from the stories of the saints as much as from the Bible.
[27] Lived 1091-1153. Founder of the Cistercian monastery at Clairvaux, of whom Luther says: "If there ever lived on earth a God-fearing and holy monk, it was Saint Bernard, of Clairvaux." Erl. Ed., 36, 8.
[27] Lived 1091-1153. Founder of the Cistercian monastery at Clairvaux, of whom Luther says: "If there was ever a truly devout and holy monk on this earth, it was Saint Bernard of Clairvaux." Erl. Ed., 36, 8.
[28] Cf. Discussion of Confession, above, p. 81 f.
[28] See Discussion of Confession, above, p. 81 f.
[29] The prayer-book and the rosary. The Breviary, a collection of prayers, was used by the clergy; the Rosary, the beads of which represent prayers, the smaller and more numerous Ave Marias, the larger of the Lord's Prayer, Paternoster, was the layman's prayer book.
[29] The prayer book and the rosary. The Breviary, a collection of prayers, was used by the clergy; the Rosary, which consists of beads representing prayers, has the smaller and more numerous Ave Marias and the larger Paternoster or Lord's Prayer, serving as the prayer book for the laity.
[30] Cf. Introduction to The Fourteen of Consolation, p. 106.
[30] See Introduction to The Fourteen of Consolation, p. 106.
[31] See note, p. 191.
[31] See note, p. 191.
[32] The German, Oelgötzen, means the wooden images of saints, which were painted with oil paints. It was transferred to any dull person, block-head, sometimes also to priests, who were anointed with oil at their consecration.
[32] The German term, Oelgötzen, refers to the wooden images of saints that were painted with oil paints. It was also applied to any dull person or blockhead, and sometimes even to priests who were anointed with oil during their consecration.
[33] Sinnlichkeit.
Sensuality.
[34] St. Barbara, a legendary saint, whose day falls on December 4, was thought to protect against storm and fire. See above, p. 237. St. Sebastian, a martyr of the third century, whose day falls on January 20, was supposed to ward off the plague.
[34] St. Barbara, a legendary saint whose feast day is on December 4, was believed to protect against storms and fire. See above, p. 237. St. Sebastian, a martyr from the third century whose feast day is on January 20, was thought to protect against the plague.
[35] Cf. The Fourteen of Consolation, above, p. 162.
[35] Cf. The Fourteen of Consolation, above, p. 162.
[36] Page 194 f.
[36] Page 194 f.
[37] I. e., by fear without love.
[37] I. e., through fear without love.
[38] The patron saint of music, of whose life and martyrdom little that is definite is known.
[38] The patron saint of music, about whose life and martyrdom not much specific information is known.
[39] Canonisations, giving a dead man the rank of a saint, who may be or shall be worshiped.
[39] Canonizations, which grant someone who's passed away the title of saint, who can be or will be worshipped.
[40] I.e., faith.
Faith.
[41] Cf. the similar statements in the Sermon vom Wucher (Weimar Ed., VI, 59) and in the Address to the Christian Nobility (ibid., 438).
[41] Cf. the similar statements in the Sermon on Usury (Weimar Ed., VI, 59) and in the Address to the Christian Nobility (ibid., 438).
[42] A name for the dependents of the papal court at Rome.
[42] A term for the dependents of the papal court in Rome.
[43] At Constance, 1414-1443; at Rome, the Lateran council, 1512-1517.
[43] In Constance, from 1414 to 1443; in Rome, at the Lateran council, from 1512 to 1517.
[44] Or, "Who is said to rule the councils."
[44] Or, "Who is said to lead the councils."
[45] This program of reform is further elaborated in the Address to the Christian Nobility.
[45] This reform plan is explained in more detail in the Address to the Christian Nobility.
[46] Augustus Caesar, first Roman Emperor (B.C. 63-A.D. 14), the Caesar Augustus of Luke 2:1.
[46] Augustus Caesar, the first Roman Emperor (63 B.C.-14 A.D.), the Caesar Augustus mentioned in Luke 2:1.
[47] "The purchase of a rent-charge (rent, census, Zins) was one of the methods of investing money frequently resorted to during the later middle ages. From the transfer from one person to another of the right to receive a rent already due the step was but a short one to the creation of an altogether new rent-charge, for the express purpose of raising money by the sale of it…The practice seems to have arisen spontaneously, and to have been by no means a mere evasion of the prohibition of usury." Dictionary of Political Economy, ed. by R. H. Inglish Palgrave, vol. ii. Cf. Ashley, Economic History, vol. i, p.t. ii, §§ 66, 74, 75. For a fuller discussion of the subject by Luther, see the Sermon vom Wucher (Weimar Ed., VI, 51-60).
[47] "Buying a rent-charge (rent, census, Zins) was a common way to invest money during the later Middle Ages. The move from one person to another receiving an already due rent was a small step toward creating an entirely new rent-charge, specifically to generate money through its sale… This practice appears to have developed naturally and was certainly not just a way to get around the ban on usury." Dictionary of Political Economy, ed. by R. H. Inglish Palgrave, vol. ii. Cf. Ashley, Economic History, vol. i, p.t. ii, §§ 66, 74, 75. For a more in-depth discussion of this topic by Luther, see the Sermon vom Wucher (Weimar Ed., VI, 51-60).
[48] See note above, p. 220.
[48] See note above, p. 220.
[49] Sorgfäitigkeit, Luther's translation of the Vulgate solicitndo in Rom. 12:8, where our English Version reads "diligence." The word as Luther uses it includes the two kinds of carefulness and considerateness.
[49] Sorgfäitigkeit, Luther's translation of the Vulgate solicitndo in Rom. 12:8, where our English Version reads "diligence." The word as Luther uses it includes the two kinds of carefulness and thoughtfulness.
[50] A most strict monastic order; the phrase here is equivalent to "becomes a monk."
[50] A very strict monastic order; the phrase here means "becomes a monk."
[51] Sanftmüthlgkeit.
Gentleness
[52] Luther discusses these tricks in detail in his Sermon von Kaufhandlung und Wucher (1524) Weimar Ed., XV, pp. 279 ff.
[52] Luther discusses these tricks in detail in his Sermon on Buying and Usury (1524) Weimar Ed., XV, pp. 279 ff.
[53] Sermon von dem Wucher, Weimar Ed., VI, 36 ff. Cf. also Address to the German Nobility.
[53] Sermon on Usury, Weimar Ed., VI, 36 ff. Cf. also Address to the German Nobility.
[54] Cf. The Fourteen of Consolation above, p. 149.
[54] Cf. The Fourteen of Consolation above, p. 149.
A TREATISE ON THE NEW TESTAMENT
THAT IS THE HOLY MASS
1520
1520
INTRODUCTION
The Treatise on the New Testament, that is, on the Holy Mass, was published in the year 1520[1] In the beginning of August of that year, Luther's Address to the Christian Nobility of the German Nation had appeared, in which he had touched upon the subject of the mass,[2] but refused to express himself fully at that time, promising to take up this question later, a promise which he had already made in his Treatise on Good Works, of May, 1520.[3] He must have begun the preparation of this Treatise on the New Testament while the Address to the Christian Nobility was still in press, because on Aug. 3 it was already finished and ready for publication.[4] The treatise, therefore, takes its place between Luther's two famous writings, the Address to the Christian Nobility and the Babylonian Captivity of the Church, which appeared in Oct, 1520. Its tone is remarkably quiet, and its aim predominantly constructive. It is one of those devotional tracts which Luther issued from time to time between his larger publications, and which appear like roses among the thorns of his polemical writings.
The Treatise on the New Testament, or the Holy Mass, was published in 1520. In early August of that year, Luther's Address to the Christian Nobility of the German Nation was released, in which he touched on the topic of the mass but didn't fully express his thoughts at that time, promising to address the issue later, a commitment he had already made in his Treatise on Good Works from May 1520. He must have started preparing this Treatise on the New Testament while the Address to the Christian Nobility was still being printed, because it was already completed and ready for publication by August 3. The treatise, therefore, sits between Luther's two notable writings, the Address to the Christian Nobility and the Babylonian Captivity of the Church, which came out in October 1520. Its tone is notably calm, and its purpose mainly constructive. It is one of those devotional pieces that Luther published occasionally between his larger works, appearing like roses among the thorns of his critical writings.
The doctrine of the Lord's Supper was one of the most corrupt doctrines of the Roman Church, and it was, therefore, but natural that Luther should have written extensively on this subject, even at the beginning of the work of reformation. From this period, when the opposition of the Sacramentarians[5] to the doctrine of the Real Presence had not yet arisen we have four writings of Luther in which he makes this sacrament a subject of special discussion. These are (1) his mild-toned Sermon von dem hochwürdigen Sacrament, etc., of 1519; (2) the present Sermon von dem neuen Testament, etc., of Aug., 1520; (3) the Babylonian Captivity of the Church, of Oct., 1520; (4) the strongly polemical tract On the Abuse of the Mass, 1522.[6] We shall have occasion to refer to some interesting points of comparison among these works.
The teaching of the Lord's Supper was one of the most distorted beliefs of the Roman Church, so it makes sense that Luther wrote extensively on this topic, even at the start of the Reformation. During this time, before the Sacramentarians challenged the belief in the Real Presence, we have four of Luther's writings that focus specifically on this sacrament. These are (1) his gentle Sermon on the Most Holy Sacrament, etc., from 1519; (2) the current Sermon on the New Testament, etc., from August 1520; (3) the Babylonian Captivity of the Church, from October 1520; and (4) the strongly argumentative tract On the Abuse of the Mass, from 1522.[6] We will refer to some interesting points of comparison among these works.
This treatise is divided into sections, ending with number 40, but section 32 is omitted, so that there are only 39 in all. Section 1 contains the introduction, section 40 the conclusion. Sections 2-15 are the positive, constructive part of the treatise, dealing with the question. What is the Lord's Supper? In sections 16-34 the sacrificial theory of the Roman Church is rejected; sections 35-31 discuss (1) in how far we may speak of making an offering in the sacrament, and (2) what follows for the conception of a true priesthood in the Church, viz., the priesthood of all believers. Sections 33-39 deal, among other things, with the abuses to which an unscriptural conception of the Lord's Supper has led. Of special interest is section 12, in which Luther gives a summary of all that enters into the Sacrament of the Altar.
This treatise is divided into sections, ending with number 40, but section 32 is left out, so there are only 39 in total. Section 1 contains the introduction, and section 40 provides the conclusion. Sections 2-15 form the positive, constructive part of the treatise, addressing the question: What is the Lord's Supper? In sections 16-34, the sacrificial theory of the Roman Church is rejected; sections 35-39 discuss (1) to what extent we can talk about making an offering in the sacrament, and (2) what this means for the idea of a true priesthood in the Church, namely, the priesthood of all believers. Sections 33-39 address, among other things, the abuses that have arisen from an unscriptural understanding of the Lord's Supper. Of particular interest is section 12, where Luther summarizes everything that is involved in the Sacrament of the Altar.
Knowing, as we do, that Luther developed his doctrine of the Lord's Supper gradually[7] and under stress of much opposition from all sides, it is interesting for us to note the stage of that development which this treatise represents. We may, therefore, inquire how he stood at this time on the question of the Real Presence. This question is answered under the fourth point of section 12. The true presence of the body and blood cannot be more clearly admitted than is done in sections 11 and 12 of this treatise. We can safely say that there never was a time when Luther was uncertain on this point. The point of view from which he discusses the significance of the sacrament in the Sermon von dem hochwürdigen Sacrament (1519) has sometimes been cited to the contrary, but even in this Sermon, with its emphasis upon the spiritual body of Christ, of which even those may be partakers whom the pope might exclude from the external communion, he speaks of the bread and wine as being changed into the Lord's "true, natural flesh" and into His "natural, true blood," [8] which shows that Luther at that time, nine months before the appearance of this Treatise on the New Testament, still held even to the conception of transubstantiation. He cannot, therefore, have had doubts about the Real Presence.
Knowing that Luther developed his doctrine of the Lord's Supper gradually and faced a lot of opposition, it's interesting to see what stage this treatise represents in that development. So, we can look into how he viewed the question of the Real Presence at that time. This question is addressed under the fourth point of section 12. The true presence of the body and blood can't be stated more clearly than in sections 11 and 12 of this treatise. We can confidently say that Luther never wavered on this issue. The perspective from which he discusses the significance of the sacrament in the Sermon von dem hochwürdigen Sacrament (1519) has sometimes been interpreted differently, but even in this Sermon, which emphasizes the spiritual body of Christ, he notes that the bread and wine are transformed into the Lord's "true, natural flesh" and His "natural, true blood," which indicates that Luther, just nine months before the release of this Treatise on the New Testament, still accepted the idea of transubstantiation. Therefore, he couldn't have had any doubts about the Real Presence.
In view, however, of the rapid development of Luther's doctrinal conceptions, we might further ask: Did Luther still retain his belief in transubstantiation at the time when he wrote the Treatise on the New Testament? At the beginning of October in this same year, in his Babylonian Captivity, Luther comes out for the first time with an attack on this Roman doctrine. He regards it as a mere human opinion, which one may accept or not accept, and clearly inclines to the belief that after consecration not only the form (Gestalt; species), but also the substance of bread and wine is still present.[9] In the Sermon von dem hochwürdigen Sacrament he spoke of the "shape and form of the bread"; in the present treatise he chooses the expression: "His own true flesh and blood under the bread and wine" (sec. 12). This would soon to indicate that in this writing he already holds the opinion which he soon afterward expressed in the Babylonian Captivity. But while he believed in the real presence of Christ's "own true flesh and blood," this body of Christ he regards—at this time, when he has not yet had to meet the spiritualistic interpretation of the Sacramentarians—as a sign only, a thing signifying the blessing of the sacrament, which is forgiveness of sins and life eternal (sec 10). Exactly the same view is expressed in the Sermon of 1519[10]. "Luther does not yet speak of 'any value which this body, sacramentally imparted, is supposed to have in and of itself.'" [11]
However, given the rapid development of Luther's doctrinal ideas, we might also ask: Did Luther still believe in transubstantiation when he wrote the Treatise on the New Testament? At the beginning of October that same year, in his Babylonian Captivity, Luther made his first public attack on this Roman doctrine. He viewed it as just a human opinion that one can choose to accept or reject, and he clearly leaned towards the belief that after consecration, not only the form (Gestalt; species) but also the substance of bread and wine is still present.[9] In the Sermon von dem hochwürdigen Sacrament, he referred to the "shape and form of the bread"; in this treatise, he uses the term: "His own true flesh and blood under the bread and wine" (sec. 12). This suggests that in this writing, he already holds the view that he later articulated in the Babylonian Captivity. While he believed in the real presence of Christ's "own true flesh and blood," he viewed this body of Christ—at a time when he had not yet faced the spiritual interpretations of the Sacramentarians—as merely a sign, something that signifies the blessing of the sacrament, which is forgiveness of sins and eternal life (sec. 10). The same view is echoed in the Sermon of 1519.[10] "Luther does not yet speak of 'any value which this body, sacramentally imparted, is supposed to have in and of itself.'"[11]
The question next arises: How does the recipient of the sign (body and blood under bread and wine) become partaker of that which is thereby signified? It is through faith, as the receiving organ (sec. 13). So, too, in the Sermon of 1519, where it is called the "third part of the sacrament," "in which the power lies" (wo die Macht anliegt). At a later time Luther found it necessary to emphasize the fact that it is not through the faith of the recipient that the sacrament gains its power and efficacy, since this attaches to it simply by virtue of the Word[12]; but that faith is the receiving organ for the blessing of the sacrament is a conviction which he never gave up.
The next question is: How does the person receiving the sign (the body and blood represented in bread and wine) become part of what it signifies? It happens through faith, as the means of receiving (sec. 13). Similarly, in the Sermon from 1519, it’s referred to as the "third part of the sacrament," "where the power lies" (wo die Macht anliegt). Later on, Luther felt it was important to clarify that it’s not the recipient's faith that gives the sacrament its power and effectiveness, as that comes solely from the Word[12]; however, he always maintained the belief that faith is the means through which one receives the blessing of the sacrament.
The object of faith is the Gospel, i. e., the promise of the forgiveness of sins contained in the Words of Institution, which are a "testament," a "new and eternal testament" (secs. 5-10). Hence the title of the work, Treatise on the New Testament. While the Sermon of 1519 speaks of the Gospel only in general, we have here a special emphasis on the words of institution as embracing "in a short summary" the whole Gospel (sec. 33). The words of institution are still further emphasized and interpreted in the work On Abuse of the Mass, of 1522. Because of the importance of the Word in the sacrament, Luther declares that the words of institution should be spoken aloud, not whispered, as was and is done in the Roman churches, and in a language which is understood by the people (sec. 16).
The focus of faith is the Gospel, which means the promise of forgiveness for sins found in the Words of Institution, considered a "testament," a "new and eternal testament" (secs. 5-10). This is why the work is titled Treatise on the New Testament. While the Sermon of 1519 talks about the Gospel in broad terms, here there's a specific emphasis on the words of institution as summarizing the entire Gospel "in a short summary" (sec. 33). The words of institution are further highlighted and explained in the work On Abuse of the Mass, from 1522. Due to the significance of the Word in the sacrament, Luther states that the words of institution should be spoken aloud, not whispered, as is done in Roman churches, and in a language that the people can understand (sec. 16).
An especially striking feature of this treatise is the repeated assertion that faith, which leans on the Word, and is the "principal part of the mass," does not absolutely need the sacrament. "I can daily enjoy the sacrament in the mass if only I keep before my eyes the testament, that is, the words and covenant of Christ, and feed and strengthen my faith thereby" (sec. 17) [13]. He quotes Augustine: "Only believe, so hast thou already partaken of the sacrament." In interpreting this passage we must remember that Luther was writing at a time when he was daily expecting to hear that the pope had excommunicated him from the Church. His comfort was that he and his followers could not be excluded by papal dictum from the communion of true believers and saints, nor deprived of the spiritual feeding upon the true spiritual body of Christ.
An especially striking feature of this treatise is the repeated assertion that faith, which relies on the Word and is the "main part of the mass," does not absolutely need the sacrament. "I can enjoy the sacrament in the mass every day as long as I keep the testament in mind, that is, the words and covenant of Christ, and nourish and strengthen my faith through that" (sec. 17) [13]. He cites Augustine: "Just believe, and you have already partaken of the sacrament." In interpreting this passage, we must remember that Luther was writing at a time when he was daily expecting to hear that the pope had excommunicated him from the Church. His comfort was that he and his followers could not be excluded by papal decree from the fellowship of true believers and saints, nor deprived of the spiritual nourishment from the true spiritual body of Christ.
In this treatise Luther also attacks for the first time the Roman doctrine of the mass as a bloodless repetition of the sacrifice once made on Calvary—a theory which forgets that the mass is a testament and a sacrament, in which God promises and gives something to us, not we to Him (sec. 19). In much stronger language, and quoting Scripture more extensively, Luther exposes and rejects this error, so fundamental to the Roman system, in his work of 1522, On the Abuse of the Mass. In the Babylonian Captivity he remarks, "When I published my Sermon of the Supper,[14] I was still caught in the prevailing conception, and was indifferent whether the pope was right or not." [15] In this treatise, then, we have the first clear statement of the reformer on this subject.
In this essay, Luther also challenges the Roman belief in the mass as a bloodless repetition of the sacrifice that happened on Calvary—a idea that overlooks the fact that the mass is a testament and a sacrament, where God promises and gives something to us, not the other way around (sec. 19). Using much stronger language and quoting Scripture more extensively, Luther reveals and rejects this mistake, which is crucial to the Roman system, in his 1522 work, On the Abuse of the Mass. In the Babylonian Captivity, he notes, "When I published my Sermon of the Supper,[14] I was still caught in the prevailing conception, and was indifferent whether the pope was right or not." [15] In this treatise, we have the reformer's first clear statement on this topic.
It shows, however, the beautifully conservative character of Luther that even here, where he is compelled to reject the Roman sacrificial theory, we see him laboring to detect at least an element of scriptural truth in the refuted doctrine. He says (secs. 26, 27) that in the Supper we use Christ as our Sacrifice and Mediator, by bringing our prayer and thanksgiving to the Father through Him. And this furnishes the basis on which he builds the evangelical doctrine of the priesthood of all believers (sec. 28); alle Christenmänner Pfaffen, alle Weiber Pfaffinnen, es sei jung oder alt, etc. This is still more strongly emphasized in the Abuse of the Mass of 1522.
It shows, however, the beautifully conservative nature of Luther that even here, when he has to reject the Roman sacrificial theory, we see him working to find at least some element of biblical truth in the discredited doctrine. He says (secs. 26, 27) that in the Supper we use Christ as our Sacrifice and Mediator by bringing our prayer and thanks to the Father through Him. This provides the foundation on which he builds the evangelical doctrine of the priesthood of all believers (sec. 28); alle Christenmänner Pfaffen, alle Weiber Pfaffinnen, es sei jung oder alt, etc. This is further emphasized in the Abuse of the Mass of 1522.
Two more points need to be mentioned,—the withholding of the cup from the laity and the number of the sacraments. In the Sermon of 1519 Luther attaches little importance to the communion in both kinds, though he thinks it would be well for the Church in a General Council to restore the two elements to all Christians. But in this treatise of 1520 he is already beginning to use stronger language. He would like to know who gave the power to withhold the cup (sec. 34). In the Babylonian Captivity and in the Abuse of the Mass he unsparingly condemns the Roman practice. On the number of the sacraments, Luther seems not yet to have been entirely in the clear when he wrote this work. In Section 24 he mentions, besides baptism and the Lord's Supper, "confirmation, penance, extreme unction, etc." In the Babylonian Captivity he definitely reduces the seven sacraments of the Roman Church to baptism, the Lord's Supper and penance, but he had his doubts on this point before he wrote this present work, as we may conclude from a remark in the Sermon of 1519, in which he distinguishes "baptism and the bread" as the two "principal sacraments," and also from a letter to Spalatin,[16] in which he writes that no one need expect from him a publication on the other sacraments until he shall first have been taught by what passage of Scripture he may justify them.[17] In conclusion, it may be said that this whole Treatise on the New Testament is a beautiful illustration of the constructive power of Luther's work. In the work of tearing down he proceeds with the greatest care, ever mindful of his duty to replace the old with something new which can stand the test of Scripture.
Two more points need to be mentioned: the withholding of the cup from the laity and the number of sacraments. In the Sermon of 1519, Luther doesn't put much emphasis on communion in both kinds, but he believes it would be beneficial for the Church in a General Council to restore the two elements to all Christians. However, in this treatise from 1520, he's starting to use stronger language. He wants to know who gave the authority to withhold the cup (sec. 34). In the Babylonian Captivity and in the Abuse of the Mass, he outright condemns the Roman practice. Regarding the number of sacraments, Luther doesn't seem to have been completely clear when he wrote this work. In Section 24, he mentions, besides baptism and the Lord's Supper, "confirmation, penance, extreme unction, etc." In the Babylonian Captivity, he firmly reduces the seven sacraments of the Roman Church to baptism, the Lord's Supper, and penance, but he had his doubts about this before writing the present work, as suggested by a comment in the Sermon of 1519, where he identifies "baptism and the bread" as the two "principal sacraments." He also expresses in a letter to Spalatin that no one should expect a publication from him on the other sacraments until he has been shown by what scripture he can justify them. In conclusion, it's fair to say that this entire Treatise on the New Testament illustrates the constructive aspect of Luther's work beautifully. In his effort to tear down, he takes the utmost care, always mindful of his responsibility to replace the old with something new that aligns with Scripture.
J. L. NEVE.
Wittenberg Theological Seminary,
Wittenberg Theological Seminary,
Springfield, O.
Springfield, OH
FOOTNOTES
[1] As the earliest prints, the following may be mentioned: (1) By Joh. Gruenenberg in Wittenberg, 11520 (the basis of the Weimar text); (2) by the same publisher, 1520; (3) by Melchior Lotther in Wittenberg, 1520; (4) by Silanus Ottmar in Wittenberg, Aug. 21st, 1520 (this is the text of the Erlangen Edition); (5) a Wittenberg print with no mention of the publisher, but otherwise identical in appearance with No. 4; (6) by Fridrichen Peypus at Nürnberg, 1520; (7) a Wittenberg print, 1520, with no mention of the publisher; (8) by Adam Petri in Basel, 1520; (9) a Wittenberg edition of 1520, revised by Luther (anderweit gecorigiert durch D. Mart. Luther); this edition in octavo, all the preceding in quarto. The text of this treatise in the following collections of Luther's works, Wittenberg, VII, 25 ff.; Jena, I, 329 ff.; Altenburg, I, 514 ff.; Leipzig, XVII 490 ff.; Walch XIX, 1256 ff.; Erlangen XXVII, 141 ff.; Weimar VI. 353 ff.
[1] The earliest prints include the following: (1) By Joh. Gruenenberg in Wittenberg, 1520 (the basis of the Weimar text); (2) by the same publisher, 1520; (3) by Melchior Lotther in Wittenberg, 1520; (4) by Silanus Ottmar in Wittenberg, August 21, 1520 (this is the text of the Erlangen Edition); (5) a Wittenberg print with no mention of the publisher, but otherwise identical in appearance to No. 4; (6) by Fridrichen Peypus in Nürnberg, 1520; (7) a Wittenberg print, 1520, with no mention of the publisher; (8) by Adam Petri in Basel, 1520; (9) a Wittenberg edition of 1520, revised by Luther (anderweit gecorigiert durch D. Mart. Luther); this edition in octavo, all the previous ones in quarto. The text of this treatise appears in the following collections of Luther's works: Wittenberg, VII, 25 ff.; Jena, I, 329 ff.; Altenburg, I, 514 ff.; Leipzig, XVII 490 ff.; Walch XIX, 1256 ff.; Erlangen XXVII, 141 ff.; Weimar VI. 353 ff.
[2] By the word "mass" Luther means the celebration of the Lord's Supper. Even after this sacrament was understood in an evangelical sense, the Lutherans for a long time kept the name mass. Thus Melanchthon writes in the Augs. Conf., Art. xxiv, "Our churches are falsely accused of abolishing the mass; for the mass is retained on our part, and celebrated with the greatest reverence."
[2] By the term "mass," Luther refers to the celebration of the Lord's Supper. Even after this sacrament was understood in a more evangelical way, the Lutherans continued to use the name mass for a long time. Melanchthon states in the Augs. Conf., Art. xxiv, "Our churches are wrongly accused of abolishing the mass; for we retain the mass and celebrate it with great reverence."
[3] Page 224.
[3] Page 224.
[4] De Weite, Luther's Briefe, I, 475.
[4] De Weite, Luther's Letters, I, 475.
[5] The name given by the Lutheran theologians to those who denied the real presence of the body and blood of Christ in the Lord's Supper.
[5] The term used by Lutheran theologians for those who rejected the real presence of Christ's body and blood in the Lord's Supper.
[6] Two more might have been mentioned: (1) a discourse on the proper preparation of the Lord's Supper (Erl. Ed., XVII, 55 ff.) and (2) the Discourse on Excommunication (Ibid., XXVII, 29 ff.)
[6] Two more could have been included: (1) a discussion on the proper preparation for the Lord's Supper (Erl. Ed., XVII, 55 ff.) and (2) the Discourse on Excommunication (Ibid., XXVII, 29 ff.)
[7] In the Introduction to The Babylonian Captivity of the Church he writes: "I am compelled, whether I will or not, to become daily more learned, having so many notable teachers diligently pushing me on and keeping me at work." (Weimar Ed., VI, 497.
[7] In the Introduction to The Babylonian Captivity of the Church, he writes: "I have to keep getting smarter every day, whether I want to or not, with so many impressive teachers urging me on and keeping me busy." (Weimar Ed., VI, 497.
[8] Cf. Koëstlin-Kawäeau, Martin Luther, 4th ed., I, 284; Koëstlin-Hay, Theology of Luther, I, 399 f; Luther's Werke, Berlin Ed., III, 261-264, 374.
[8] Cf. Koëstlin-Kawäeau, Martin Luther, 4th ed., I, 284; Koëstlin-Hay, Theology of Luther, I, 399 f; Luther's Werke, Berlin Ed., III, 261-264, 374.
[9] Weimar Ed., VI, 511 f.
[9] Weimar Ed., VI, 511 f.
[10] Cf. Koëstlin-Hay, op. cit., I, 340.
[10] See Koëstlin-Hay, cited work, I, 340.
[11] Ibid., p. 350.
Ibid., p. 350.
[12] Erl. Ed., XVI, 33, 92 ff.
[12] Erl. Ed., XVI, 33, 92 ff.
[13] So also with much emphasis in the Sermon v. d. hochw. Sac., 1519.
[13] So also with much emphasis in the Sermon on the Holy Sacrament, 1519.
[14] He means the Serm. v. d. hochw. Sac., 1519.
[14] He means the Serm. v. d. hochw. Sac., 1519.
[15] Weimar Ed., VI, 502.
[15] Weimar Ed., VI, 502.
[16] De Weite, Briefe, I, 378
[16] De Weite, Letters, I, 378
[17] Koëstlin-Hay, op. cit., I, 355.
[17] Koëstlin-Hay, op. cit., I, 355.
A TREATISE ON THE NEW TESTAMENT,
THAT IS THE HOLY MASS
1519
1519
JESUS[1]
[Sidenote: The Multiplying of Laws]
[Sidenote: The Increase of Laws]
1. Experience, all chronicles, and the Holy Scriptures besides, teach us this truth: the less law, the more justice; the fewer commandments, the more good works. No well-regulated community ever existed long, if at all, where there were many laws. Therefore, before the ancient law of Moses, the Patriarchs of old had no prescribed law and order for the service of God other than the sacrifices; as we read of Adam, Abel, Noah and others. Afterward, circumcision was enjoined upon Abraham and his household, until the time of Moses, through whom God gave the people of Israel divers laws, forms, and practices, for the sole purpose of teaching human nature how utterly useless many laws are to make people pious. For although the law leads and drives away from evil to good works, it is still impossible for man to do them willingly and gladly; but he has at all times an aversion for the law and would rather be free. Now where there is unwillingness, there can never be a good work. For what is not done willingly is not good, and only seems to be good. Consequently, all the laws cannot make one really pious without the grace of God, for they can produce only dissemblers, hypocrites, pretenders, and proud saints, such as have their reward here [Matt. 6:2], and never please God. Thus He says to the Jews, Malachi i: "I have no pleasure in you; for who is there among you that would even as much as shut a door for me, willingly and out of love?" [Mal. 1:10]
1. Experience, along with all records and the Holy Scriptures, proves this truth: the fewer laws there are, the more justice prevails; the fewer commandments, the more good deeds follow. No well-ordered community has lasted long, if at all, with too many laws. Before the ancient law of Moses, the early Patriarchs had no specific laws or rules for serving God apart from sacrifices, as we see with Adam, Abel, Noah, and others. Later, God commanded Abraham and his household to practice circumcision until the time of Moses, through whom He gave the people of Israel various laws, forms, and practices to show human nature how pointless many laws are in making people devout. While the law guides and encourages turning from evil to good deeds, it remains impossible for humans to perform them willingly and joyfully; they always have a reluctance towards the law and would prefer to be free. Where there's unwillingness, there's no genuine good work. What isn't done willingly isn't truly good, but merely appears to be so. Therefore, no number of laws can create true piety without God's grace, as they only lead to pretenders, hypocrites, and arrogant saints, who receive their reward here [Matt. 6:2] and never please God. Hence, He says to the Jews in Malachi 1: "I take no pleasure in you; for who among you would even willingly close a door for me out of love?" [Mal. 1:10]
[Sidenote: Sects and Divisions]
[Sidenote: Groups and Divisions]
2. Another result of many laws is this, that many sects and divisions in the congregations [Gemeinden] arise from them. One adopts this way, another that, and there grows up in each man a false, secret love for his own sect, and a hatred, or at least a contempt for, and a disregard of the other sects, whereby brotherly, free, common love perishes, and selfish love prevails. So Jeremiah and Hosea speak, [Jer. 2:28, Hos. 8:11,12] yea, all the profits lament that the people of Israel divided themselves into as many sects as there were cities in the land; each desiring to outdo the others. Thence also arose the Sadducees and Pharisees in the Gospel.
2. Another consequence of many laws is that numerous sects and divisions within congregations arise from them. One group follows one path, while another follows a different one, leading each person to develop a false, hidden affection for their own sect, along with a hatred, or at least a disregard and contempt for the other sects. This ultimately destroys brotherly, open, communal love and allows selfish love to thrive. As Jeremiah and Hosea say, [Jer. 2:28, Hos. 8:11,12], indeed, all the prophets lament that the people of Israel split into as many sects as there were cities in the land, each hoping to surpass the others. This is also where the Sadducees and Pharisees in the Gospel originated.
So we observe to-day, that through the Spiritual Law[2] but little justice and piety have arisen in Christendom; the world has been filled with dissemblers and hypocrites and with so many sects, orders, and divisions of the one people of Christ, that almost every city is divided into ten parties or more. And they daily devise new ways and manners (as they think) of serving God, until it has come to this, that priests, monks, and laity have become more hostile toward each other than Turks and Christians. Yea, the priests and the monks are deadly enemies, wrangling about their self-conceived ways and methods like fools and madmen, not only to the hindrance, but to the very destruction of Christian love and unity. Each one clings to his sect and despises the others; and they regard the laymen as though they were no Christians. This lamentable condition is only a result of the laws.
So today, we see that because of the Spiritual Law[2], very little justice and piety have emerged in Christianity; the world is filled with deceivers and hypocrites, along with so many sects, orders, and divisions within the one body of Christ that almost every city is split into ten or more factions. They constantly come up with new ways they believe are better for serving God, to the point where priests, monks, and laypeople are more antagonistic toward each other than Turks and Christians. Indeed, the priests and monks are fierce enemies, arguing over their own ideas and methods like fools and madmen, which not only hinders but truly destroys Christian love and unity. Each one clings to his own faction and looks down on the others, treating laypeople as if they aren’t Christians at all. This unfortunate situation is merely a consequence of the laws.
[Sidenote: The Mass Christ's Law]
The Mass of Christ's Law
3. Christ, in order that He might prepare for Himself an acceptable and beloved people, which should be bound together in unity through love, abolished the whole law of Moses. And that He might not give further occasion for divisions, He did not again appoint more than one law or order for His entire people, and that the holy mass. For, although baptism is also an external ordinance, yet it takes place but once, and is not a practice of the entire life, like the mass. Therefore, after baptism there is to be no other external order for the service of God except the mass. And where the mass is used, there is a true service, even though there be no other form, with singing, playing, bell-ringing, vestments, ornaments and postures; for everything of this sort is an addition invented by men. When Christ Himself first instituted this sacrament and held the first mass, there were do patens, no chasuble, no singing, no pageantry, but only thanksgiving to God, and the use of the sacrament. After this same simplicity the Apostles and all Christians long time held mass, until the divers forms and additions arose, by which the Romans held mass one way, the Greeks another; and now it has finally come to this, that the chief thing in the mass has become unknown, and nothing is remembered except the additions of men.
3. Christ, to create a united and beloved community through love, eliminated the entire law of Moses. To prevent further divisions, He established only one law or practice for His people, which is the holy mass. While baptism is also an outward ceremony, it is done only once and is not a lifelong practice like the mass. Therefore, after baptism, there should be no other external practice for worshiping God except the mass. Where the mass is celebrated, there is genuine worship, even if there are no other elements like singing, music, bells, garments, decorations, and specific actions; because all those things are just human inventions. When Christ first set up this sacrament and held the first mass, there were no patens, no chasuble, no singing, no elaborate displays, just gratitude to God and the use of the sacrament. The Apostles and early Christians celebrated the mass in this same simplicity for a long time, until various forms and additions emerged, leading to the Romans celebrating mass in one way and the Greeks in another. Now, the main aspect of the mass has become unclear, and all that is remembered are the human additions.
[Sidenote: Christ's Institution and Man's Ordinances]
[Sidenote: Christ's Institution and Man's Ordinances]
4. The nearer, now, our masses are to the first mass of Christ, the better, without doubt, they are; and the farther from Christ's mass, the more perilous. For that reason we may not boast of ourselves, against the Russians or Greeks, that we alone have a right to hold mass; as little as a priest who wears a red chasuble may boast against him who wears one of white or black. For such external additions and differences may by their dissimilarity make sects and dissensions, but they can never make the mass better. Although I neither wish nor am able to displace or discard all such additions, still, because such pompous forms are perilous, we must never permit ourselves to be led away by them from the simple institution by Christ and from the right use of the mass. And, indeed, the greatest and most useful art is to know what really and properly belongs to the mass, and what is added and foreign. For where there is no clear distinction, the eyes and the heart are easily misled by such shamming into a false impression and delusion; so that what men have invented is reckoned the mass, and what the mass is, is never experienced, to say nothing of deriving benefit from it. Thus, alas! it happens in our times; for, I fear, every day more than a thousand masses are said, of which perhaps not one is a real mass. O dear Christian, to have many masses is not to have the mass. There is more to it than that.
4. The closer we are to the original mass of Christ, the better it is, without a doubt; and the farther we stray from Christ's mass, the more dangerous it becomes. For this reason, we can't boast about ourselves against the Russians or Greeks, claiming we alone have the right to hold mass, just as a priest in a red chasuble can't boast over one in white or black. Those superficial additions and differences can create divisions and disputes, but they can never improve the mass itself. While I don’t want to or can't eliminate all these additions, we must never let ourselves be diverted by them from the simple practice established by Christ and the proper use of the mass. In fact, the most important skill is understanding what truly belongs to the mass and what is extra and irrelevant. When there’s no clear distinction, our eyes and hearts can be easily led astray by such pretenses, making us believe that what people have created is the real mass, while the true essence of the mass is never experienced, let alone valued. Sadly, this is the case in our times; I worry that every day, more than a thousand masses are celebrated, yet perhaps not a single one is a true mass. Oh dear Christian, having many masses doesn’t mean we have the mass. There’s much more to it than that.
[Sidneote: The Chief Thing in the Mass]
[Sidneote: The Chief Thing in the Mass]
5. If we desire to say mass rightly and understand it, then we must give up everything that the eyes and all the senses behold and suggest in this act, such as vestments, in bells, songs, ornaments, prayers, processions, elevations, prostrations, or whatever happens in the mass, until we first lay hold of and consider well the words of Christ, by which He completed and instituted the mass and commanded us to observe it. For therein lies the whole mass, its nature, work, profit and benefit, and without them (i. e., the words) no benefit is derived from the mass. But these are the words: Take and eat, this is My body, which is given for you. [Matt. 26:26] Take and drink ye all of it, this is the cup of the new and eternal testament in My blood, [Mark 14:22, 23, 24] which is shed for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins [Luke 22:19, 20]. These words every Christian must have before him in the mass and hold fast to them as the chief part of the mass, in which also the really good preparation for the mass and sacrament is taught; this we shall see.
5. If we want to properly say mass and understand it, we need to let go of everything that we see and feel during this act, like the robes, bells, songs, decorations, prayers, processions, lifts, kneeling, or anything else that happens during mass, until we first grasp and reflect on the words of Christ, by which He established and commanded us to celebrate the mass. For this is where the essence of the mass lies—its nature, purpose, and benefits—and without these words, there is no benefit to the mass. These are the words: Take and eat, this is My body, which is given for you. [Matt. 26:26] Take and drink ye all of it, this is the cup of the new and eternal testament in My blood, [Mark 14:22, 23, 24] which is shed for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins [Luke 22:19, 20]. Every Christian must keep these words in mind during the mass and hold onto them as the core part of the mass, which is essential for a good preparation for the mass and sacrament; we'll discuss this further.
[Sidenote: Faith and God's Promises]
Faith and God's Promises
6. If man is to deal with God and receive anything from Him, it must happen in this wise, not that man begin lay the first stone, but that God alone, without any entreaty or desire of man, must first come and give him a promise.[3] This word of God is the beginning, the foundation, the rock, upon which afterward all works, words and thoughts of man must build. This word man must gratefully accept, and faithfully believe the divine promise, and by no means doubt that it is and comes to pass just as He promises. This trust and faith is the beginning, middle, and end of all works and righteousness. For, because man does God the honor of regarding and confessing Him as true. He becomes to him a gracious God, Who in turn honors him and regards and confesses him as true. Thus it is not possible that man, of his own reason and strength, should by works ascend to heaven and anticipate God, moving Him to be gracious; but God must anticipate all works and thoughts, and make a promise clearly expressed in words, which man then takes and keeps with a good, firm faith. Then follows the Holy Spirit, Who is given him because of this same faith.
6. If a person is to connect with God and receive anything from Him, it has to happen this way: it's not about the person laying the first stone, but rather that God alone, without any plea or desire from the person, must first come and give a promise. This word from God is the beginning, the foundation, the rock upon which all the actions, words, and thoughts of the person must build afterward. The person must gratefully accept this word and wholeheartedly believe in the divine promise, without any doubt that it is real and will come to pass just as He promises. This trust and faith are the beginning, middle, and end of all actions and righteousness. Because when a person honors God by recognizing and confessing Him as true, He becomes a gracious God who also honors and recognizes the person as true. Therefore, it is impossible for a person, through their own reasoning and strength, to ascend to heaven through works and prompt God to be gracious; instead, God must precede all works and thoughts, making a promise clearly expressed in words, which the person then receives and keeps with a strong, unwavering faith. Following that, the Holy Spirit is given to them because of this same faith.
7. Such a promise was given to Adam after his fall, when God spake to the serpent: "I will put enmity between thee and the woman, between her seed and thy seed: she shall crush thy head; and thou shalt lie in wait for her foot." [Gen. 3:15] [4] In these words, however obscurely, God promises help to human nature, namely, that by a woman the devil shall again be overcome. This promise of God sustained Adam and Eve and all their children until the time of Noah; in this they believed, and by this faith they were saved; else they had despaired. [Gen. 9:9 f.] In like manner, after the flood, He made a covenant with Noah and his children, until the time of Abraham (Genesis xii), whom He summoned out of his fatherland [Gen. 12:1, 3], and promised that in his seed all nations should be blessed [Gen. 18:18]. This promise Abraham believed and obeyed, and thereby was justified and became the friend of God. [Gen. 22:18; 15:6] In the same book this promise to Abraham is many times repeated, enlarged and made more definite, until Isaac is promised him, who was to be the seed from which Christ and every blessing should come. In this faith upon the promise Abraham's children were kept until the time of Christ, although in the mean time it was continually renewed and made more definite by David and many prophets This promise the Lord in the Gospel calls "Abraham's bosom," [Luke 16:22, 23] because in it were kept all who with a right faith clung thereto, and, with Abraham, waited for Christ Then came Moses, who declared the same promise under many forms in the Law. [Ex. 3:6, 7, 8] Through him God promised the people of Israel the land of Canaan, while they were still in Egypt; which promise they believed, and by it they were sustained and led into that land.
7. A promise was given to Adam after his fall when God spoke to the serpent: "I will create hostility between you and the woman, between her offspring and your offspring: she will crush your head, and you will wait in ambush for her heel." [Gen. 3:15] [4] In these words, though they are somewhat unclear, God promises support to humanity, specifically that a woman will ultimately defeat the devil. This promise from God upheld Adam and Eve and all their descendants until the time of Noah; they believed in this, and through this faith, they were saved; otherwise, they would have lost hope. [Gen. 9:9 f.] Similarly, after the flood, God formed a covenant with Noah and his children, lasting until the time of Abraham (Genesis xii), whom He called out of his homeland [Gen. 12:1, 3], and promised that through his descendants, all nations would be blessed [Gen. 18:18]. Abraham believed and obeyed this promise, which led to his justification and made him a friend of God. [Gen. 22:18; 15:6] In the same book, this promise to Abraham is repeated several times, expanded and clarified, until Isaac is promised to him, who would be the seed from which Christ and all blessings would come. Abraham's children maintained their faith in this promise until the time of Christ, even as it was continually reaffirmed and made clearer by David and many prophets. The Lord refers to this promise in the Gospel as "Abraham's bosom," [Luke 16:22, 23] because it included all who, with true faith, held onto it and, like Abraham, awaited Christ. Then Moses arrived, who expressed the same promise in various forms within the Law. [Ex. 3:6, 7, 8] Through him, God assured the people of Israel of the land of Canaan while they were still in Egypt; they believed this promise, which sustained them and guided them into that land.
[Sidenote: God's Promise in the Mass—the Testament]
[Sidenote: God's Promise in the Mass—the Testament]
8. In the New Testament, likewise, Christ has made a promise or solemn vow, which we are to believe and thereto come to godliness and salvation. This promise is the word in which Christ says: "This is the cup of the New Testament." [Luke 22:20] This we shall now examine.
8. In the New Testament, similarly, Christ has made a promise or solemn vow, which we are to believe in and strive for godliness and salvation. This promise is the phrase where Christ says: "This is the cup of the New Testament." [Luke 22:20] We will now examine this.
Not every vow is called a testament, but only a last irrevocable will of one who is about to die, whereby he bequeaths his goods, allotted and assigned to be distributed to whom he will. Just as St. Paul says to the Hebrews that a testament must be made operative by death, and avails nothing while he still lives who made the testament. [Heb. 9:16, 17] For other vows, made for this life, may be hindered or recalled, and hence are not called testaments. Therefore, wherever in Scripture God's testament is referred to by the prophets, in that very word the prophets are taught that God would become man and die and rise again, to the end that His Word, in which He promised such a testament, might be fulfilled and confirmed. For if He is to make a testament as He promised, then He must die; if He is to die, He must be a man. And so that little word "testament" is a short summary of all God's wonders and grace, fulfilled in Christ.
Not every vow is called a testament, but only a final, unchangeable will of someone who is about to die, through which they leave their possessions to be given to whoever they choose. Just as St. Paul tells the Hebrews that a testament takes effect only after the death of the person who made it and is worthless while that person is still alive. [Heb. 9:16, 17] Other vows made for this life can be stopped or taken back, which is why they aren’t called testaments. Therefore, wherever in Scripture the prophets mention God's testament, that very term teaches us that God would become man, die, and rise again, so that His Word, in which He promised such a testament, could be fulfilled and confirmed. If He is to establish a testament as He promised, then He must die; if He is to die, He must be a man. So that little word "testament" is a brief summary of all God's wonders and grace, fulfilled in Christ.
[Sidenote: Difference between Old and New Testaments]
[Sidenote: Difference between Old and New Testaments]
9. He also distinguishes this testament from others and says, "It is a new and everlasting testament, in His own blood, for the forgiveness of sins"; whereby He disannuls the old testament. For the little word "new" makes the testament of Moses old and ineffective, one that avails no more. The old testament was a promise made through Moses to the people of Israel, to whom was promised the land of Canaan. For this testament God did not die, but the paschal lamb had to die instead of Christ and as a type of Christ; and so it was a temporal testament in the blood of the paschal lamb, which was shed for the obtaining and possessing of that land of Canaan. And as the paschal lamb, which died in the old testament for the land of Canaan, was a temporal and transitory thing, so too the old testament, together with that possession or land of Canaan allotted and promised therein, was temporal and transitory.
9. He also differentiates this covenant from others and says, "It is a new and everlasting covenant, in His own blood, for the forgiveness of sins"; thus, He declares the old covenant void. The small word "new" renders Moses' covenant old and ineffective, one that holds no value anymore. The old covenant was a promise made through Moses to the people of Israel, who were promised the land of Canaan. For this covenant, God did not die, but the Passover lamb had to die in place of Christ and as a foreshadowing of Christ; and so it was a temporary covenant in the blood of the Passover lamb, which was shed to acquire and possess that land of Canaan. And just as the Passover lamb, which died in the old covenant for the land of Canaan, was a temporary and passing thing, so too the old covenant, along with that possession or land of Canaan promised within it, was temporary and passing.
But Christ, the true Paschal Lamb, is an eternal divine Person, Who dies to establish the new testament; therefore the testament and the possessions therein bequeathed are eternal and abiding. And that is what He means when He contrasts this testament with that other, and says: A new testament—so that the other may become old and of none effect. An eternal testament, [Heb. 8:13] He says, not temporal like that other; not to dispose of temporal lands or possessions, but of eternal. In My blood, He says, not in the blood of a lamb. All this is to the end that the old should be altogether annulled and give place to the new alone.
But Christ, the true Paschal Lamb, is an eternal divine being who dies to establish the new covenant; therefore, the covenant and the benefits within it are eternal and enduring. This is what He means when He contrasts this covenant with the old one, saying: A new covenant—so that the old may become obsolete and ineffective. He refers to it as an eternal covenant, [Heb. 8:13] not temporary like the old one; it doesn’t concern temporary lands or possessions, but eternal ones. He says, In My blood, not in the blood of a lamb. All of this is meant to completely annul the old and make way for the new alone.
[Sidenote: What is Promised in the Mass]
[Sidenote: What is Promised in the Mass]
10. What then is this testament, and what is bequeathed us therein by Christ? Forsooth, a great, eternal and unspeakable treasure, namely, the forgiveness of all sins, as the words plainly state, "This is the cup of a new eternal testament in My blood, that is shed for you and for many for the remission of sin." [Matt. 26:8, Luke 22:30] As though He said: Behold, man, in these words I promise and bequeath thee forgiveness of all thy sin and eternal life. And in order that thou mayest be certain and know that such promise remains irrevocably thine, I will die for it, and will give My body and blood for it, and will leave them both to thee as sign and seal, that by them thou mayest remember Me." [1 Cor. 11:25] So He says: "As oft as ye do this, remember Me." [Luke 22:19] Even as a man who bequeathes something includes therein what shall be done for him afterward [1 Cor. 11:25], as is the custom at present in the requiems and masses for the dead, so also Christ has ordained a requiem for Himself in this testament; not that He needs it, but because it is necessary and profitable for us to remember Him; whereby we are strengthened in faith, confirmed in hope and made ardent in love. For as long as we live on earth our lot is such that the evil spirit and all the world assail us with joy and sorrow, to extinguish our love for Christ, to blot out our faith, and to weaken our hope. Wherefore we sorely need this sacrament, in which we may gain new strength when we have grown weak, and may daily exercise ourselves into the strengthening and uplifting of the spirit.
10. So what is this testament, and what has Christ left us in it? Truly, it’s a great, eternal, and indescribable treasure: the forgiveness of all sins, as the words clearly say, "This is the cup of a new eternal testament in My blood, which is shed for you and for many for the remission of sin." [Matt. 26:8, Luke 22:30] It’s as if He is saying: Look, humanity, in these words I promise and give you the forgiveness of all your sin and eternal life. And to ensure that you can be certain and know that this promise is irrevocably yours, I will die for it, and I will give My body and blood for it, leaving both to you as a sign and seal, so that by them you can remember Me." [1 Cor. 11:25] He says: "As often as you do this, remember Me." [Luke 22:19] Just as someone who leaves an inheritance also specifies what should be done for them afterward [1 Cor. 11:25], following the current custom in requiems and masses for the dead, Christ has also established a requiem for Himself in this testament; not that He needs it, but because it’s necessary and beneficial for us to remember Him, which strengthens our faith, confirms our hope, and ignites our love. While we live on earth, we face a reality where the evil spirit and the world surround us with both joy and sorrow, trying to extinguish our love for Christ, undermine our faith, and weaken our hope. Thus, we desperately need this sacrament, through which we can gain new strength when we feel weak, and can daily train ourselves to strengthen and uplift our spirit.
[Sidenote: Promises and Signs]
[Sidenote: Promises and Signals]
11. Furthermore, in all His promises God has usually given a sign in addition to the word, for the greater assurance and strengthening of our faith. Thus He gave Noah the sign of the rainbow. [Gen. 9:9, 13] To Abraham He gave circumcision as a sign. [Gen. 17:11] To Gideon He gave the rain on the ground and on the fleece [Judg. 6:37 ff.]; and we constantly find in the Scriptures many of these signs, given along with the promises. For so also worldly testaments are made; not only are the words written down, but seals and notaries' marks are affixed thereto, that they may always be binding and authentic. Thus Christ has done in this testament and has affixed to the words a powerful and most precious seal and sign; this is His own true body and blood under the bread and wine. For we poor men, since we live in our five senses, must always have, along with the words, at least one outward sign, on which we may lay hold, and around which we may gather; but in such wise that this sign may be a sacrament, that is, that it may be external and yet contain and express something spiritual, so that through the external we may be drawn into the spiritual, comprehending the external with the eyes of the body, the spiritual and inward with the eyes of the heart.
11. Furthermore, in all His promises, God has usually given a sign along with the word for greater assurance and to strengthen our faith. For example, He gave Noah the sign of the rainbow. [Gen. 9:9, 13] To Abraham, He gave circumcision as a sign. [Gen. 17:11] To Gideon, He gave the rain on the ground and on the fleece [Judg. 6:37 ff.]; and throughout the Scriptures, we regularly find many of these signs accompanying the promises. The same is true for worldly contracts; not only are the words written down, but seals and notaries' marks are added to ensure they are always binding and authentic. In this testament, Christ has done the same and added a powerful and precious seal and sign: His own true body and blood under the bread and wine. For us, since we live through our five senses, we need at least one outward sign to hold onto and gather around, while ensuring that this sign is a sacrament, meaning it is external yet contains and expresses something spiritual. This allows us to be drawn into the spiritual through the external, perceiving the physical with our eyes while understanding the spiritual with our hearts.
[Sidenote: The Parts of the Testament]
[Sidenote: The Parts of the Testament]
12. Now we see how many parts there are in this testament, or the mass. There is, first, the testator who makes the testament, Christ. Second, the heirs to whom the testament is bequeathed, we Christians. Third, the testament in itself, the words of Christ when He says: "This is My body which is given for you. This is My blood which is shed for you, a new eternal testament, etc." Fourth, the seal or token, the sacrament, bread and wine, and under them His true body and blood. For everything that is in this sacrament must live; therefore He did not put it in dead writ and seal, but in living words and signs which we use from day to day.
12. Now we can see how many parts there are in this testament, or the mass. First, there's the testator who creates the testament, Christ. Second, the heirs to whom the testament is given, we Christians. Third, the testament itself, the words of Christ when He says: "This is My body which is given for you. This is My blood which is shed for you, a new eternal testament, etc." Fourth, the seal or token, the sacrament, bread and wine, and under them His true body and blood. Everything that is in this sacrament must be alive; therefore, He didn't put it in dead writing and seals, but in living words and signs that we use every day.
And this is what is meant when the priest elevates the host,[5] by which act he addresses us rather than God, as though he said to us: Behold, this is the seal and sign of the testament in which Christ has bequeathed us remission of all an and eternal life. With this agrees also that which is sung by the choir: "Blessed be He that cometh to us in the name of God" [Matt. 21:9]?[6] so that we testify how we receive therein blessings from God, and do not sacrifice nor give to Him. Fifth, the bequeathed blessing which the words signify, namely, remission of sin and eternal life. Sixth, the obligation, remembrance or requiem which we should observe for Christ, to wit, that we preach this His love and grace, hear and meditate upon it, by it be incited and preserved unto love and hope in Him, as St. Paul explains it: "As oft as ye eat this bread and drink of this cup ye show the death of Christ." [1 Cor. 11:26] And this is what an earthly testator does, who bequeaths something to his heirs, that he may leave behind him a good name, the good will of men and a blessed memory, that he be not forgotten.
And this is what is meant when the priest lifts the host,[5] which is an action directed at us rather than God, as if to say: Look, this is the seal and sign of the covenant in which Christ has granted us the forgiveness of all and eternal life. This also aligns with what the choir sings: "Blessed is He who comes to us in the name of God" [Matt. 21:9]?[6], so we acknowledge how we receive blessings from God, rather than sacrificing or giving to Him. Fifth, the blessing conveyed by the words, which means forgiveness of sin and eternal life. Sixth, the duty, remembrance, or requiem that we should uphold for Christ, that is, that we proclaim His love and grace, listen to it, meditate on it, and let it inspire and sustain us in love and hope for Him, as St. Paul explains: "As often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the death of Christ." [1 Cor. 11:26] And this is similar to what a worldly testator does when he bequeaths something to his heirs, aiming to leave behind a good reputation, the goodwill of people, and a blessed memory, so that he is not forgotten.
[Sidenote: How the Mass Should be Regarded]
[Sidenote: How the Mass Should be Regarded]
13. From all this it is now easily seen what the mass is, how one should prepare himself for it, how observe and how use it, and how many are the abuses of it. For just as one would act if ten thousand gulden were bequeathed him by a good friend: so, and with far more reason, we ought to conduct ourselves toward the mass, which is nothing else than an exceeding rich and everlasting and good testament bequeathed us by Christ Himself, and bequeathed in such wise that He would have had no other reason to die except that He wished to make such a testament; so fervently desirous was He to pour out His eternal treasures, as He says: "With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I die." [Luke 22:15] Hence, too, it comes that in spite of many masses we remain so blind and cold, for we do not know what the mass is, what we do in it, nor what we get from it.
13. From all this, it's now clear what the mass is, how one should prepare for it, how to observe it, how to use it, and how many abuses exist around it. Just as someone would act if ten thousand gulden were left to them by a good friend, we should approach the mass with even more care, since it is nothing less than an incredibly rich and everlasting testament given to us by Christ Himself. He had no other reason to die except to create this testament; He was so eager to share His eternal treasures, as He said: "With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I die." [Luke 22:15] This is why, despite so many masses, we remain blind and indifferent—we don't understand what the mass is, what we do in it, or what we benefit from it.
[Sidenote: Faith in the word the True Preparation for the Mass]
[Sidenote: Trust in the Word: The Real Preparation for the Mass]
Since then it is nothing else than a testament, the first and by far the best preparation for the mass is a hungry soul and a firm joyful faith of the heart accepting such a testament Who would not go with great and joyful desire, hope and comfort, and demand a thousand gulden, if he knew that at a certain place they had been bequeathed him; especially if there were no other condition than that he remember, honor, and praise the testator? So, in this matter, you must above all else take heed to your heart, that you believe the words of Christ, and admit their truth, when He says to you and to all: "This is My blood, a new testament, by which I bequeath you forgiveness of all sins and eternal life." How could you do Him greater dishonor and show greater disrespect to the holy mass than by not believing or by doubting? For He desired this to be so certain that He Himself even died for it. Surely such doubt would be naught else than denying and blaspheming Christ's sufferings and death, and every blessing which He has thereby obtained.
Since then, it’s nothing but a testament; the first and by far the best preparation for the mass is a hungry soul and a firm, joyful faith in the heart accepting such a testament. Who wouldn’t go with great and joyful desire, hope, and comfort, and demand a thousand gulden, if they knew that at a certain place it had been left to them? Especially if there were no other condition than that they remember, honor, and praise the person who made the will? So, in this matter, you must above all else pay attention to your heart, that you believe the words of Christ and accept their truth when He says to you and to everyone: "This is My blood, a new testament, by which I bequeath you forgiveness of all sins and eternal life." How could you do Him greater dishonor and show greater disrespect to the holy mass than by not believing or by doubting? For He wanted this to be so certain that He even died for it. Surely such doubt would be nothing but denying and blaspheming Christ's sufferings and death, and every blessing He has obtained through them.
14. For this reason, I have said, everything depends upon the words of this sacrament, which are the words of Christ, and which we verily should set in pure gold and precious stones, and keep nothing more diligently before the eyes of the heart, that faith be exercised thereby. Let another pray, fast, go to confession, prepare himself for mass and the sacrament as he will. Do thou the same, but know that all that is pure fool's-work and self-deception, if you do not set before you the words of the testament and arouse yourself to believe and desire them. A long time would you have to polish your shoes, pick the lint[7] off your clothes, and deck yourself out to get an inheritance, if you had no letter and seal with which you could prove your right to it. But if you have letter and seal, and believe, desire, and seek it, it must be given you, even though you were scaly, scabby, stinking and most unclean. So if you would receive this sacrament and testament worthily, see to it that you bring forward these living words of Christ, rely thereon with a strong faith, and desire what Christ has therein promised you: then it will be given you, then are you worthy and well prepared. This faith and confidence must and will make you joyful, and awaken a bold love for Christ, by means of which you will begin with joy to lead a really good life and with all your heart to flee from sin. For he who loves Christ will surely do what pleases Him, and leave undone what does not please Him. But who will love Him except he taste the riches of this testament which Christ, out of pure mercy, has freely bequeathed to poor sinners? This taste comes by the faith which believes and trusts the testament and promise. If Abraham had not believed the promise of God he would never have amounted to anything. Just as certainly, then, as Abraham, Noah, and David accepted and believed their promises: so certainly must we also accept and believe this testament and promise.
14. For this reason, I’ve said that everything hinges on the words of this sacrament, which are the words of Christ. We should truly cherish those words as if they were made of pure gold and precious stones and keep them at the forefront of our hearts to exercise our faith. Let others pray, fast, go to confession, and prepare themselves for mass and the sacrament as they choose. Do the same, but remember that all of that is just foolishness and self-deception if you don’t focus on the words of the testament and stir yourself to believe and desire them. You could spend ages polishing your shoes, picking lint off your clothes, and dressing up to claim an inheritance if you didn't have a letter and seal to prove your right to it. But if you have the letter and seal, and you believe, desire, and seek it, it must be given to you, even if you look unkempt or dirty. So, if you want to receive this sacrament and testament properly, make sure you bring forward these living words of Christ, rely on them with strong faith, and desire what Christ has promised you in them: then it will be given to you, and you will be worthy and well-prepared. This faith and confidence must and will bring you joy and spark a bold love for Christ, leading you to joyfully live a really good life and wholeheartedly flee from sin. For anyone who loves Christ will surely do what pleases Him and avoid what doesn’t. But who will love Him if they don’t experience the riches of this testament that Christ has graciously left to poor sinners? This experience comes through the faith that believes in and trusts the testament and promise. If Abraham hadn’t believed in God’s promise, he would have never achieved anything. Just as surely as Abraham, Noah, and David accepted and believed their promises, we too must accept and believe this testament and promise.
[Sidenote: Who is Worthy]
[Sidenote: Who’s Worthy]
15. Now there are two temptations which never cease to assail you; the first, that you are entirely unworthy of so rich a testament, the second, that even were you worthy, the blessing is so great that human nature is terrified by the greatness of it; for what do not forgiveness of all sin and eternal life bring with them? If either of these temptations comes to you, you must, as I have said, esteem the words of Christ more than such thoughts. It will not be He that lies to you; your thoughts will be deceiving you.
15. There are two temptations that keep attacking you. The first is the feeling that you're completely unworthy of such a valuable gift, and the second is that even if you were worthy, the blessing is so immense that it scares human nature. After all, what do forgiveness of all sin and eternal life bring with them? If either of these temptations hits you, you must, as I've said, value the words of Christ more than those thoughts. He won't be the one lying to you; your thoughts are misleading you.
Just as though a poor beggar, yea, a very knave, were bequeathed a thousand gulden: he would not demand them because of his merit or worthiness, nor fail to claim them because of the greatness of the sum; and if any one should cast up to him his unworthiness and the greatness of the sum, he would certainly not allow anything of that sort to frighten him, but would say: "What is that to you? I know full well that I am unworthy of the inheritance; I do not demand it on my merits, as though it had been due me, but on the favor and grace of the testator. If he did not think it too much to bequeath to me, why should I so despise myself and not claim and take it?" So also must a timid, dejected conscience insist, against its own thoughts, upon the testament of Christ, and be stubborn in firm faith, despite its own unworthiness and the greatness of the blessing. For this very reason that which brings to such unworthy ones so great a blessing is a divine testament, by which God desires above all things to awaken love to Him. So Christ comforted those dejected ones who thought the blessing too great and said: "Faint-hearted little flock, fear not; it hath pleased your Father to give you the eternal Kingdom." [Luke 12:32]
Just like a poor beggar, yes, a real scoundrel, who was left a thousand gulden: he wouldn’t ask for it because of his merits or worth, nor would he refuse it because it's such a large amount; and if someone pointed out his unworthiness and the size of the gift, he wouldn't let that intimidate him. He would say: "What does that matter to you? I know I'm unworthy of this inheritance; I'm not asking for it based on my worth as if it were owed to me, but out of the favor and grace of the person who left it to me. If they thought it wasn’t too much to give me, why should I belittle myself and not claim what’s mine?" Similarly, a fearful, discouraged conscience must stand firm against its own thoughts and insist on the will of Christ, remaining steadfast in faith, despite its own unworthiness and the enormity of the blessing. The reason that such unworthy people receive such great blessings is that it’s a divine testament, through which God desires above all things to inspire love for Him. So Christ comforted those who felt dejected and thought the blessing was too great, saying: "Little flock, don’t be afraid; it has pleased your Father to give you the eternal Kingdom." [Luke 12:32]
[Sidenote: Abuses of the Mass: 1. The Suppression of the Words]
[Sidenote: Abuses of the Mass: 1. The Suppression of the Words]
16. But see now what they have made of the mass! In the first place, they have hidden these words of the testament, and have taught that they are not to be spoken to the laity, that they are secret words to be spoken in the mass only by the priest. Has not the devil here in a masterly way stolen from us the chief thing in the mass and put it to silence? For who has ever heard it preached that one should give heed in the mass to these words of the testament and insist upon them with a firm faith? And yet this should have been the chief thing. Thus they have been afraid, and have taught us to be afraid, where there is no cause for fear, nay, where all our comfort and safety lie.
16. But look at what they've done to the mass! First of all, they’ve hidden these words from the testament and have taught that they shouldn’t be said to the congregation, that they are secret words meant only for the priest during the mass. Hasn’t the devil cleverly taken away the most important part of the mass and silenced it? Who has ever heard it preached that we should pay attention to these words from the testament in the mass and hold on to them with strong faith? Yet this should have been the main focus. Instead, they’ve been scared and have taught us to be scared where there’s no reason for fear, when in fact that’s where all our comfort and safety lie.
How many miserable consciences, which perished from fear and sorrow, could have been comforted and rescued by these words! What devil has told them that the words which should be the most familiar, the most openly spoken among all Christians, priests and laity, men and women, young and old, are to be hidden in greatest secrecy? How should it be possible for us to know what the mass is, or how to use and observe it, if we are not to know the words in which the very mass consists?[8]
How many troubled minds, overcome by fear and sadness, could have found comfort and salvation in these words! What devil has convinced them that the words meant to be the most familiar and openly shared among all Christians—priests and laypeople, men and women, young and old—should be kept in the strictest secrecy? How can we possibly understand what the mass is, or how to participate and observe it, if we aren't allowed to know the very words that make up the mass?[8]
But would to God that we Germans could say mass in German, and sing these "most secret" words loudest of all! Why should not we Germans say mass in our own language, when the Latins, Greeks and many others observe mass in their language? Why should we not also keep secret the words of baptism: "I baptise thee in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, Amen"? [Matt. 28:19] If every one may speak in German, and aloud, these words, which are no less the holy Word and promise of God, why should not every one also be permitted to hear and speak those words of the mass aloud and in German?
But I wish we Germans could say mass in German and sing these "most secret" words the loudest! Why shouldn't we say mass in our own language when the Latins, Greeks, and many others do it in theirs? Why can’t we also keep the words of baptism—"I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, Amen"—a secret? [Matt. 28:19] If everyone can say these words in German and out loud, which are just as much the holy Word and promise of God, then why shouldn’t everyone also be allowed to hear and speak those words of the mass out loud and in German?
[Sidenote: Word and Sign in the Sacraments]
[Sidenote: Word and Sign in the Sacraments]
17. Let us learn, then, that in every covenant[9] of God there are two things which one must consider; these are Word and Sign. In baptism these are the words of the baptiser and the dipping in water.[10] In the mass they are the words and the bread and wine. The words are the divine covenant, promise and testament. The signs are sacraments, that is sacred signs. Now since the testament is far more important than the sacrament, so the words are much more important than the signs. For the signs might be lacking, if only one have the words, and thus one might be saved without sacrament, yet not without testament. For I can daily enjoy the sacrament in the mass, if I only keep before my eyes the testament, that is, the words and covenant of Christ, and feed and strengthen my faith thereby.
17. Let’s understand, then, that in every covenant of God there are two things to consider; these are the Word and the Sign. In baptism, these are the words of the person performing the baptism and the act of immersion in water. In the mass, they are the words and the bread and wine. The words represent the divine covenant, promise, and testament. The signs are sacraments, which are sacred signs. Now, since the testament is much more significant than the sacrament, the words are much more important than the signs. The signs might be absent, but as long as one has the words, they can be saved without the sacrament, though not without the testament. For I can experience the sacrament in the mass every day, as long as I keep in mind the testament, which consists of the words and covenant of Christ, and nourish and strengthen my faith through them.
We see, then, that the best and greatest part of all sacraments and of the mass is the words and covenant of God, without which the sacraments are dead and are nothing at all; like a body without a soul, a cask without wine, a purse without gold, a type without fulfilment, a letter without spirit, a sheath without a knife, and the like; whence it is true that when we use, hear, or see the mass without the words or testament, and look only to the sacrament and sign, we do not even half keep the mass. For sacrament without testament is keeping the case without the jewel, quite an unequal separation and division.
We can see that the most important part of all sacraments and the mass is the words and covenant of God; without them, the sacraments are lifeless and meaningless—like a body without a soul, a barrel without wine, a wallet without money, a shadow without substance, a letter without meaning, a sheath without a blade, and so on. Therefore, it’s true that when we participate in, hear, or see the mass without the words or testament, and focus only on the sacrament and symbol, we aren’t even properly observing the mass. Because a sacrament without the testament is like keeping the case without the jewel—it’s an unfair separation.
[Sidenote: The Testament ignored]
The Testament was ignored
18. I fear, therefore, that there is at present more idolatry in Christendom through the masses than ever occurred among the Jews. For we hear nowhere that the mass is directed toward the feeding and strengthening of faith, for which alone it was ordained by Christ, but is only used as a sacrament without the testament.
18. I worry that right now there’s more idol worship in Christianity through the masses than there ever was among the Jews. We don’t hear that the mass is meant to nurture and strengthen faith, which is the only reason Christ established it, but instead, it’s just used as a ritual without the true meaning behind it.
Many have written of the fruits of the mass, and indeed have greatly exalted them; nor do I question the value of these fruits. But take heed that you regard them all, compared to this one thing, as the body compared to the soul. God has here prepared for our faith a pasture, table and feast; [Ps. 23] but faith is fed with nothing except the Word of God alone. Therefore you must take heed above all things to the words, exalt them, highly esteem them, and hold them fast; then you will have not simply the little drops of blessing[11] that drip from the mass, but the very head-waters of faith, from which springs and flows all that is good, as the Lord says in John vii, "Whosoever believeth in Me, out of his belly shall flow streams of living water" [John 4:14, 15]; again: "Whosoever shall drink of the water which I give, he shall never thirst, and there shall be in him a spring of living water unto everlasting life." We see, then, the first abuse of the mass is this—that we have lost the chief blessing, to wit, the testament and the faith. What consequences this has had we now shall see.
Many have written about the benefits of the mass and have praised them greatly; I don’t doubt the importance of these benefits. But be careful to see them all, in comparison to this one thing, as the body compared to the soul. God has prepared for our faith a pasture, a table, and a feast; [Ps. 23] but faith is nourished only by the Word of God alone. Therefore, you must pay attention above all things to the words, value them, hold them in high regard, and cling to them; then you will receive not just the small drops of blessing[11] that come from the mass, but the very source of faith, from which all good things spring and flow, as the Lord says in John vii, "Anyone who believes in Me, rivers of living water will flow from their heart" [John 4:14, 15]; also: "Anyone who drinks the water I give them will never thirst, and it will become in them a spring of living water welling up to eternal life." We see, then, that the first misuse of the mass is this—that we have lost the main blessing, which is the testament and the faith. We will now see what consequences this has had.
19. It follows of necessity, where faith and the Word or promise of God decline or are neglected, that there arise in their place works and a false, presumptuous trust in them. For where there is no promise of God there is no faith. Where there is no faith, there everyone presumptuously undertakes to better himself by means of works, and to make himself well-pleasing to God. When this happens, false security and presumption arise therefrom, as though man were well-pleasing to God because of his own works. When this does not happen, the conscience has no rest, and knows not what to do, that it may become well-pleasing to God.
19. It’s necessary to understand that when faith and the Word or promise of God are ignored or overlooked, what takes their place are works and a false, arrogant confidence in them. Without the promise of God, there can be no faith. When there’s no faith, everyone arrogantly tries to improve themselves through works and to make themselves acceptable to God. This leads to false security and arrogance, as if a person is pleasing to God because of their own efforts. If this doesn’t happen, the conscience remains unsettled and doesn’t know what to do to become pleasing to God.
[Sidenote: Abuses of the Mass: 2. The Mass a Good Work]
[Sidenote: Abuses of the Mass: 2. The Mass a Good Work]
So too I fear that many have made out of the mass a good work, whereby they thought to do a great service to Almighty God. Now, if we have rightly understood what has been said above, namely, that the mass is nothing else than a testament and sacrament, in which God pledges Himself to us and gives us grace and mercy, I think it is not fitting that we should make a good work or merit out of it. For a testament is not beneficium acceptum, sed datum;[12] it does not derive benefit from us, but brings us benefit. Who has ever heard that he who receives an inheritance does a good work? He does derive benefit. Likewise in the mass we give Christ nothing, but only take from Him; unless they are willing to call this a good work, that a man be quiet and permit himself to be benefited, to be given food and drink, to be clothed and healed, helped and redeemed. Just as in baptism, in which there is also a divine testament and sacrament, no one gives God anything or does Him a service, but instead takes something; so too in all the other sacraments, and in the sermon. For if one sacrament cannot be a meritorious good work, then no other can be a work; because they are all of one kind, and it is the nature of a sacrament or testament that it is not a work, but only an exercise of faith.
I fear many people have turned the mass into a good deed, thinking it’s a great service to Almighty God. However, if we truly understand what has been said above—that the mass is essentially a testament and sacrament, where God commits Himself to us and offers us grace and mercy—I believe it is inappropriate for us to consider it a good deed or something that earns us merit. A testament is not beneficium acceptum, sed datum;[12] it doesn’t gain anything from us, but instead provides us with benefits. Who has ever heard that someone receiving an inheritance is doing a good deed? They are receiving benefits. In the same way, during the mass, we don’t give Christ anything; we only receive from Him—unless one wants to call it a good deed to be still and allow oneself to be helped, provided food and drink, clothed, healed, supported, and redeemed. Just like in baptism, where there is also a divine testament and sacrament, no one gives anything to God or does Him a service; instead, they receive something. The same goes for all the other sacraments and the sermon. If one sacrament cannot be a meritorious good work, then none of them can be, because they are all the same in nature, and it is the essence of a sacrament or testament that it is not a work but simply an exercise of faith.
[Sidenote: Good Works Connected with the Mass]
[Sidenote: Good Works Connected with the Mass]
20. It is true, indeed, that when we come together to the mass to receive the testament and sacrament, and to nourish and strengthen faith, we there offer our prayer with one accord, and this prayer, which arises out of faith, and is for the increase of faith, is truly a good work; and we also distribute alms among the poor; as was done aforetime when the Christians gathered food and other needful things, which after the mass were distributed among the needy, as we learn from St. Paul. But this work and prayer are quite another thing than the testament and sacrament, [1 Cor. 11:21, 22] which no one can offer or give to God or to men, but every one takes and receives of it for himself only, in proportion as he believes and trusts. Now just as I cannot receive or give the sacrament of baptism, of penance, or of extreme unction in any one's stead or for his benefit, but I take for myself alone the blessing therein offered by God, and there is here not officium, but beneficium, i. e., not work or service, but reception and benefit alone; so also, no one can say or hear mass for another, but each one for himself alone, for it is purely a taking and receiving.
20. It’s true that when we gather for mass to receive the testament and sacrament, and to nourish and strengthen our faith, we offer our prayers together, and this prayer arises from faith and aims to increase faith; it is indeed a good deed. We also share donations with those in need, just like early Christians who collected food and other essentials, which were distributed to the needy after mass, as we learn from St. Paul. However, this work and prayer are completely different from the testament and sacrament, [1 Cor. 11:21, 22] which no one can offer or give to God or others. Each person receives it for themselves, based on their own belief and trust. Just as I cannot receive or give the sacrament of baptism, penance, or extreme unction on someone else's behalf, but I can only take the blessing offered by God for myself, and this is about beneficium, meaning not work or service, but solely reception and benefit; similarly, no one can say or hear mass for another, but each person does it for themselves, as it is entirely about taking and receiving.
This is all easily understood, if one only considers what the mass really is, namely, a testament and sacrament; that is, God's Word and promise, together with a sacred sign, the bread and the wine, under which Christ's body and blood are truly present. For by what process of reasoning could a man be said to do a good work for another when, like the others, he comes as one in need, and takes to himself the words and sign of God in which God promises and grants him grace and help? Surely, to receive God's Word, sign, and grace is not the imparting of good, or the doing of a good work, but is simply a "taking to oneself."
This is all pretty straightforward if you think about what the mass really is: a testament and sacrament; that is, God's Word and promise, along with a sacred sign, the bread and the wine, under which Christ's body and blood are truly present. How can we say that someone is doing a good deed for another when, like everyone else, they come in need and take the words and sign of God, in which God promises and offers them grace and help? Clearly, receiving God's Word, sign, and grace is not about giving good or doing a good deed, but is simply about "taking for oneself."
[Sidenote: Abuses of the Mass: 3. The Mass as a Sacrifice]
[Sidenote: Abuses of the Mass: 3. The Mass as a Sacrifice]
21. Now, since the whole world has made a sacrifice of the mass, wherein they bring an offering to God, which without doubt is the third and very worst abuse, we must dearly distinguish between what we offer and what we do not offer in the mass.
21. Now, since the whole world has made a sacrifice of the mass, where they present an offering to God, which is undoubtedly the third and most serious misuse, we need to clearly distinguish between what we offer and what we don’t offer in the mass.
Beyond all doubt the word "offering" in the mass has arisen and has remained until now, because in the times of the Apostles, when some of the practices of the Old Testament were still observed, the Christians brought food, money and necessities, which were distributed in connection with mass among the needy, as I have said before.[13] For so we still read in Acts iv, that the Christians sold all that they had, and brought it to the feet of the Apostles, who then had it distributed and gave of the common possessions to every one as he needed. [Acts 4:34, 35] Even so the Apostle Paul teaches, that all food and whatsoever we use shall be blessed with prayer and the Word of God, and thanks be given to God therefor [Rom. 14:6, 7; 1 Cor. 10:30,31]; hence we say the Benedicite and Gratias[14] at table. Thus it was the custom of the Old Testament, when men thanked God for gifts received, that they lifted them up in their hands to God; as is written in the law of Moses. [Exod. 34:26; Num.15:19, 20] Therefore, the apostles also lifted up the offerings in this way, thanked God, and blessed, with the Word of God, food and whatever the Christians gathered. And Christ Himself, as St. Luke writes, lifted up the cup, gave thanks to God, drank of it, and gave to the others, before He instituted the sacrament and testament. [Luke 22:17]
Without a doubt, the word "offering" in the mass came about and has persisted until now because in the times of the Apostles, when some practices of the Old Testament were still followed, Christians brought food, money, and necessities that were distributed during mass to those in need, as I mentioned earlier. For we still read in Acts 4 that the Christians sold everything they had and brought the proceeds to the Apostles, who then distributed it to everyone as they needed. Even the Apostle Paul teaches that all food and anything we use should be blessed with prayer and the Word of God, and thanks should be given to God for it; hence we say the Benedicite and Gratias at the table. It was customary in the Old Testament for people to thank God for the gifts they received by lifting them up in their hands to God, as written in the law of Moses. Therefore, the apostles also lifted up the offerings in this way, thanked God, and blessed, with the Word of God, the food and whatever the Christians gathered. And Christ Himself, as St. Luke writes, lifted up the cup, gave thanks to God, drank from it, and gave it to others before He established the sacrament and testament.
[Sidenote: The Collect and Offeratory]
[Sidenote: The Collect and Offering]
22. Traces of this usage have survived in three customs. The first, that the first and last prayer of the mass are called "collects," that is, "collections"; which indicates that these prayers were spoken as a blessing and thanksgiving over the food which had been collected, to bless it and give thanks to God, according to the teaching of St. Paul [1 Cor. 10:30, 31]. The second, when the people after the Gospel proceed to the offering; from which the chant which is sung at that time is called "Offertory," that is, an offering. The third, that the priest elevates in the paten and offers to God the still unblessed host, at the same time that the offertory is being sung and the people are making their offering; by which is shown that the sacrament is not offered to God by us, but only these "collects" and offerings of food and gifts that have been gathered, in order that God may be thanked for them, and they may be blessed, to be distributed to the needy.
22. Traces of this practice have survived in three customs. The first is that the first and last prayers of the mass are called "collects," meaning "collections"; this indicates that these prayers were said as a blessing and thankfulness over the food that had been gathered, to bless it and give thanks to God, following the teaching of St. Paul [1 Cor. 10:30, 31]. The second is when the people move to the offering after the Gospel; the chant sung at that time is called "Offertory," which means an offering. The third is that the priest raises the still unblessed host in the paten and offers it to God at the same time the offertory is being sung and the people are making their offering; this demonstrates that the sacrament is not offered to God by us, but only these "collects" and offerings of food and gifts that have been gathered, so that God may be thanked for them, and they can be blessed to be given to those in need.
For afterward, when the priest, in the "low mass," [15] elevates the blessed host and cup, there is not a word said about the sacrifice, where he should most of all make mention of the sacrifice, if the mass were a sacrifice: but, as I have said above,[16] he elevates it not toward God, but toward us, to remind us of the testament, and to incite us to faith in the same. In like manner, when he receives or administers the sacrament, he does not mention the sacrifice by a single word; which must and should be done were the sacrament a sacrifice. Therefore, the mass dare not and cannot be called or be a sacrifice because of the sacrament, but only because of the food which is gathered and the prayer with which God is thanked and with which it is blessed.
For later, when the priest, during the "low mass," [15] lifts the blessed host and cup, he doesn’t say anything about the sacrifice, even though that’s when he should most clearly mention it if the mass were indeed a sacrifice. As I mentioned earlier,[16] he lifts it not toward God, but toward us, to remind us of the testament and encourage us to have faith in it. Similarly, when he receives or gives the sacrament, he doesn’t mention the sacrifice at all; this should happen if the sacrament were a sacrifice. Therefore, the mass cannot be called a sacrifice because of the sacrament, but only because of the food that is gathered and the prayer through which we thank God and bless it.
[Sidenote: The Offering at the Mass]
[Sidenote: The Offering at the Mass]
23. Now the custom of gathering food and money at the mass has fallen into disuse, and not more than a trace of it remains in the offering of the pfennig on the high festivals, and especially on Easter Day, when they still bring cakes, meat, eggs, etc., to church to be blessed. Now in place of such offerings and collections, endowed churches, monastic houses and hospitals have been erected, and should be maintained for the sole purpose that the needy in every city may be given all they need, that there be no beggar or needy one among the Christians, but that each and all may have from the mass enough for body and soul.
23. Nowadays, the practice of collecting food and money during mass has largely disappeared, with only a trace left in the offering of the pfennig on major holidays, especially Easter, when people still bring cakes, meat, eggs, and other items to church for blessings. Instead of these offerings and collections, we now have endowed churches, monasteries, and hospitals that should be maintained solely to provide for the needy in every city, ensuring that there are no beggars or those in need among Christians, so that everyone has enough from the mass for both body and soul.
But all this is reversed. Just as the mass is not rightly explained to men, but is understood as a sacrifice, not as a testament, so, on the other hand, that which is and ought to be the offering, namely, the possessions of the churches and monastic houses, is no longer offered and is not given, with the thanksgiving and blessing of God, to the needy to whom it ought to be given. Therefore God is provoked to anger, and now permits the possessions of the churches and monastic houses to become the occasion of war, of worldly pomp, and of such abuse that no other blessing is so shamefully and blasphemously managed and wasted. And since it does not serve the poor, for whom it was appointed, it is indeed meet and right that it should remain unworthy to serve for anything but sin and shame.
But all of this is turned upside down. Just like the mass isn’t truly explained to people, but is seen as a sacrifice instead of a testament, the things that should be offerings—specifically, the possessions of churches and monasteries—are no longer given away. They aren’t shared with the needy, who should receive them, along with gratitude and God’s blessing. As a result, God gets angry and allows the possessions of churches and monasteries to become a source of war, worldly show, and such misuse that no other blessing is managed and wasted so shamefully and blasphemously. And since it doesn’t help the poor, for whom it was meant, it truly is fitting that it remains only a source of sin and disgrace.
[Sidenote: The Mass Not a Sacrifice]
[Sidenote: The Mass Not a Sacrifice]
24. Now if you ask what is left in the mass to give it the name of a sacrifice, since so much is said in the Office about the sacrifice, I answer: Nothing is left. For, to be brief and to the point, we must let the mass be a sacrament and testament, and this is not and cannot be a sacrifice any more than the other sacraments—baptism, confirmation, penance, extreme unction, etc.—are sacrifices.[17] Otherwise we should lose the Gospel, Christ, the comfort of the sacrament and every grace of God. Therefore we must separate the mass clearly and distinctly from the prayers and ceremonies which have been added by the holy fathers, and keep the two as far apart as heaven and earth, that the mass may remain nothing else than the testament and sacrament comprehended in the words of Christ. What there is over and beyond these words we are to regard, in comparison with the words of Christ, as we regard the monstrance[18] and corporal[19] in comparison with the host and the sacrament itself; and these we regard as nothing but additions for the reverent and seemly administration of the sacrament. Now just as we regard the monstrance, corporal and altar-cloths compared with the sacrament, so we are to look upon all added words, works and ceremonies of the mass compared with the words of Christ Himself, in which He gives and ordains this testament. For if the mass or sacrament were a sacrifice, we would have to say that it is a mass and sacrifice when the sacrament is brought to the sick in their home, or when those in health receive it in the church, and that there are as many masses and sacrifices as the number of those who approach the sacrament. If in this case it is not a sacrifice, how is it a sacrifice in the hand of the priest, since it is still one and the same sacrament, one and the same use, one and the same benefit, and in all respects the same sacrament and testament with all of us?
24. If you’re wondering what makes the mass qualify as a sacrifice, especially since there’s so much emphasis on sacrifice in the Office, my answer is: nothing is left. To keep it simple and clear, we should recognize the mass as a sacrament and testament, just like the other sacraments—baptism, confirmation, penance, extreme unction, etc.—are not sacrifices. Otherwise, we’d lose the Gospel, Christ, the comfort of the sacrament, and all of God’s grace. So, we need to clearly separate the mass from the prayers and rituals added by the holy fathers, keeping them as distinct as heaven and earth, allowing the mass to be nothing more than the testament and sacrament encapsulated in Christ’s words. Anything beyond these words should be viewed, in relation to Christ’s words, like how we see the monstrance and corporal compared to the host and the sacrament itself; these are just additions for the respectful and proper administration of the sacrament. Just as we view the monstrance, corporal, and altar cloths in relation to the sacrament, we should see all extra words, actions, and ceremonies of the mass compared to Christ’s own words, in which He gives and establishes this testament. If the mass or sacrament were a sacrifice, we would have to say it’s a mass and sacrifice when the sacrament is brought to the sick at home or when healthy individuals receive it in church, meaning there would be as many masses and sacrifices as there are people approaching the sacrament. If it’s not a sacrifice in this situation, how is it a sacrifice when it’s in the priest’s hands, since it’s still the same sacrament, the same use, the same benefit, and essentially the same sacrament and testament for all of us?
[Sidenote: The Spiritual Sacrifice in the Mass]
[Sidenote: The Spiritual Sacrifice in the Mass]
25. We should, therefore, give careful heed to this word "sacrifice," that we do not presume to give God something in the sacrament, when it is He who therein gives us all things. We should bring spiritual sacrifices, since the external sacrifices have ceased and have been changed into the gifts to churches, monastic houses and charitable institutions. What sacrifices then are we to offer? Ourselves, and all that we have, with constant prayer, as we say: "Thy will be done on earth as in heaven." [Matt. 6:10] Whereby we are to yield ourselves to the will of God, that He may do with us what He will, according to His own pleasure; in addition, we are to offer Him praise and thanksgiving with our whole heart, for His unspeakable, sweet grace and mercy, which He has promised and given us in this sacrament. And although such a sacrifice occurs apart from the mass, and should so occur, for it does not necessarily and essentially belong to the mass, as has been said,[20] yet it is more precious, more seemly, more mighty and also more acceptable when it takes place with the multitude and in the assembly where men provoke, move and inflame one another to press close to God, and thereby attain without all doubt what they desire.
25. We should pay close attention to the word "sacrifice," so we don’t mistakenly think we’re offering something to God in the sacrament when it’s really Him giving us everything. We should offer spiritual sacrifices since the old external sacrifices have stopped and have turned into donations for churches, monasteries, and charitable organizations. So what sacrifices should we present? Ourselves and everything we have, along with constant prayer, as we say: "Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven." [Matt. 6:10] This means we should submit ourselves to God’s will, allowing Him to do with us as He wishes, according to His own desires. Additionally, we should offer Him praise and thanks from the bottom of our hearts for His incredible grace and mercy, which He has promised and given us in this sacrament. And although such a sacrifice can happen outside of the mass and should, since it doesn’t necessarily and essentially belong to the mass, as mentioned before,[20] it is more precious, appropriate, powerful, and definitely more acceptable when it takes place with a group of people and in a gathering where individuals encourage, uplift, and inspire each other to draw closer to God, thus achieving without question what they seek.
For so has Christ promised; where two are gathered together in His name there He is in the midst of them, and where two agree on earth as touching anything that they shall ask, all shall be done that they ask. [Matt. 18:19, 20] How much more shall they obtain what they ask, when a whole city comes together to praise God and to pray with one accord! We would not need many indulgence-letters if we proceeded aright in this matter. Souls also would easily be redeemed from purgatory and innumerable blessings would follow. But, alas! that is not the way it goes. Everything is reversed; what the mass is intended to do, we take upon us and want to do ourselves; what we ought to do we give over to the mass. All this is the work of unlearned, false preachers.
For Christ has promised that wherever two or more are gathered in His name, He is there with them, and when two agree on anything they ask for on earth, it will be done for them. [Matt. 18:19, 20] How much more will they get what they ask for when an entire city comes together to praise God and pray in unity! We wouldn’t need so many indulgences if we approached this the right way. Souls would also be easily saved from purgatory, and countless blessings would follow. But, unfortunately, that’s not how it works. Everything is flipped around; instead of letting the mass do what it's meant to, we try to take it on ourselves, and what we should be doing, we leave to the mass. All of this is the result of uneducated, false preachers.
26. To be sure, this sacrifice of prayer, praise and thanksgiving, and of ourselves, we are not to present before God in our own person, but we are to lay it on Christ and let Him present it, as St. Paul teaches in Hebrews xiii: "Let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of the lips which confess Him and praise Him," [Heb. 13:15] and all this through Christ. For He is also a priest, as Psalm cx says: "Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek" [Ps. 110:4]; because He intercedes for us in heaven, receives our prayer and sacrifice, and through Himself, as a godly priest, makes them pleasing to God [Heb. 5:6, 10, etc.], as St. Paul says again in Hebrews ix: "He is ascended into Heaven to be a mediator in the presence of God for us" [Heb. 9:24]; and: "It is Christ Jesus that died, yea, rather, that is risen again, Who is even at the right hand of God, Who also maketh intercession for us." [Rom. 8:34]
26. Clearly, this act of prayer, praise, and thanksgiving, along with ourselves, shouldn't be presented to God in our own name. Instead, we should place it on Christ and let Him present it, as St. Paul teaches in Hebrews 13: "Let us continually offer the sacrifice of praise to God, which is the fruit of our lips that confess and praise Him," [Heb. 13:15] and all of this through Christ. He is also a priest, as Psalm 110 states: "You are a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek" [Ps. 110:4]; because He intercedes for us in heaven, accepts our prayers and sacrifices, and, as a holy priest, makes them pleasing to God [Heb. 5:6, 10, etc.]. St. Paul also mentions in Hebrews 9: "He has ascended into heaven to be a mediator in the presence of God for us" [Heb. 9:24]; and: "It is Christ Jesus who died, yes, rather, who is raised again, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us." [Rom. 8:34]
[Sidenote: Christ the Priest: Christians the Sacrifice]
[Sidenote: Christ the Priest: Christians the Sacrifice]
From these words we learn that we do not offer Christ as a sacrifice, but that Christ offers us. And in this way it is permissible, yea, profitable, to call the mass a sacrifice, not on its own account, but because we offer ourselves as a sacrifice along with Christ; that is, we lay ourselves on Christ by a firm faith in His testament, and appear before God with our prayer, praise and sacrifice only through Him and through His mediation; and we do not doubt that He is our priest and minister in heaven before God. Such faith, forsooth, brings it to pass that Christ takes up our cause, presents us, our prayer and praise, and also offers Himself for us in heaven. If the mass were so understood and therefore called a sacrifice, it would be well. Not that we offer the sacrament, but that by our praise, prayer and sacrifice we move Him and give Him occasion to offer Himself for us in heaven, and ourselves with Him. As though I were to say, I had brought a king's son to his father as an offering, when, indeed, I had done no more than induce that son to present my need and petition to the king, and made the son my mediator.
From these words, we learn that we don't present Christ as a sacrifice; rather, Christ presents us. In this way, it’s acceptable and even beneficial to refer to the mass as a sacrifice, not because of the mass itself, but because we offer ourselves as a sacrifice alongside Christ. We commit ourselves to Christ with strong faith in His testament and come before God with our prayers, praises, and sacrifices only through Him and His mediation. We have no doubt that He is our priest and minister in heaven before God. Such faith indeed allows Christ to take up our cause, to present us, our prayers, and praises, while also offering Himself for us in heaven. If the mass were understood this way and therefore considered a sacrifice, that would be good. It's not that we are offering the sacrament, but by our praises, prayers, and sacrifices, we prompt Him and give Him the opportunity to offer Himself for us in heaven, along with ourselves. It’s like saying I had brought a king's son to his father as a gift when all I did was encourage that son to present my needs and requests to the king, making the son my mediator.
[Sidenote: All Christians Priests]
All Christian Priests
27. Few, however, understand the mass in this way. For they suppose that only the priest offers the mass as a sacrifice before God, although this is done and should be done by everyone who receives the sacrament, yea, also by those who are present at the mass and do not receive the sacrament. Furthermore, such offering of sacrifice every Christian may make, wherever he is and at all times, as St. Paul says: "Let us offer the sacrifice of praise continually through Him," [Heb. 13:15] and Psalm cx: "Thou art a priest forever." [Ps. 110:4] If He is a priest forever, then He is at all times a priest and is offering sacrifices without ceasing before God. But we cannot be continually the same, and therefore the mass has been instituted that we may there come together and offer such sacrifice in common.
27. However, few people understand the mass this way. They think that only the priest offers the mass as a sacrifice before God, but this is something that everyone who receives the sacrament, and even those present at the mass who don't receive it, should do. Moreover, any Christian can offer this sacrifice wherever they are and at any time, as St. Paul says: "Let us offer the sacrifice of praise continually through Him," [Heb. 13:15] and in Psalm cx: "You are a priest forever." [Ps. 110:4] If He is a priest forever, then He is always a priest and is continually making sacrifices before God. However, we cannot always be the same, and that's why the mass has been established so that we can come together and offer this sacrifice collectively.
But let him who understands the mass otherwise or uses it otherwise than as a testament and sacrifice of this kind take heed how he understands it. I understand it, as has been said, to be really nothing else than this, that we receive the testament and at the same time admonish ourselves and be minded to strengthen our faith and not doubt that Christ is our priest in heaven, who offers Himself for us without ceasing and presents us and our prayer and praise, and makes them acceptable; just as though I were to offer the human priest as a sacrifice in the mass and appoint him to present my need and my praise of God, and he were to give me a token that he would do it. In this case I would be offering the priest as a sacrifice; and it is in this wise that I offer Christ, in that I desire and believe that He accepts me and my prayer and praise, and presents it to God in His own person, and to strengthen this faith, gives me a token that He will do it. This token is the sacrament of bread and wine. Thus it becomes clear that it is not the priest alone who offers the sacrifice of the mass, but every one's faith, which is the true priestly office, through which Christ is offered as a sacrifice to God. This office the priest, with the outward ceremonies of the mass, simply represents. Each and all are, therefore equally spiritual priests before God. [Rev. 1:6; 5:10, 1 Pet. 2:9]
But let anyone who understands the mass differently or uses it in any way other than as a testament and sacrifice of this kind pay attention to how they understand it. I see it, as I’ve mentioned, as really nothing more than this: we receive the testament while also reminding ourselves to strengthen our faith and not doubt that Christ is our priest in heaven, who continuously offers Himself for us and presents our prayers and praises, making them acceptable; just as if I were to offer a human priest as a sacrifice during the mass and ask him to present my needs and praises to God, and he were to give me a sign that he would do it. In this case, I would be offering the priest as a sacrifice; similarly, I offer Christ in that I desire and believe that He accepts me and my prayers and praises, and presents them to God in His own person, and to bolster this faith, He gives me a sign that He will do it. This sign is the sacrament of bread and wine. Thus, it becomes clear that it’s not just the priest who offers the sacrifice of the mass, but everyone's faith, which is the true priestly role, through which Christ is offered as a sacrifice to God. This role is simply represented by the priest with the external ceremonies of the mass. Therefore, everyone is equally a spiritual priest before God. [Rev. 1:6; 5:10, 1 Pet. 2:9]
[Sidenote: Faith the True Priestly Office]
[Sidenote: Faith the True Priestly Office]
28. From this you can see for yourself that there are many who rightly observe mass and make this sacrifice, who themselves know nothing about it, nay, who do not realize that they are priests and can observe mass. Again, there are many who take great pains and apply themselves with all diligence, thinking that they are keeping the mass properly and offering a right sacrifice, and yet there is nothing right about it. For all those who have the faith that Christ is a priest for them in heaven before God, and who lay on Him their prayers and praise, their need and their whole selves, and present them through Him, not doubting that He does this very thing, and offers Himself for them, these take the sacrament and testament, outwardly or spiritually, as a sign of all this, and do not doubt that all sin is thereby forgiven, that God has become their gracious Father and that everlasting life is prepared for them.
28. From this, you can see for yourself that there are many who properly attend mass and make this sacrifice, but who don’t really understand it, and who don’t even realize that they are priests and can celebrate mass. Additionally, there are many who work hard and give their all, believing they are conducting the mass correctly and offering the right sacrifice, yet there’s nothing correct about it. However, all those who have faith that Christ is a priest for them in heaven before God, and who bring their prayers and praises, their needs and their entire selves to Him, presenting them through Him without any doubt that He does this, and offers Himself for them, take the sacrament and testament, whether physically or spiritually, as a sign of all this. They do not doubt that all sin is forgiven, that God has become their loving Father, and that eternal life is prepared for them.
All such, then, wherever they may be, are true priests, observe the mass aright and also obtain by it what they desire. For faith must do everything. It alone is the true priestly office and permits no one else to take its place. Therefore all Christians are priests; the men, priests, the women, priestesses, be they young or old, masters or servants, mistresses or maids, learned or unlearned. Here there is no difference, unless faith be unequal. Again, all who do not have such faith, but presume to make much of the mass as a sacrifice, and perform this office before God, are figure-heads. They observe mass outwardly and do not themselves know what they are doing, and cannot be well pleasing to God. For without true faith it is impossible to please Him, as St. Paul says in Hebrews xi. [Heb. 11:6] Now there are many who, hidden in their hearts, have such true faith, and themselves know not of it; many there are who do not have it, and of this, too, they are unaware.
All people, wherever they are, are true priests when they perform the mass correctly and achieve what they desire through it. Faith must drive everything. It is the only true priestly role and doesn’t allow anyone else to take its place. Therefore, all Christians are priests: men are priests, women are priestesses, whether they are young or old, masters or servants, mistresses or maids, educated or uneducated. There is no distinction here, unless faith varies. Additionally, those who lack such faith but still try to treat the mass as a sacrifice and perform this role before God are just playing a part. They participate in the mass outwardly without understanding what they are doing, and they cannot please God. For without true faith, it is impossible to please Him, as St. Paul states in Hebrews 11:6. Many people genuinely have this true faith in their hearts, even if they are unaware of it; conversely, many do not have this faith and are also oblivious to it.
[Sidenote: Masses for the Dead]
Masses for the Dead
39. It has become a wide-spread custom to found masses for the dead, and many books have been written about it. If we ask now, Of what benefit are the masses celebrated for the souls which are kept in purgatory? the answer is: What is custom! God's Word must prevail and remain true, to wit, that the mass is nothing else than a testament and sacrament of God, and cannot be a good work or a sacrifice, although it may be taken to include sacrifice and good works, as was said above.[21]
39. It has become a common practice to hold masses for the dead, and many books have been written about it. If we ask now, What’s the point of the masses celebrated for the souls in purgatory? the answer is: It’s just tradition! God's Word must be upheld and remain true, meaning that the mass is nothing more than a testament and sacrament of God, and it can't be considered a good deed or a sacrifice, even though it may seem to include sacrifice and good deeds, as mentioned earlier.[21]
There is no doubt, therefore, that whoever observes mass without the faith aforementioned benefits neither himself nor any one else. For the sacrament in itself, without faith, does nothing; nay, God Himself, Who indeed doeth all things, does and can do good to no one unless he firmly believes Him; how much less can the sacrament. It is easy to say, a mass is effective whether it be performed by a pious or a wicked priest, that it is acceptable opere operati, not opere operantis.[22] But to produce no other argument except that many say this, and it has become a custom, is poor proof that it is right. Many have praised pleasures and riches and have grown accustomed to them; that does not make them right; we should produce Scripture or reason for it. Therefore let us take heed lest we be made fools. I cannot conclude that the institution of so many masses and requiems can be without abuse, especially since all this is done as a good work and sacrifice by which to pay God, whereas in the mass there is nothing else than the reception and enjoyment of divine grace, promised and given us in His testament and sacrament.
There’s no doubt that anyone who attends mass without the faith mentioned above benefits neither themselves nor anyone else. The sacrament, by itself, does nothing without faith; in fact, God, who does all things, can’t do good for anyone unless they truly believe in Him. How much less can the sacrament do so? It’s easy to claim that a mass is effective whether performed by a good or bad priest, arguing it’s acceptable opere operati, not opere operantis.[22] But using the fact that many people say this and it has become a tradition as the only proof is weak. Many have praised pleasures and wealth and have gotten used to them; that doesn’t make them right. We should provide Scripture or reasoning for it. So, let’s be careful not to be fools. I can’t believe that so many masses and requiems can exist without some kind of abuse, especially since all of this is done as a good work and sacrifice to pay God, while the mass is really just about receiving and enjoying divine grace, which has been promised and given to us in His testament and sacrament.
30. I will gladly agree that the faith which I have called[23] the true priestly office, which makes of us all priests and priestesses, through which in connection with the sacrament we offer ourselves, our need, prayer, praise and thanksgiving in Christ and through Christ, and thereby offer Christ before God, that is, give Him cause and move Him to offer Himself for us and us with Himself—this faith, I say, is truly able to do all things in heaven, earth, hell and purgatory, and to this faith no one can ascribe too much. And as I have said above,[24] if Christ promises to two persons the answers to all their prayers [Matt. 18:19], how much more may so many obtain from Him what they desire!
30. I’ll happily agree that the faith I’ve referred to as the true priestly office, which makes all of us priests and priestesses, allows us to offer ourselves, our needs, prayers, praise, and thanks in Christ and through Christ, and in doing so, present Christ before God. That means we give Him cause and encourage Him to offer Himself for us and us with Him—this faith, I say, can truly accomplish anything in heaven, on earth, in hell, and in purgatory, and there’s no such thing as attributing too much to this faith. As I mentioned earlier, if Christ promises to answer the prayers of two people [Matt. 18:19], how much more can so many others receive from Him what they wish for!
I know full well that some will be very ready to call me a heretic in this. But, dear fellow, you should also consider whether you can prove as easily as you slander. I have read all that, and I know the books on which you rely, so you need not think I do not know your art. But I say that your art has no foundation, and that you cannot defend it, and that out of a sacrament or testament of God you will never make a sacrifice or a work of satisfaction, and, indeed, satisfaction itself is more of a human than a divine law.[25]
I know that some people will be quick to call me a heretic for this. But, my friend, you should also think about whether you can prove your claims as easily as you throw around insults. I’ve read everything, and I’m familiar with the books you rely on, so you don’t need to assume I’m ignorant of your arguments. However, I assert that your arguments lack a solid foundation, that you can’t defend them, and that you will never turn a sacrament or testament of God into a sacrifice or a means of atonement. In fact, atonement is more of a human concept than a divine law.[25]
Therefore my advice is, let us hold fast to that which is sure[26] and let the uncertain go; that is, if we would help these poor souls in purgatory or any one else, let us not take the risk of relying upon the mass as a sufficient work, but rather come together to mass, and with priestly faith[27] present every besetting need, in Christ and with Christ, praying for the souls [of the departed], and not doubting that we will be heard. Thus we may be sure that the soul is redeemed. For the faith which rests on the promise of Christ never deceives nor fails.
So my advice is, let's hold on to what we know is certain and let go of what isn't; that is, if we want to help those poor souls in purgatory or anyone else, we shouldn't risk depending solely on the mass as enough, but instead, let’s gather for mass and, with faith in the priesthood, bring every pressing need before Christ, praying for the souls of the departed, and trusting that we will be heard. This way, we can be confident that the soul is saved. The faith that is based on Christ's promise never deceives or falters.
[Sidenote: The Need for the Sacrament]
[Sidenote: The Need for the Sacrament]
31. So we read that St. Monica, St Augustine's mother, on her death-bed, desired to be remembered in the mass.[28] If the mass were sufficient of itself to help everyone, what need would there be for faith and prayer? But you might say, if this is true, anyone might observe mass and offer such a sacrifice, even in the open fields. For every one may indeed have such a faith in Christ in the open fields, and offer and commit to Him his prayer, praise, need and cause, to bring it before God in heaven, and besides he may also think of the sacrament and testament, heartily desire it, and in this way spiritually receive it. For he who desires it and believes, receives it spiritually, as St. Augustine teaches.[29]
31. So we read that St. Monica, St. Augustine's mother, on her deathbed, wanted to be remembered in the mass.[28] If the mass alone were enough to help everyone, what would be the point of faith and prayer? But you might argue that if this is true, anyone could attend mass and offer such a sacrifice, even in open fields. After all, everyone can indeed have faith in Christ in open spaces and bring their prayers, praises, needs, and requests before God in heaven. Plus, they can think about the sacrament and testament, sincerely desire it, and in this way, receive it spiritually. For whoever desires it and believes, receives it spiritually, as St. Augustine teaches.[29]
What need is there then to observe mass in the churches? I answer: It is true, such faith is enough, and truly accomplishes everything, but how could you think of this faith, sacrifice, sacrament and testament if it were not visibly administered in certain designated places and churches? The same is true in the case of baptism and absolution, although faith is sufficient without them, where no more can be done; still if there were no place for their administration, who could think of them and believe in them, or who could know or say anything of them? Moreover, since God has so ordered this sacrament, we must not despise it, but receive it with great reverence, praise and gratitude. For if there were no other reason why we should observe mass outwardly and not be satisfied with inward faith alone, yet were this sufficient, that God so orders and wills it. And His will ought to please us above all things and be sufficient reason to do or omit anything.
What’s the point of attending mass in churches? The truth is, faith alone is enough and truly achieves everything, but how could you think of faith, sacrifice, sacrament, and testament if they weren’t visibly practiced in specific places and churches? The same goes for baptism and absolution; even though faith is enough without them, if there were no place for their practice, who could think about them or believe in them, or know anything about them? Furthermore, since God has established this sacrament, we shouldn't take it lightly, but should approach it with great respect, praise, and gratitude. If for no other reason, the fact that God commands and desires it should be enough for us to participate in mass outwardly, rather than relying only on inner faith. His will should be our priority above all else and is a sufficient reason for doing or not doing anything.
There is also this advantage: since we are still living in the flesh and are not all perfect enough to rule ourselves in spirit, we need to come together to enkindle such a faith in one another by example, prayer, praise, and thanksgiving, as I have said above,[30] and through the outward seeing and receiving of the sacrament and testament to move each other to the increase of this faith. There are many saints, who like St. Paul the Hermit,[31] remained for years in the desert without mass, and yet were never without mass. But such a high spiritual example cannot be imitated by everyone or by the whole Church.
There’s also this benefit: since we’re still living in the flesh and none of us are perfect enough to govern ourselves solely by spirit, we need to come together to inspire faith in one another through example, prayer, praise, and gratitude, as I mentioned earlier,[30] and by physically seeing and receiving the sacrament and testament to encourage each other in growing this faith. There are many saints who, like St. Paul the Hermit,[31] spent years in the desert without attending mass, yet they were never without it spiritually. But such a high spiritual example can’t be followed by everyone or the whole Church.
[Sidenote: The Mass a Proclamation of the Gospel]
[Sidenote: The Mass a Proclamation of the Gospel]
33. But the chief reason for outwardly holding mass is the Word of God, which no one can do without, and which must daily be used and studied. Not only because every day Christians are born, baptised and trained, but because we live in the midst of the world, the flesh and the devil, who do not cease to tempt us and drive us into sin, against which the most powerful weapon is the holy Word of God, as St. Paul also calls it, "a spiritual sword," [Eph. 6:17] which is powerful against all sin. This the Lord indicated when He instituted the mass and said: "This do in remembrance of Me" [Luke 22:19]; as though He said, "As often as you use this sacrament and testament you shall preach of Me," As also St. Paul says in I. Corinthians xi, "As oft as ye eat this bread and drink this cup ye shall preach and proclaim the death of the Lord until He come" [1 Cor. 11:26]; and Psalm cii, "They shall declare the glory of the Lord in Zion and His praise in Jerusalem, as often as the kings (that is, the bishops and rulers) and the people come together to serve the lord" [Ps. 102:21, 22]; and Psalm cxi, "He hath instituted a memorial of His wonders in that He has given meat to all who fear Him." [Ps. 111:4, 5]
33. But the main reason for publicly holding Mass is the Word of God, which everyone needs and should engage with every day. This is important not only because new Christians are born, baptized, and educated every day, but also because we live surrounded by the world, the flesh, and the devil, who constantly tempt us and lead us into sin. Against this, the most powerful weapon is the holy Word of God, which St. Paul refers to as "a spiritual sword" [Eph. 6:17], effective against all sin. The Lord highlighted this when He established the Mass and said, "Do this in remembrance of Me" [Luke 22:19], as if He meant, "Whenever you partake in this sacrament and testament, you will be proclaiming Me." St. Paul also states in 1 Corinthians 11, "Whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until He comes" [1 Cor. 11:26]; and in Psalm 102, "They shall declare the glory of the Lord in Zion and His praise in Jerusalem, whenever the kings (meaning the bishops and leaders) and the people gather to worship the Lord" [Ps. 102:21, 22]; and in Psalm 111, "He has established a memorial of His wonders, providing food for all who fear Him" [Ps. 111:4, 5].
In these passages you see how the mass was instituted to preach and praise Christ, to glorify His sufferings and all His grace and goodness, that we may be moved to love Him, hope and believe in Him, and thus, in addition to this Word or sermon, receive an outward sign, that is, the sacrament, to the end that our faith, provided with and confirmed by divine words and signs, may become strong against all sin, suffering, death and hell and everything that is against us. And but for the preaching of the Word He would nevermore have instituted the mass. He is more concerned about the Word than about the sign. For the preaching ought to be nothing but an explanation of the words of Christ when He institutes the mass and says: "This is My body. This is My blood, etc." What is the whole Gospel but an explanation of this testament? Christ has comprehended the whole Gospel in a short summary with the words of this testament or sacrament. For the whole Gospel is nothing but a proclamation of God's grace and of the forgiveness of all sins, granted us through the sufferings of Christ, as St. Paul proves in Romans x [Rom. 10:9, 11, 13]; and Christ in Luke xxiv [Luke 24:46, 47]. This same thing the words of this testament contain, as we have seen.
In these passages, you can see how the mass was established to preach and praise Christ, to honor His sufferings and all His grace and goodness, so that we are inspired to love Him, hope in Him, and believe in Him. This, along with the Word or sermon, offers us a visible sign, which is the sacrament, so that our faith, supported and confirmed by divine words and signs, can stand strong against all sin, suffering, death, hell, and everything that opposes us. Without the preaching of the Word, He would never have instituted the mass. He values the Word more than the sign. The preaching should simply be an explanation of the words of Christ when He establishes the mass and says: "This is My body. This is My blood," etc. What is the whole Gospel if not an explanation of this testament? Christ has summarized the entire Gospel with the words of this testament or sacrament. The whole Gospel is just a declaration of God's grace and the forgiveness of all sins that we receive through the sufferings of Christ, as St. Paul demonstrates in Romans 10, and Christ in Luke 24. The words of this testament contain the same message, as we have seen.
34. From this we may see what a pity and perversion it is that so many masses are said, and yet the Gospel is kept altogether silent. They stand and preach, and give to poor souls chaff for wheat, yea, death for life, intending afterward to make up for it with many masses. What sort of baptism would that be, if the water were poured upon the child and not a word were said? I fear that the holy words of the testament are read so secretly, and kept hidden from the laity, because God in His wrath is testifying thereby that the whole Gospel is no longer publicly preached to the people, that even as the summary of the Gospel is hidden, so also its public explanation has ceased.
34. From this, we can see how unfortunate and twisted it is that so many masses are held, yet the Gospel is completely ignored. They stand and preach, giving struggling souls worthless substitutes for true nourishment, even offering death instead of life, believing they can make up for it later with more masses. What kind of baptism would it be if water were poured over a child and no words were spoken? I worry that the sacred words of the testament are read so secretly and kept from the general public because God, in His anger, is showing that the entire Gospel is no longer being preached openly to the people, just as the essence of the Gospel is hidden, so too has its public interpretation stopped.
[Sidenote: The Withdrawal of the Cup]
[Sidenote: The Withdrawal of the Cup]
Next, they took entirely from us the one element, the wine, although that does not matter much, for the Word is more important than the sign. Still, I should like to know who gave them the power to do such a thing. In the same way they might take from us the other element and give us the empty monstrance to kiss as a relic, and at last abolish everything that Christ has instituted. I fear it is a figure and type that augurs nothing good in these perilous, perverted latter days. It is said that the pope has the power to do it; I say that is all fiction, he does not have a hair's breadth of power to change what Christ has made; and whatever of these things he changes, that he does as a tyrant and Antichrist. I should like to hear how they will prove it.
Next, they completely took away the one thing from us, the wine, but that doesn’t matter much since the Word is more important than the sign. Still, I’d like to know who gave them the authority to do this. In the same way, they could take away the other element and give us the empty monstrance to kiss as a relic, eventually abolishing everything that Christ established. I worry this is a sign that points to nothing good in these dangerous, twisted latter days. People say that the pope has the authority to do it; I argue that’s all nonsense—he doesn’t have the slightest bit of power to change what Christ has set in place, and any changes he makes, he does as a tyrant and Antichrist. I’d like to hear how they will justify it.
Not that I wish to cause a turmoil about it, for I regard the Word as mightier than the sign, but I cannot permit the outrage when they not only do us wrong, but wish to have a right thereto, and force us not only to permit such a wrong, but also to praise it as right and good. Let them do what they will, so long as we are not obliged to acknowledge wrong as right. It is enough that we permit ourselves, with Christ, to be smitten on the cheek [John 18:22], but it is not for us to praise it, as though they had done well therein and earned God's reward.
Not that I want to create a fuss about it, because I believe the Word is more powerful than the sign, but I can't stand for the injustice when they not only wrong us but also think they're justified in doing so, and force us to not only accept such wrong but also to call it right and good. Let them do what they want, as long as we’re not forced to accept wrong as right. It’s enough that we allow ourselves, with Christ, to be struck on the cheek [John 18:22], but it’s not for us to commend it, as if they did something good and deserve God’s reward.
[Sidenote: Superstitious Use of Mass]
[Sidenote: Superstitious Use of Mass]
35. But what of those poor priests and laymen who have departed so far from the true meaning of the mass and of faith that they have even made of it a sort of magic? Some men have masses said that they may become rich and prosper in their business, others because they think if they hear mass in the morning they will be safe during the day from all danger and want; some, again, on account of sickness; others for still more foolish, yea, even sinful reasons, and yet they find priests perverted enough to take their money and do their bidding.
35. But what about those poor priests and laypeople who have strayed so far from the true meaning of the mass and faith that they have turned it into something almost magical? Some people have masses said to become wealthy and succeed in their business, while others believe that if they attend mass in the morning, they will stay safe from harm and lack throughout the day. Still others do it because of illness; some for even more foolish, or even sinful reasons, and yet they find priests willing to take their money and carry out their wishes.
[Sidenote: Distinction of Masses]
[Sidenote: Difference of Masses]
Furthermore, they have now made one mass better than another; one is valued as useful for this, another for that. Thus they have made seven "Golden Masses." [33] The "Mass of the Holy Cross" has come to have a different virtue from the "Mass of Our Lady." In this matter every one is silent and permits the people to go on for the sake of the cursed, filthy pfennigs, which through these various titles and virtues of the mass come piling in. So must faith, like Christ, be sold by its Judas, that is, by covetousness and the thirst for money. [Matt. 26:15, 16]
Furthermore, they’ve made one mass better than another; one is considered useful for this purpose, another for that. Thus, they’ve created seven "Golden Masses." [33] The "Mass of the Holy Cross" has developed a different significance from the "Mass of Our Lady." In this situation, everyone stays quiet and lets the people continue for the sake of the cursed, filthy pfennigs, which stack up due to these various titles and virtues of the mass. So faith must be sold like Christ was by Judas, that is, by greed and the desire for money. [Matt. 26:15, 16]
Some are to be found also who have mass said privately, for this and for that; in short, the mass must do all kinds of things, except its own peculiar work—faith, which no one regards. They now are the best men on earth who have many masses said, as though they thought thereby to lay up many good works. All of this is the work of ignorance, which does not separate the hymns and prayers, which have been added, from the true, original mass. For one mass is like another and there is no difference, except in the faith. For the mass is best to him who believes most, and it serves only to increase faith, and for nothing else. True, indeed, the added prayers do serve, one this purpose, another that, according to the meaning of their words, but they are not the mass or the sacrament.
Some people also have private masses said for various reasons; in short, the mass is expected to do everything except its main job—faith, which no one pays attention to. Nowadays, the best people are often those who have many masses said, as if they believe this will earn them good deeds. All of this stems from ignorance, which doesn’t distinguish between the hymns and prayers that have been added and the true, original mass. One mass is just like another, and the only difference lies in the faith behind it. The mass is most effective for those who have the strongest faith, and it exists solely to enhance faith and nothing else. It’s true that the added prayers serve specific purposes based on their wording, but they do not constitute the mass or the sacrament.
[Sidenote: Reduction in the Number of Masses]
[Sidenote: Reduction in the Number of Masses]
36. I would advise then, that where the masses are not directed toward such faith, they be abolished, and that there be fewer masses endowed for the souls of the dead. Truly we provoke God to anger with them more than we conciliate Him. To what purpose are the priests in the chapter houses and cloisters so strictly bound to observe the yearly[34] masses, since they are not only without such faith, but also are often of necessity unfit. Christ Himself did not desire to bind anyone thereto and left us wholly free when He said: "This do ye, as oft as ye do it, in remembrance of Me." [1 Cor. 11:25] And we men bind ourselves so fast and drive ourselves on against our own conscience. I see too that such an institution often has no good reason, but a secret greed is at the bottom of the obligation and that we burden ourselves with many masses in order that we may have sufficient income in temporal things; afterward we say that we do it for God's sake. I fear few would be found who gratuitously and for God's sake would thus burden themselves. But if all these masses are observed in the faith above mentioned, which I scarcely expect, they are to be tolerated. But if not, then it would be best that there be only one mass a day in a city, and that it be held in a proper manner in the presence of the assembled people. If at any time, however, we desire to have more, the people should be divided into as many parts as there are masses, and each part should be made to attend its own mass, there to exercise their faith and to offer their prayer, praise and need in Christ, as was said above.[35]
36. I would suggest that when the masses are not conducted with genuine faith, they should be discontinued and that fewer masses be held for the souls of the deceased. In truth, we provoke God's anger more than we please Him with them. What is the point of priests in chapter houses and cloisters being strictly required to hold yearly masses, when they often lack true faith and are sometimes unfit? Christ Himself did not intend for anyone to be bound by this obligation and gave us complete freedom when He said: "This do ye, as oft as ye do it, in remembrance of Me." [1 Cor. 11:25] Yet we bind ourselves tightly and go against our own conscience. I also see that this institution often lacks a valid reason, and that a hidden greed underlies these obligations. We overload ourselves with many masses for the sake of securing our financial needs; afterwards, we claim it's for God's sake. I doubt there are many who would take on such burdens freely and genuinely for God. However, if all these masses are celebrated with the aforementioned faith, which I hardly expect, they can be tolerated. But if not, it would be best to have only one mass a day in a city, conducted properly with the gathered community present. If we wish to have more masses, the congregation should be split into as many groups as there are masses, and each group should attend its own mass, where they can express their faith and offer their prayers, praises, and needs in Christ, as stated above.[35]
[Sidenote: Proper Preparation for the Mass]
[Sidenote: Proper Preparation for the Mass]
37. If, then, the mass is a testament and sacrament in which the forgiveness of sins and every grace of God are promised and sealed with a sign, it follows of itself, what is the best preparation for it. Without doubt, it is given to them that need it and desire it. But who needs forgiveness of sins and God's grace more than just these poor miserable consciences that are driven and tormented by their sins, are afraid of God's anger and judgment, of death and of hell, that would be glad to have a gracious God and desire nothing more greatly? These are truly they who are well-prepared for mass. For them these words have force and meaning, when Christ says: "Take and drink, this is My blood, which is shed for you for the remission of sins." [Matt. 26:27] Where such a soul believes these words, as it ought, it receives from the mass all the fruits of the mass, that is, peace and joy, and is thus well and richly fed by it in spirit. But where there is no faith, there no prayer helps, nor the hearing of many masses; things can only become worse. As Psalm xxiii says: "Thou preparest a table before me against all my enemies." [Ps. 23:5] Is this not a clear passage? What greater enemies are there than sin and an evil conscience which at all times fears God's anger and never has rest? Again, Psalm cxi says: "He hath made His wonderful works to be remembered and hath given meat to them that fear Him." [Ps. 111:4, 5] It is certain then that for bold, confident spirits, whose sin does not prick them, the mass is of no value, for they have as yet no hunger for this food, but are still too full. The mass demands and must have a hungry soul, which longs for forgiveness of sins and divine favor.
37. If the mass is a sign and a sacrament in which the forgiveness of sins and every grace from God are promised and confirmed, it naturally follows what the best way to prepare for it is. Without a doubt, it is offered to those who need it and desire it. But who needs the forgiveness of sins and God’s grace more than the poor, tormented consciences that are troubled by their sins, afraid of God's anger and judgment, death, and hell, and who would be grateful to have a merciful God and desire nothing more? These are truly the ones who are well-prepared for the mass. For them, Christ’s words have power and meaning when He says: "Take and drink, this is My blood, which is shed for you for the remission of sins." [Matt. 26:27] Where such a soul believes these words as it should, it receives all the fruits of the mass, that is, peace and joy, and is thus nourished richly in spirit. But where there is no faith, no prayer or the hearing of many masses will help; things can only get worse. As Psalm 23 says: "You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies." [Ps. 23:5] Is this not clear? What greater enemies are there than sin and a guilty conscience that constantly fears God’s anger and never finds rest? Again, Psalm 111 says: "He has made His wonderful works to be remembered and has given food to those who fear Him." [Ps. 111:4, 5] It follows then that for bold, self-satisfied people, whose sins don’t bother them, the mass is meaningless, as they have no appetite for this food and are still too full. The mass requires a hungry soul that longs for the forgiveness of sins and God’s favor.
[Sidenote: The Mass a Remedy against Despair and Doubt]
[Sidenote: The Mass as a Cure for Despair and Doubt]
38. But because this despair and unrest of conscience are nothing but an infirmity of faith, the severest malady which man can have in body and soul, and which cannot at once or speedily be cured, it is useful and necessary that the more restless a man's conscience, the more should he approach the sacrament or hear mass, provided that he picture to himself therein the Word of God, and feed and strengthen his faith by it, and ever see to it that he do not make a work or sacrifice of it, but let it remain a testament and sacrament, out of which he shall take and enjoy a benefit freely and of grace, by which his heart may become sweet toward God and obtain a comforting confidence toward Him. For so sings the Psalter, Psalm civ, "The bread strengtheneth man's heart, and the wine maketh glad the heart of man." [Ps. 104:15]
38. But since this despair and restlessness of conscience are simply signs of weak faith, the most serious condition a person can have in body and soul, which cannot be cured quickly or easily, it’s important and necessary that the more troubled a person's conscience is, the more they should participate in the sacrament or attend mass, as long as they visualize the Word of God in it, and nourish and strengthen their faith through it. They should always ensure that it doesn't become just a task or sacrifice but remains a testament and sacrament from which they can freely receive and enjoy grace, allowing their heart to become comforting towards God and build confidence in Him. For as the Psalter says in Psalm 104, "The bread strengthens a man's heart, and the wine makes glad the heart of man." [Ps. 104:15]
[Sidenote: A Sacrament for the Deaf and Dumb]
[Sidenote: A Sacrament for the Deaf and Dumb]
39. Some have asked whether the sacrament is to be offered also to the deaf and dumb. Some think it a kindness to practice a pious fraud upon them, and think they should be given unblessed wafers. This mockery is not right, and will not please God, Who has made them Christians as well as us; and the same things are due to them as to us. Therefore, if they have sound understanding and can show by indubitable signs that they desire it in true Christian devotion, as I have often seen, we should leave to the Holy Spirit what is His work and not refuse Him what He demands. It may be that inwardly they have a better understanding and faith than we, and this no one should presumptuously oppose. Do we not read of St. Cyprian,[36] the holy martyr, that in Carthage, where he was bishop, he gave both elements to the children, although that has now ceased, for good reasons? Christ permitted the children to come to Him, and would not suffer any one to forbid them [Mark 10:13 ff.]. And in like manner He has withheld His blessings neither from dumb or blind, nor from the lame; why should not His sacrament also be for those who heartily and in a Christian spirit desire it?
39. Some people have asked if the sacrament should also be offered to those who are deaf and mute. Some believe it’s kind to deceive them by giving them unblessed wafers. This mockery is not right and won’t please God, who has made them Christians just like us; they deserve the same things we do. Therefore, if they have sound understanding and can clearly show that they genuinely desire it with true Christian devotion, as I have often witnessed, we should trust the Holy Spirit to do His work and not deny Him what He asks. It’s possible that inside they have a deeper understanding and faith than we do, and no one should arrogantly challenge that. Don’t we read about St. Cyprian,[36] the holy martyr, who, when he was bishop in Carthage, gave both elements to the children, even though that practice has now stopped for valid reasons? Christ allowed the children to come to Him and wouldn’t let anyone stop them [Mark 10:13 ff.]. Similarly, He hasn’t withheld His blessings from those who are mute or blind, or from the lame; so why shouldn’t His sacrament also be available to those who sincerely and in a Christian spirit want it?
[Sidenote: Conclusion]
[Note: Conclusion]
40. Thus we see with how very few laws and works Christ has weighed down His holy Church, and with how many promises He has lifted it up to faith; although now, alas! all is turned about, and we are driven by many long and burdensome laws and works to become pious; and nothing comes of it. But Christ's burden is light [Matt. 11:30] and soon produces an abundant piety, which consists in faith and trust, and fulfils what Isaiah says: "A little perfection shall bring a flood full of all piety." [Isa. 10:32 (Vulgate)] That burden is faith, which is a little thing, to which belong neither laws nor works, nay it cuts off all laws and works and fulfils all laws and works. Therefore there flows from it nothing but righteousness. For so perfect is faith, that without any other labor and law, it makes everything that man does acceptable and well-pleasing to God. As I have further said of it in my little book "Of Good Works." [37]
40. So, we see how Jesus has given His holy Church very few laws and tasks, while lifting it up to faith with countless promises. Unfortunately, it seems the opposite is true now, and we are burdened by many long and heavy laws and tasks to try to be pious, but it leads to nothing. However, Christ's burden is light [Matt. 11:30] and quickly brings about a rich piety that consists of faith and trust, fulfilling what Isaiah says: "A little perfection will bring a flood full of all piety." [Isa. 10:32 (Vulgate)] That burden is faith, which is small and requires neither laws nor tasks; in fact, it removes all laws and tasks and fulfills them completely. Therefore, it results in nothing but righteousness. Faith is so perfect that, without any other effort or law, it makes everything a person does acceptable and pleasing to God. As I have discussed further in my small book "Of Good Works." [37]
Therefore, let us beware of sins, but much more of laws and good works, and only give heed to the divine promise and to faith; then good works will come of themselves. To this may God help us. Amen.
Therefore, let us be cautious about sins, but even more about laws and good works, and pay attention only to the divine promise and to faith; then good works will follow naturally. May God assist us in this. Amen.
FOOTNOTES
[1] See above, p. 25, note 1.
[1] See above, p. 25, note 1.
[2] Luther's customary term for the law of the Church, or "Canon Law."
[2] Luther's usual term for the law of the Church, or "Canon Law."
[3] For the application of this principle to the sacrament of penance, see the Discussion of Confession above, p. 82 f.
[3] For how this principle applies to the sacrament of penance, see the Discussion of Confession above, p. 82 f.
[4] Luther quotes from the Vulgate, St. Jerome's Latin version of the Bible.
[4] Luther quotes from the Vulgate, St. Jerome's Latin version of the Bible.
[5] The bread of the Lord's Supper.
The Communion bread.
[6] The Sanctus in the mass.
The Sanctus in the mass.
[7] Luther says "feathers."
Luther says "feathers."
[8] Darinnen die Messe steht und geht.
The mass is still happening.
[9] Gelübde, literally "vow."
Gelübde, literally "promise."
[10] On the mode of baptism see the Treatise on Baptism in this volume. Cf. Small Catechism, Part IV, 4, and Large Catechism, Part IV.
[10] For information on the method of baptism, see the Treatise on Baptism in this volume. Also refer to the Small Catechism, Part IV, 4, and Large Catechism, Part IV.
[11] Tropffrüchtlein.
Tropffrüchtlein.
[12] "Not a benefit received, but a benefit conferred."
[12] "Not a benefit received, but a benefit given."
[13] See p. 309.
See page 309.
[14] i. e., Blessing and Thanksgiving at Table; cf. Appendix II. of the Small Catechism.
[14] i. e., Blessing and Thanksgiving at the Table; see Appendix II. of the Small Catechism.
[15] Called the "still" mass because said without music.
[15] Called the "silent" mass because it's said without music.
[16] See p. 302.
See p. 302.
[17] Luther at this period still acknowledges seven sacraments. But see the Babylonian Captivity, written in October 1520.
[17] At this time, Luther still recognizes seven sacraments. But check out the Babylonian Captivity, written in October 1520.
[18] The receptacle in which the consecrated host is shown to the people.
[18] The container that displays the consecrated host to the people.
[19] The corporal-cloth spread over the altar during the communion service.
[19] The corporal cloth laid over the altar during the communion service.
[20] See p. 306.
[20] See p. 306.
[21] See pp. 308 f., 311 ff.
[21] See pp. 308 f., 311 ff.
[22] It is the teaching of the Roman Church that a sacrament is effective ex opere operato, i. e., simply as a sacrament ordained of God. Intended to guard against the idea that the validity of the sacrament depended on the character of the priest or of the recipient, it gave rise to the notion that the sacrament worked a sort of sacred magic.
[22] The Roman Church teaches that a sacrament is effective ex opere operato, meaning it works simply because it is a sacrament established by God. This was intended to prevent the belief that the validity of the sacrament relied on the priest’s or the recipient’s character, which led to the idea that the sacrament had a kind of sacred magic.
[23] See p. 316.
[23] See p. 316.
[24] See p. 313.
[24] See p. 313.
[25] Cf. XCV Theses, pp. 19, 41.
[25] Cf. XCV Theses, pp. 19, 41.
[26] Lasst uns des gewissen spielen.
Let's play the game of certainty.
[27] See p. 316.
[27] See p. 316.
[28] Confessions of St. Augustine, Book IX, Chapter XI.
[28] Confessions of St. Augustine, Book IX, Chapter XI.
[29] This is the votum sacramenti, which, according to Roman teaching, suffices for salvation if participation in the sacrament is impossible.
[29] This is the votum sacramenti, which, according to Roman teaching, is enough for salvation if taking part in the sacrament is not possible.
[30] See p. 313.
See page 313.
[31] Paul of Thebes, an Egyptian hermit of the III. Century, whose life was written by St. Jerome.
[31] Paul of Thebes, an Egyptian hermit from the 3rd Century, whose life was documented by St. Jerome.
[32] The translators have followed the numbering of the text in the Weimar and Erlangen Editions, which omit No. 32 in numbering the paragraphs.
[32] The translators have followed the numbering of the text in the Weimar and Erlangen Editions, which skip No. 32 in numbering the paragraphs.
[33] The mass held for the Blessed Virgin in Hildsheim on the second Sunday after St. Michael's Day is, on account of its magnificence, called "golden." Du Cange.
[33] The mass held for the Blessed Virgin in Hildesheim on the second Sunday after St. Michael's Day is, because of its magnificence, called "golden." Du Cange.
[34] The masses which are observed every day throughout the year.
[34] The crowds that are seen every day all year round.
[35] See p. 313 f.
See p. 313 f.
[36] Bishop of Carthage, died 258.
[36] Bishop of Carthage, died in 258.
[37] See above, pp. 187 ff.
[37] See above, pp. 187 ff.
THE PAPACY AT ROME
AN ANSWER TO THE CELEBRATED ROMANIST AT LEIPZIG
1520
1520
INTRODUCTION
Luther's declaration of emancipation from the spiritual pre-eminence of the Church of Rome, which, said he, "is proven solely by the by the empty papal decretals of the last four hundred years, and against which there stands the testimony of the authentic history of eleven hundred years, the text of Holy Scripture, and the decree of the Nicene Council," appeared in print in spring 1519.[1] It was in the form of a counter-thesis[2] to Eck's specious and celebrated "Thirteenth Thesis." It culminated in the Leipzig Disputation in July.
Luther's declaration of freedom from the spiritual dominance of the Church of Rome, which he said "is supported only by the empty papal decrees of the last four hundred years, and against which stands the testimony of the authentic history of eleven hundred years, the text of Holy Scripture, and the decree of the Nicene Council," was published in the spring of 1519.[1] It took the form of a counter-thesis[2] to Eck's misleading and famous "Thirteenth Thesis." This led to the Leipzig Disputation in July.
Before another summer had passed, this Disputation bore marvelous and unlooked-for fruits. In a series of epochal pamphlets, written in part for the clergy, and in part for the newly awakened laity, Luther with remarkable rapidity developed his new and scriptural teaching on the nature of the Church, on the duties of the state, on the essence of the sacraments, and on the inner life of the individual Christian.
Before another summer had passed, this debate produced amazing and unexpected results. In a series of groundbreaking pamphlets, written partly for the clergy and partly for the newly aware laypeople, Luther quickly developed his new and scriptural teachings on the nature of the Church, the responsibilities of the state, the essence of the sacraments, and the personal life of individual Christians.
The tractates of 1520, to which that on "The Papacy at Rome" belongs, like most of Luther's writings, were drawn forth from him in large part defensively, under provocation from the other side, or by the exigencies of the occasion. His correspondence[3] during the first half of 1520 reveals them as a result (with fresh causes arising) of the stir at Leipzig.
The writings from 1520, including "The Papacy at Rome," like many of Luther's works, were largely produced in response to challenges or circumstances he faced. His letters during the first half of 1520 show that they were a reaction—prompted by ongoing events—stemming from the situation in Leipzig.
Said Luther (February, 1520), "You cannot make a pen out of a sword: the Word of God is a sword. I was unwilling to be forced to come forward in public; and the more unwilling I am, the more I am drawn into the contest." Widely and eagerly read, these piquant publications made Luther the awakener, the developer, and as Harnack declares, the spiritual center of the reformatory thought that was now rising to a crisis.
Said Luther (February, 1520), "You can't turn a sword into a pen: the Word of God is a sword. I didn't want to be pushed into the spotlight; and the more I resist, the more I find myself pulled into the fight." These engaging publications were widely read and made Luther the catalyst, the driving force, and as Harnack puts it, the spiritual hub of the reformative ideas that were now reaching a turning point.
Fortunate it was, that the infancy of modern and the birth of Luther were contemporary, and that Luther turned to the printing press to such an extent in that critical period, that in the single year under discussion the number of printed German works was doubled.
It was fortunate that the early days of the modern era coincided with Luther's arrival, and that he utilized the printing press so extensively during that pivotal time that in just that one year, the number of printed works in German doubled.
Our little book of June 26, 1520, is the earliest of his writings to present a full outline of his teaching on the nature of the Christian Church. Driven by an antagonist, to whom his work is a reply, to write[4] in German for the laity, Luther gives them a clear and fundamental insight into this burning subject. His teachings "which he had just one year before maintained at the Leipzig Disputation are here unfolded, following to their logical conclusions and clearly presented."[5] This flying counter-attack against the "famous Romanist at Leipzig" thus becomes, in the judgment of Köstlin,[6] "one of the most important of his general doctrinal treatise of that period."
Our little book from June 26, 1520, is the earliest of his writings to provide a complete outline of his views on the nature of the Christian Church. Prompted by an opponent, to whom his work is a response, Luther writes in German for ordinary people, giving them a clear and fundamental understanding of this pressing topic. His teachings, which he had just a year earlier presented at the Leipzig Disputation, are here expanded, following through to their logical conclusions and clearly articulated. This rapid counter-attack against the "famous Romanist at Leipzig" thus becomes, in Köstlin's opinion, "one of the most important of his general doctrinal treatises from that period."
Luther's reply was written in short order during the last two weeks in May.[7] It came about in this wise: Eck at the Disputation had driven Luther to declare that belief in the divine supremacy of Rome was not necessary to salvation. Following this, in fall, a Franciscan friar, Augustine von Avleld, had risen to attack Luther and glorify the papacy, having received an appointment from Adolph, the Bishop of Merseburg (who had posted the inhibition on the Leipzig churches against the Disputation,[8] to write against the Reformer. Alveld's work, justifying the divine right of the Apostolic Chair, to all learned men, appeared early in May,[9] in the Latin language, in a first edition full of errors, followed quickly by a second edition.[10] Alveld attempted to cut Luther to pieces with "seven swords," of which the first was recta ratio; the second, canonica scriptura; the third, vera scientia (gained through the Church teachers and scholastics); the fourth, pietas sacra; the fifth, sanus intellectus; the sixth, simplex et pudica sapientia; the seventh, pura et integra scientia.
Luther's response was quickly written during the last two weeks of May. Here's how it happened: Eck, during the Disputation, forced Luther to state that belief in the divine authority of Rome was not essential for salvation. Later that fall, a Franciscan friar, Augustine von Alveld, attacked Luther and praised the papacy after being appointed by Adolph, the Bishop of Merseburg (who had issued the ban on the Leipzig churches regarding the Disputation) to write against the Reformer. Alveld's work, which defended the divine right of the Apostolic Chair, was published in early May in Latin, in a first edition filled with errors, quickly followed by a second edition. Alveld tried to take Luther down with "seven swords," the first being recta ratio; the second, canonica scriptura; the third, vera scientia (acquired through the teachings of the Church and scholastics); the fourth, pietas sacra; the fifth, sanus intellectus; the sixth, simplex et pudica sapientia; the seventh, pura et integra scientia.
On Alved's miserable jumble, in which the Reformer is alluded to as a "heretic," "lunatic," "wolf," Luther was not willing to waste any time (despite a threatening letter from Alveld); but jotted down some points for John Lonicer,[11] who on June 1st, published a sharp exposé[12] of the Leipzig Romanist's weaknesses[13]. Although the monastic authorities at Leipzig, fearing Luther, now attempted to suppress Alveld, that worthy at once came out[14] with a new work[15] on the same theme and this time in the German language[16]. It stirred Luther's blood. "If the jackanapes had not issued his little book in German to poison the defenceless laity," he said, "I would have looked on it as too small a matter to take up." As it was, with great rapidity he wrote his "The Papacy at Rome against the Celebrated Romanist at Leipzig." Going to press in May, the book was completed on the 26th of June. The twelve known editions are all quartos and range in size from twenty-two to thirty-two leaves. The first[17] two editions were printed by Melchior Lotther in Wittenberg; one by Peypus in Nuremberg; two by Silvan Otmar in Augsburg; one by George Nadler in Augsburg; one by Adam Petri in Basel and one by Andrew Exatander.[18]
On Alved's miserable mess, where the Reformer is called a "heretic," "lunatic," and "wolf," Luther didn't want to waste any time (even with a threatening letter from Alveld). Instead, he quickly jotted down some points for John Lonicer,[11] who published a strong critique[12] of the Leipzig Romanist's weaknesses[13] on June 1st. Although the monastic authorities in Leipzig, fearing Luther, tried to suppress Alveld, he immediately responded[14] with a new work[15] on the same topic, this time in German[16]. It got Luther riled up. "If that fool hadn't released his little book in German to poison the defenseless laity," he said, "I would have considered it too trivial to address." As it was, he swiftly wrote "The Papacy at Rome against the Noted Romanist at Leipzig." Going to print in May, the book was finished on June 26th. The twelve known editions are all quartos and vary in size from twenty-two to thirty-two leaves. The first[17] two editions were printed by Melchior Lotther in Wittenberg; one by Peypus in Nuremberg; two by Silvan Otmar in Augsburg; one by George Nadler in Augsburg; one by Adam Petri in Basel and one by Andrew Exatander.[18]
Incidentally Luther handles the "Alveld Ass" [19] and the Roman cause without gloves, but in substance he explains to the layman what Christianity really is,[20] i. e., unfolds to them the essence of the Christian Church.[21] In doing so he takes advanced ground for civil and religious liberty. The traditional mediæval idea of universal monarchy is dealt a heavy blow. Neither in Civil Government nor in the Church is the need of a single monarchical head. "The Roman Empire governed itself for a long time, and very well, without the one head, and many other countries in the world did the same. How does the Swiss Confederacy govern itself at present?"
By the way, Luther takes on the "Alveld Ass" [19] and the Roman issue directly, but essentially, he explains to the average person what Christianity truly is, [20] meaning he reveals the core of the Christian Church. [21] In doing this, he advocates for civil and religious freedom. The traditional medieval idea of universal monarchy takes a significant hit. There is no need for a single monarchical leader in either Civil Government or the Church. "The Roman Empire managed itself for a long time, and quite well, without a single head, and many other countries around the world did the same. How does the Swiss Confederacy govern itself today?"
Against the modern demand that the Church shall socialize itself, that it shall organize as a public center in a community of the people's civic life, that it shall enter the nation's political activities for moral uplift, and that ministers should become what Luther would call "preachers of dreams in material communities," our book places itself on record[22].
Against the current expectation that the Church should integrate itself into the community, functioning as a public hub within civic life, participating in the nation's political scene for moral improvement, and that ministers should embody what Luther referred to as "preachers of dreams in material communities," our book takes a stand[22].
Against the widespread demand that Christianity should get together into one world-wide visible ecclesiastical order, Luther's words are peremptory. He declares that the one true Church is already a spiritual community composed of all the believers in Christ upon the earth, that it is not a bodily assembly, but "an assembly of the hearts in one faith," that the true Church is "a spiritual thing, and not anything external or outward," that "external unity is not the fulfilment of a divine commandment," and that those who emphasize the externalization of the Church into one visible or national order "are in reality Jews."[23]
Against the widespread push for Christianity to unite into a single global church organization, Luther's stance is definitive. He states that the one true Church is already a spiritual community made up of all believers in Christ around the world; it is not a physical gathering, but "an assembly of the hearts in one faith." He emphasizes that the true Church is "a spiritual thing, not anything external or outward," and that "external unity is not the fulfillment of a divine commandment." Furthermore, he argues that those who insist on the Church being externally unified into one visible or national order "are in reality Jews."[23]
Luther refers to those without the unity of the Roman Church as still within the true Church. "For the Muscovites, Russians, Greeks, Bohemians, and many other great peoples in the world, all these believe as we do, baptise as we do, preach as we do, live as we do."
Luther talks about those who aren't part of the Roman Church but are still considered part of the true Church. "For the Muscovites, Russians, Greeks, Bohemians, and many other large groups in the world, all of these believe as we do, baptize as we do, preach as we do, and live as we do."
But if Luther attacks the supremacy of the outer organization in the Church, he no less forcibly disputes the supremacy of man's own inner thinking, his reasoning, in theology. He defines human reason as "our ability which is drawn from experience in temporal things" and declares it ridiculous to place this ability on a level with divine law[24]. He compares the man who uses his reason to defend God's law with the man who in the thick of battle would use his bare hand and head to protect his helmet and sword. He insists that Scripture is the supreme and only rule of faith[25], and ridicules the Romanists who inject their reason into the Scriptures, "making out of them what they wish, as though they were a nose of wax to be pulled around at will."
But if Luther questions the supremacy of the church's outer organization, he equally challenges the supremacy of people's inner thoughts and reasoning in theology. He defines human reason as "our ability that comes from experience with temporary things" and finds it absurd to put this ability on par with divine law. He compares someone who uses reason to justify God's law to a person in the heat of battle trying to shield their helmet and sword with just their bare hands and head. He insists that Scripture is the ultimate and only authority on faith, and mocks the Romanists who distort the Scriptures with their reasoning, "shaping them into whatever they want, as if they were a piece of wax to be molded at will."
As might be supposed, Luther's book, thus set against the external unity of human ecclesiastical organization, and against the inner rule of human thinking, is equally strong against the human visualization of divine worship. He argues against those who "turn spiritual edification into an outward show", and those who chiefly apply the name Church to an assembly in which "the external rites are in use, such as chanting, reading, vestments; and the name 'spiritual estate' is given to the members of the holy orders, not on account of their faith (which perhaps they do not have), but because they have been consecrated with an external anointing, wear distinctive dress, make special prayers and do special works, have their places in the choir, and seem to attend to all such external matters of worship."[26]
As you might expect, Luther's book, positioned against the external unity of the church organization and the internal guidelines of human thought, is equally critical of the human portrayal of divine worship. He argues against those who "turn spiritual growth into a show" and those who primarily refer to the Church as a gathering where "external rituals are observed, like singing, reading, and special clothing; and the term 'spiritual estate' is applied to those in holy orders, not because of their faith (which they may not have), but because they have been anointed externally, wear distinctive attire, offer specific prayers, and perform particular tasks, have their spots in the choir, and focus on all these external aspects of worship."[26]
The fallacy of the argument that because the Old Testament was a type of the New, therefore the material types of the Old Testament must be reproduced in the New, is exposed by him. [27] The open and fearless opposition to the popedom at Rome, which already appeared in the Diet at Augsburg in 1518, and more circumspectly, in the Leipzig Disputation in 1519, is very free[28] in this booklet to the laity of 1520, and is preliminary to the more intense antagonism which will appear in "The Babylonian Captivity." At Leipzig, Eck had laid emphasis on the Scripture passage, "Feed my sheep," and both this passage[29] and the one of Matthew 16:18 ("Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church") are explained by Luther for the laity. He charges the popes with having forsaken the faith, with living under the power of Satan, and with being themselves heretical.[30]
The flaw in the argument that because the Old Testament was a precursor to the New Testament, the physical aspects of the Old Testament must be replicated in the New is pointed out by him. [27] The clear and bold opposition to the papacy in Rome, which began at the Diet of Augsburg in 1518 and was more cautiously expressed during the Leipzig Disputation in 1519, is very direct in this pamphlet to the general public in 1520, serving as a precursor to the stronger opposition that will be found in "The Babylonian Captivity." At Leipzig, Eck highlighted the scripture passage, "Feed my sheep," and both this passage [29] and the one from Matthew 16:18 ("You are Peter, and on this rock, I will build my Church") are explained by Luther for the public. He accuses the popes of abandoning the faith, living under Satan's influence, and being heretical themselves. [30]
This tractate applies doctrine to existing institutions, and makes the truth clear to the laity. We see in it the power of Luther in stirring the popular mind. We do not regard the coarse invectives of Luther (which many cultured men of to-day seem to cite with outward horror—and inner enjoyment) as a remark of low peasant birth, or of crudeness of breeding, but as the language of a great leader who, in desperate struggle with the powers that be, knew how to attach himself to the mind of his age in such way as to influence it. How noble and great is his own remark at the close of his booklet on others' allusion to himself in print! "Whoever will, let him freely slander and condemn my person and my life. It is already forgiven him. God has given me a glad and fearless spirit, which they shall not embitter for me, I trust, not in all eternity."
This text applies doctrine to current institutions and clarifies the truth for everyday people. It showcases Luther's power in engaging the public's mindset. We don’t see Luther’s harsh criticisms (which many educated people today seem to quote with a mix of horror and enjoyment) as a sign of his humble origins or lack of refinement, but rather as the words of a great leader who, in his fierce battle against oppressive powers, was able to connect with the mindset of his time in a way that made an impact. How noble and profound is his own comment at the end of his booklet regarding others’ references to him in writing: "Whoever wants to can freely slander and condemn my character and my life. It is already forgiven him. God has given me a joyful and fearless spirit, which, I trust, they shall not embitter for me, not for all eternity."
Luther in this pamphlet, insists that none are to be regarded as heretics simply because they are not under the Pope; and that the Pope's decrees, to stand, must endure the test of Scripture. Luther wrote in May. In June he told Spalatin that if the Pope did not reform, he would appeal to the Emperor and German nobility. Within another month that appeal appeared.
Luther in this pamphlet insists that no one should be seen as a heretic just because they're not under the Pope, and that for the Pope's decrees to hold any weight, they must stand up to the scrutiny of Scripture. Luther wrote this in May. In June, he told Spalatin that if the Pope didn’t make changes, he would reach out to the Emperor and the German nobility. Within a month, that appeal was made.
The men of Leipzig feared the work of Luther, and the rector of the University had pled for mercy. Luther replied that Leipzig deserved to be placed in the pillory[31], that he had no desire to make sport of the city and its university, but was pressed into it by the bombast of the Romanist, who boasted that he was a "public teacher of the Holy Scripture at Leipzig"; and by the fact that Alveld had dedicated his work to the city and its Council. Alveld answered Lonicer and Luther bitterly, but Luther replied no more.
The people of Leipzig were afraid of Luther's work, and the university's rector had asked for mercy. Luther responded that Leipzig deserved to be shamed, stating he didn't want to mock the city and its university, but he was pushed into it by the arrogance of the Romanist, who claimed to be a "public teacher of the Holy Scripture at Leipzig," and by the fact that Alveld dedicated his work to the city and its Council. Alveld reacted harshly to Lonicer and Luther, but Luther didn't respond further.
Theodore E. Smauk.
Theodore E. Smauk.
Lebanon, Pennsylvania.
Lebanon, PA.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Still earlier, in his Resolutions to the 95 Theses (Resolut. Disputat., etc. Erl. Fr. Ed. II, 122 sqq., 137 sqq.) Luther had in an historical and objective way spoken of a time when the Roman Church had not been exalted over the other churches, at least not above those of Greece; that it was thus yet in the time of Pope Gregory I.
[1] Even earlier, in his Resolutions to the 95 Theses (Resolut. Disputat., etc. Erl. Fr. Ed. II, 122 sqq., 137 sqq.), Luther talked about a time when the Roman Church wasn’t seen as superior to other churches, at least not to those in Greece; this was during the era of Pope Gregory I.
[2] Luther's Thirteen Theses against Eck's Thirteen Theses. Frater Mar. Luth. Dsupt. etc., Erl.-Fr. Ed. III, 4 sqq., 11 sqq. "Bruder Martin Luther's Disputation und Entschuldigung wider die Anschuldigungen des D. Johann Eck." St. Louis Ed. XVIII, 718. The oldest print is doubtless one in possession of the University at Halle.
[2] Luther's Thirteen Theses against Eck's Thirteen Theses. Frater Mar. Luth. Dsupt. etc., Erl.-Fr. Ed. III, 4 sqq., 11 sqq. "Brother Martin Luther's Disputation and Defense against the Accusations of Dr. Johann Eck." St. Louis Ed. XVIII, 718. The oldest print is definitely one in the possession of the University at Halle.
[3] January 10, 1520, to Spalatin; January 26, to John Lang; February 5, to Spalatin; February 18, to Spalatin; April, Alved to Luther; Ma 5, May 17, May 31, June 8, and June 20, to Spalatin, with a letter of July or August to Peter Mosellanus, rector of the University at Leipzig.
[3] January 10, 1520, to Spalatin; January 26, to John Lang; February 5, to Spalatin; February 18, to Spalatin; April, Alved to Luther; May 5, May 17, May 31, June 8, and June 20, to Spalatin, with a letter from July or August to Peter Mosellanus, rector of the University at Leipzig.
[4] He alluded to the subject in his Sermon on the Ban.
[4] He hinted at the topic in his Sermon on the Ban.
[5] Köstlin, Theology of Luther, translated by Hay, I, 363.
[5] Köstlin, Theology of Luther, translated by Hay, I, 363.
[6] Martin Luther, I, 299.
[6] Martin Luther, I, 299.
[7] Alved's second book, the Confutatio Inepti, was dedicated to the Council and honorable citizens of the city of Leipzig on the 23d of April, and appeared in print in the middle of May. Its smooth and popular form roused Luther to this reply, which was put in press before the end of May, and published before the end of June.
[7] Alved's second book, the Confutatio Inepti, was dedicated to the Council and respected citizens of the city of Leipzig on April 23rd and was printed in mid-May. Its accessible and appealing style prompted Luther to respond, which went to press before the end of May and was published before the end of June.
[8] See Luther to Spalatin, July 20, 1519.
[8] See Luther to Spalatin, July 20, 1519.
[9] See Luther to Spalatin, May 5, 1520. "Exiit tandem frater Augustinus Afveidenais cum sus offs," etc. He characterises Alved in this letter, and refers to the approval it found in Meissen in his letter to Spalatin of May 17th.
[9] See Luther to Spalatin, May 5, 1520. "Finally, Brother Augustinus Afveidenais has come out with his views," etc. He describes Alved in this letter and mentions the support it received in Meissen in his letter to Spalatin on May 17th.
[10] The title is as follows: "Super apostolica ne-de, An Videlicet diuino sit iure nec ne, anque potifex qui Papa dici caeptus est, iure diuino in ea ipea president, no paru laudanda ex sacro Biblior. canone declaratio. sedita p. F. Augustinu Ahldesem Franciscanu, regularis (vt dicit) observuatíae sacredote, Prouin ciae Saxoniae, Sancte crucia, Sa-criq Biblioru canonis publi-cu lectore i couetu Lipsico, ad Reurendu in Chro patre & dom, dom Adolphu pricipe Illust. i Anhaldt ic Episcope Mersen-burge sem." See Super apostolica sed declario edita per Augustinum Alveldensem Bl.; E. S. Cyprian, Nütsliche Urkunden, Leipzig, 1718, II S. 160 f.
[10] The title is as follows: "Super apostolica ne-de, An Videlicet divino sit iure nec ne, anque potifex qui Papa dici caeptus est, iure divino in ea ipea president, no paru laudanda ex sacro Biblior. canone declaratio. sedita p. F. Augustinu Ahldesem Franciscanu, regularis (vt dicit) observatíae sacredote, Prouin ciae Saxoniae, Sancte crucia, Sa-criq Biblioru canonis publi-cu lectore i couetu Lipsico, ad Reurendu in Chro patre & dom, dom Adolphu pricipe Illust. i Anhaldt ic Episcope Mersen-burge sem." See Super apostolica sed declario edita per Augustinum Alveldensem Bl.; E. S. Cyprian, Nütsliche Urkunden, Leipzig, 1718, II S. 160 f.
[11] Luther's famulus. "Ich werde meinem Bruder Famulus anstellen."—To Spalatin already on May 5th.
[11] Luther's assistant. "I will appoint my brother as my assistant."—To Spalatin already on May 5th.
[12] "Contra Romanistam fratrem Augustinu, Alulden. Fran-ciscanu Leipaica Canonis Biblici publicu lictore eiusdem. F. Joanes Lonicerus. Augustinianus. VVITTENBERGAE, APVD, COLLEGIVM NOVVM. ANNO. M.D.XX."
[12] "Against the Romanist Brother Augustine, Alulden. Franciscan Leipaica Canon of the Bible with the public reader of the same. F. Johannes Lonicerus. Augustinian. WITTENBERG, AT THE NEW COLLEGE. YEAR 1520."
[13] Lonicer's reply had been preceded by one more detailed and less impetuous by Bernardi Feldkirch, teacher in the Wittenberg High School. This work is wrongly regarded as Melanchton's. Its title is: "CONFUTATIO INEP-ti & impli Libelli F. August. AL-VELD. Franciscani Lipsici, pro D. M. Luthero. Vmittenbergae, apud Melciorem Lottherum iuniorem, Anno M. D. XX."
[13] Lonicer's response came after a more thorough and calmer one from Bernardi Feldkirch, a teacher at the Wittenberg High School. This work is mistakenly attributed to Melanchthon. Its title is: "CONFUTATIO INEP-ti & impli Libelli F. August. AL-VELD. Franciscani Lipsici, pro D. M. Luthero. Vmittenbergae, apud Melciorem Lottherum iuniorem, Anno M. D. XX."
[14] He requested the Nuncio Milits to secure authority for him to write.
[14] He asked Nuncio Milits to get permission for him to write.
[15] Cf. Luther in the Tractate: "They cling to me like mud to a wheel."
[15] Cf. Luther in the Tractate: "They stick to me like mud to a wheel."
[16] "Eyn gar fruchtbar vu nutsbarlich buchbleyn vo dë Babstliche stul: vmud von sant Peter: vund vo den, die warhafftige schef-lein Christi sein, die Christus vner herr Petro befolen hat in sein hute vnd reglrung, gemacht durch bruder Augustinu Alueldt sant Francisci ordens tzu Leiptsk."
[16] "A productive yet practical book from the Papal seat: about St. Peter; and those who are true leaders of Christ, as Christ entrusted to St. Peter in his care and governance, created by Brother Augustinu Alueldt of the Order of St. Francis in Leipzig."
See Cyprian, Urkunden, II, 161 f.
See Cyprian, Documents, II, 161 f.
On May 31, Luther puts the whole situation graphically in a letter to Spalatin as follows: "Lonicers Schrift wird morgen fergig sein. Die Leipziger sind besorgt, ihre Schülter zu behalten; sie rühmen, dases Erasmus zu ihnen kommen werde. Wie geschäftig und doch wie unglüchlich ist der Neid. Vor einem Jahre, da sie ührer uns, als währen wir besiegt, spotteten, saben sie nicht voraus, dass ihnen dies Kreut bevorstebe. Der Herr regiert…Ochsenfart soll sich wider das Büchlein Feldkirchens rüston, in welchem er durch gehechbelt wird. Ich habe ein deutsches Buch wider den Esel von Alveld fertiggestellt, welches jetzt under der Presse ist."
On May 31, Luther vividly describes the whole situation in a letter to Spalatin: "Lonicer's writing will be finished tomorrow. The people in Leipzig are worried about keeping their positions; they boast that Erasmus will come to them. How busy and yet how unfortunate is envy. A year ago, when they mocked us as if we were defeated, they didn't foresee that this trouble was coming their way. The Lord reigns... Ochsenfart is supposed to stand against the booklet by Feldkirchen, in which he is attacked. I have completed a German book against the donkey from Alveld, which is now at the press."
[17] "Von dem Bapstum zu Rome: wid der den hochberupton Romanisten zu Leipzck D. Martinus Lu-ther ther Agust. Vuittenberg." 50 leaves, quarto, last page blank.
[17] "On the Papacy in Rome: Against the Highly Esteemed Romanists in Leipzig, Dr. Martin Luther of Wittenberg." 50 leaves, quarto, last page blank.
[18] For titles of these editions see Weimar Ed., vi, 281.
[18] For titles of these editions, see Weimar Ed., vi, 281.
[19] Luther in this tractate aims beyond the "undersized scribe of the barefoot friars at Leipzig," at the "brave and great flag-bearers who remain in hiding, and would win a notable victory in another's name," namely Prierias, Cajetan, Eck, Emser and the Universities of Cologne and Louvaine. Luther uses the epithet quoted above in one of his letters to Spalatin.
[19] In this writing, Luther targets more than just the "small-time scribe of the barefoot friars at Leipzig." He aims at the "bold and prominent leaders who stay in the shadows and would achieve a significant victory under someone else's name," specifically Prierias, Cajetan, Eck, Emser, and the universities of Cologne and Louvaine. Luther uses the term mentioned above in one of his letters to Spalatin.
[20] "I welcome the opportunity to explain something of the nature of Christianity for the laity."
[20] "I'm grateful for the chance to explain a bit about the nature of Christianity for everyday people."
[21] "I must first of all explain what these things mean, the Church, and the One Head of the Church."
[21] "First, I need to explain what these things mean: the Church and the One Head of the Church."
[22] "On this point we must hear the word of Christ, Who, when Pilate asked Him concerning His Kingdom answered, My Kingdom is not of this world. This is indeed a clear passage in which the Church is made separate from all temporal communities. Is not this a cruel error, when one places the Christian Church, separated by Christ Himself from temporal cities and places, and transferred to spiritual realms, is made a part of material communities?"
[22] "On this point, we need to listen to the words of Christ, who answered Pilate when he asked Him about His Kingdom, saying, 'My Kingdom is not of this world.' This is a clear statement that distinguishes the Church from all earthly societies. Isn't it a serious mistake to place the Christian Church, which Christ Himself separated from worldly cities and locations and elevated to spiritual realms, into material communities?"
"No hope is left on earth except in the temporal."
"No hope is left on earth except in the present moment."
[23] Among many things that Luther says on this point are the following: "According to the Scriptures the Church is called the assembly of all the believers in Christ upon the earth. This community consists of all those who live in true faith, hope and love, so that the essence, life and nature of the Church is not a bodily assembly, but an assembly of the hearts in one faith. Thus, though they be a thousand miles apart in body, they are yet called an assembly in spirit, because each one preaches, believes, hopes, loves, and lives like the other. So we sing of the Holy Ghost: 'Thou, Who through diverse tongues gatherest together the nations in the unity of the faith.' That means spiritual unity. And this unity is of itself sufficient to make a Church, and without it no unity, be it of place, of time, of person, of work, or of whatever else, makes a Church."
[23] Among the many things that Luther says about this topic are the following: "According to the Scriptures, the Church is defined as the gathering of all believers in Christ on Earth. This community includes everyone who lives in true faith, hope, and love, so the essence, life, and nature of the Church isn't about a physical gathering but a gathering of hearts united in one faith. Therefore, even if people are a thousand miles apart in body, they are still considered a gathering in spirit because each person preaches, believes, hopes, loves, and lives like the others. So we sing of the Holy Spirit: 'You, Who through diverse languages bring together the nations in the unity of faith.' That refers to spiritual unity. And this unity is enough in itself to constitute a Church; without it, no unity—whether by place, time, person, work, or anything else—can make a Church."
"A man is not reckoned a member of the Church according to his body, but according to his soul, nay, according to his faith…It is plain that the Church can be classed with a temporal community as little as spirits with bodies. Whosoever would not go astray should therefore hold fast to this, that the Church is a spiritual assembly of souls in one faith, that no one is reckoned a Christian for his body's sake; that the true, real, essential, Church is a spiritual thing, and not anything external or outward."
"A person is not considered a member of the Church based on their body, but on their soul, and more importantly, on their faith… It’s clear that the Church cannot be compared to a temporary community any more than spirits can be compared to bodies. Anyone who wants to stay on the right path should hold onto this: the Church is a spiritual gathering of souls sharing one faith, and no one is recognized as a Christian simply because of their physical existence; the true, genuine, essential Church is a spiritual entity, not something external or superficial."
"All those who make the Christian communion a material and outward thing, like other communities, are in reality Jews, who wait for their Messiah to establish an external kingdom at a certain definite place, namely Jerusalem; and so sacrifice the faith, which alone makes the kingdom of Christ a thing spiritual or of the heart."
"All those who treat the Christian community as just a material and outward organization, like other groups, are essentially like Jews who are waiting for their Messiah to set up a physical kingdom in a specific location, namely Jerusalem; and in doing so, they compromise the faith that uniquely makes the kingdom of Christ something spiritual or of the heart."
In this and the following notes, for brevity's sake, various quotations are summarized and connected.
In this and the next notes, for the sake of brevity, various quotations are summarized and linked.
[24] "For the teachings of human experience and (Deut. xii:8) reason are far below the divine law. The Scriptures expressly forbid us to follow our own reason, Deut. xii: 'Ye shall not do…every man whatsoever is right in his own eyes'; for human reason ever strives against the law (Gen. vi:5) of God. Therefore the attempt to establish or defend divine order with human reason, unless that reason has previously been established and enlightened by faith, is just as futile, as if I would throw a light upon the sun with a lightless lantern, or rest a rock upon a reed. For Isaiah vii makes reason subject to faith, when he says (vii:9): 'Except ye believe, ye shall not have understanding or reason.' He does not say, Except ye have reason, ye shall not believe. Therefore this scribe would better not have put forth a claim to establish the faith and the divine law by mere reason."
[24] "The lessons from human experience and reason are much less significant than the divine law. The Scriptures clearly warn us against relying on our own reason, as stated in Deut. xii: 'You shall not do…whatever seems right in your own eyes'; because human reasoning often conflicts with God’s law (Gen. vi:5). Trying to create or defend divine order using human reason, unless that reason is guided by faith, is as pointless as trying to shed light on the sun with a lantern that has no light or balancing a rock on a reed. Isaiah vii shows that reason must be subject to faith, when he says (vii:9): 'Unless you believe, you will not understand.' He does not state that unless you have reason, you will not believe. So, this scribe should not have tried to establish faith and divine law based on mere reason."
[25] "That the serpent lifted up by Moses, signifies Christ, is taught by John iii. If it were not for that passage, my reasoning might evolve many strange and weird fancies out of that type. That Adam was a type of Christ, I learn not from myself, but from St. Paul. That the rock in the wilderness represents Christ is not taught by my reason, but by St. Paul. None other explains the type but the Holy Spirit Himself. He has given the type and wrought the fulfillment, that both type and fulfillment and the interpretation may be God's own and not man's, and our faith he founded not on human, but on divine words. What leads the Jews astray but that they interpret the types as they please, without the Scriptures? What has led so many heretics astray but the interpretation of the types without reference to the Scriptures?"
[25] "The serpent that Moses lifted up represents Christ, as taught in John 3. Without that verse, my reasoning could lead to a lot of strange ideas about that symbol. I don't find that Adam is a symbol of Christ on my own; that comes from St. Paul. The rock in the wilderness symbolizes Christ, not from my thinking, but from St. Paul. Only the Holy Spirit explains the symbol—He has provided the symbol and brought about its fulfillment so that both the symbol and its meaning are God's work, not man's. Our faith is based on divine, not human, words. What misleads the Jews is interpreting the symbols however they want, without the Scriptures. What has caused so many heretics to go astray is interpreting the symbols without considering the Scriptures?"
[26] "The word Church, when it is used for such external affairs, whereas it concerns the faith alone, is done violence to; yet this manner of using it has spread everywhere, to the great injury of many souls, who think that such outward show is the spiritual and only true estate in Christendom. Of such a purely external Church, there is not one letter in the Holy Scriptures. The building and increase of the Church, which is the body of Christ, cometh alone from Christ, Who is its head. Christendom is ruled with outward show; but that does not make us Christians. The Church is a spiritual and not a bodily thing, for that which one believes is not bodily or visible. The external marks whereby one can perceive this Church is on earth, are Baptism, the Sacrament and the Gospel. For where Baptism and the Gospel are no one may doubt that there are saints, even if it were only the babes in their cradles."
[26] "The term Church, when used for external matters, which only relate to faith, is misrepresented; however, this way of using it has become widespread, causing great harm to many souls who believe that such outward appearance is the true spiritual state in Christianity. There isn’t even a single letter in the Holy Scriptures about such a purely external Church. The growth and development of the Church, which is the body of Christ, come solely from Christ, who is its head. Christianity is governed by outward appearances, but that doesn’t make us Christians. The Church is a spiritual entity, not a physical one, because what someone believes isn’t physical or visible. The external signs through which we can recognize this Church on earth are Baptism, the Sacrament, and the Gospel. For where Baptism and the Gospel are present, no one should doubt that there are saints, even if they are just infants in their cradles."
[27] "It is evident that a type is material and external, and fulfilment of the type is spiritual and internal; what the type reveals to the bodily eye, its fulfilment must reveal to the eye of faith alone. The bodily assembly of the people signifies the spiritual and internal assembly of the Christian people in faith. Moses set a serpent on a pole and whosoever looked upon it was made whole. That signifies Christ on the cross. Whosoever believeth in Him is saved. And so throughout the entire Old Testament, all the bodily visible things in it signify in the New Testament spiritual and inward things, which one cannot see, but only possess in faith. St. Augustine says on John iii: 'This is the difference between the type and its fulfilment: the type gave temporal goods and life, but the fulfilment gives spiritual and eternal life.'"
[27] "It's clear that a type is material and external, while its fulfillment is spiritual and internal; what the type shows the physical eye, its fulfillment reveals only to the eye of faith. The physical gathering of the people represents the spiritual and internal gathering of Christians in faith. Moses put a serpent on a pole, and whoever looked at it was healed. This signifies Christ on the cross. Whoever believes in Him is saved. Throughout the entire Old Testament, all the visible, physical elements signify spiritual and inner truths in the New Testament, which can’t be seen but can only be held in faith. St. Augustine comments on John 3: 'This is the difference between the type and its fulfillment: the type provided temporary goods and life, but the fulfillment gives spiritual and eternal life.'"
"Aaron was a type of Christ and not of the Pope. Paul says the high priest typifies Christ; you say St. Peter. Paul says Christ entered not into a temporal building. You make the fulfilment to be earthly and external. If Aaron was a type in external authority, vestments and state, why was he not a type in all other external and bodily matters? The Old Testament high priest was not permitted to have his head shorn. But why does the Pope have a tonsure? The Old Testament high priest was a subject. Why then does the Pope have men kiss his feet and aspire to be king, which Christ Himself did not? Wherein is the type fulfilled?"
"Aaron was a representation of Christ, not the Pope. Paul states that the high priest symbolizes Christ; you propose St. Peter. Paul indicates that Christ did not enter a physical building. You interpret the fulfillment as something worldly and external. If Aaron was a symbol of external authority, clothing, and status, why isn’t he also a symbol in all other external and physical matters? The Old Testament high priest wasn’t allowed to shave his head. So, why does the Pope have a tonsure? The Old Testament high priest was a servant. Why then does the Pope have people kiss his feet and aim to be a king, something Christ Himself did not do? Where is the fulfillment of the type?"
[28] Luther to Spalatin, June 8th: "Gegen den Esel von Alveld werde ich menen Angriff so enrichten dass ich des römischen Pabstes nich uneingedenk bin, und werde keinem von beiden etwas schenken. Denn solches erfordert der Stoff mit Nothwendigkeith. Endlicheinmal müssen die Geheimnisse des Antichrist offenbart werden. Denn so drangen sie sich selbst hervor, und wollen nicht weiter vorborgen sein."
[28] Luther to Spalatin, June 8th: "Against the donkey from Alveld, I will prepare my attack in a way that keeps the Roman Pope in mind, and I won’t give either of them anything. This is required by the nature of the matter. Eventually, the secrets of the Antichrist must be revealed. They are pushing themselves forward, and they don’t want to remain hidden anymore."
To this Luther adds the significant statement: "Ich habe vor, einen öffentlichen Zettel auszulassen an den Kaiser und den Adel im ganzen Deutschland, wider die Tyrannei und die Nichstwürdigkeit des römischen Hofes."
To this, Luther adds the important statement: "I plan to publish a public notice to the emperor and the nobility throughout Germany, against the tyranny and the indignity of the Roman court."
[29] "'Feeding' in the Roman sense means to burden Christendom with many and hurtful laws. In 'feeding' it means to sit in the highest place and to have an office, it follows that whoever is doing this work of feeding is a saint, whether he be a knave, or a rogue, or what not. Where there is no love, there is no feeding. The papacy either must be a love, or it cannot be a feeding of the sheep."
[29] "'Feeding' in the Roman sense refers to overwhelming Christendom with numerous damaging laws. In this context, 'feeding' means to occupy the highest position and hold an office, which implies that anyone who performs this act of feeding is considered a saint, regardless of whether they are a scoundrel or a trickster or something else. Where there is no love, there is no true feeding. The papacy must either embody love, or it cannot genuinely nourish the flock."
[30] "The greater part of the Roman communion, and even some of the popes themselves, have forsaken the faith wantonly and without struggle, and live under the power of Satan. The majority of those who hold so strongly to the authority of the Pope, and lean upon it, are themselves possessed by the powers of hell. Some of the popes were heretics themselves and gave heretical laws. These Roman knaves come along, place the Pope above Christ and make him a judge over the Scriptures. They say that he cannot err."
[30] "Most of the Roman Church, including some of the popes, have abandoned the faith easily and without resistance, and are under the influence of Satan. Many who firmly support the authority of the Pope and rely on it are themselves influenced by dark forces. Some of the popes were heretics and promoted heretical laws. These Roman tricksters elevate the Pope above Christ, making him the judge of the Scriptures. They claim that he can’t make mistakes."
[31] "Das Bemulhen der Leipziger Gehässigkeit." To Spalatin, Jan. 10. "Die Nichstwürdigkeitem der Leipziger." To Joh. Lang, Jan. 26. "Die Kunstangriffder Leipziger Partei." To Spalatin, Feb. 5.
[31] "The Efforts of the Leipzig Malice." To Spalatin, Jan. 10. "The Indignities of the Leipzig People." To Joh. Lang, Jan. 26. "The Artistic Attacks of the Leipzig Group." To Spalatin, Feb. 5.
TO THE PAPACY AT ROME
AN ANSWER TO THE CELEBRATED ROMANIST AT LEIPZIG[1]
1520
1520
[Sidenote: A New Adversary]
[Sidenote: A New Rival]
After all these years of fruitful rain and abundant growth something new has appeared on the scene. Many have essayed to attack me heretofore with vile abuse and glorious lies, yet without much success. But the latest to distinguish themselves are the brave heroes at Leipzig on the market-place, who desire not only to be seen and admired, but to break a lance with every one. Their armor is so wonderful that I have never seen the like before. They have put the helmet on the feet, the sword on the head, shield and breastplate on the back, they hold the spear by the point, and the whole armor becomes them so well as to mark them as horsemen of a new sort.[2] They would prove thereby not only that they have not frittered away their time with dream-books without learning anything, as I accused them, but would also achieve a great name as people who were conceived, born, nursed, cradled, fondled, brought up, and grown up in the Holy Scriptures. It would be no more than fair that whoever could, should be afraid of them, so that their labor and their good intentions might not be entirely in vain. Leipzig, to produce such giants, must indeed be rich soil.
After all these years of fruitful rain and abundant growth, something new has shown up. Many have tried to attack me in the past with vile insults and grand lies, yet without much success. But the latest to make a name for themselves are the brave heroes in Leipzig's marketplace, who want not only to be seen and admired but to challenge everyone. Their armor is so amazing that I've never seen anything like it before. They've put the helmet on their feet, the sword on their head, the shield and breastplate on their backs, and they hold the spear by the tip, and the whole outfit suits them so well that they stand out as a new kind of warrior. They aim to prove that they haven’t wasted their time on fanciful dreams without learning anything, as I previously accused them, but they also want to make a name for themselves as people shaped and nurtured by the Holy Scriptures. It would only be fair that anyone who could should fear them, so their efforts and good intentions won't be completely in vain. Leipzig, to produce such giants, must indeed have rich soil.
That you may understand what I mean, observe: Sylvester, Cajetan, Eck, Emser,[3] and now Cologne and Louvaine have shown their knightly prowess against me in most strenuous endeavor, and received the honor and glory they deserved; they have defended the cause of the pope and of indulgences against me in such a manner that they might well wish to have had better luck, finally, some of them thought the best thing to do was to attack me in the same manner as the pharisees attacked Christ [Matt. 22:35]. They put forward a champion, and thought: If he wins, we all win with him; if he is defeated, he suffers defeat alone. And the super-learned, circumspect Malvolio[4] thinks I will not notice it. Very well, in order that all their plans may not miscarry, I will pretend not to understand their game. And I beg them in return, not to take notice, that when I strike the pack, I am aiming at the mule. And if they will not grant this request, I stipulate that, whenever I say anything against the newest Roman heretics and blasphemers of the Scriptures, not merely the poor, immature scribe of the bare-foot friars at Leipzig shall take it to himself, but rather the great-hearted flag-bearers, who remain in hiding, and yet would win a notable victory in another's name.
To help you grasp my point, take note: Sylvester, Cajetan, Eck, Emser, and now Cologne and Louvaine have shown their determination against me with great effort and earned the respect and recognition they deserved. They've defended the pope and indulgences against me so vigorously that they might wish for better luck. Eventually, some of them believed the best approach was to attack me in the same way the Pharisees attacked Christ. They put forward a spokesperson, thinking: If he wins, we all win; if he loses, he takes the fall alone. And the overly learned and cautious Malvolio thinks I won't catch on. Fine, so that all their schemes don’t go awry, I’ll pretend not to see their strategy. I request that they ignore the fact that when I go after the group, I’m actually aiming for the mule. And if they won’t agree to this, I insist that whenever I criticize the latest Roman heretics and blasphemers of the Scriptures, it shouldn't just be the naive, inexperienced scribe of the barefoot friars in Leipzig taking it to heart, but rather the bold leaders who stay hidden but would claim a significant victory under someone else’s name.
I pray every honest Christian to receive my words—though sometimes barbed with scorn or satire—as coming from a heart that is made to break with sorrow and to turn seriousness into jesting at the sight now beheld at Leipzig, where there are also pious people who would venture body and soul for God's Word and the Scriptures, but where a blasphemer can thus openly speak and write, who esteems and treats God's holy words no better than if they were the fabled pratings of some fool or jester at the carnival. Because my Lord Christ and His holy Word, even He who gave His own blood as the purchase-price, is held to be but mockery and fools' wit, I must likewise drop all seriousness, and see whether I, too, have learned how to play the fool and clown. Thou knowest, my Lord Jesus Christ, how my heart stands toward these arch-blasphemers. That is my reliance, and I will let matters take their course in Thy name. Amen. They must ever abide Thee as the Lord. Amen.
I urge every sincere Christian to accept my words—though they may sometimes come across as sarcastic or mocking—as coming from a heart that is filled with sorrow and turns seriousness into humor at what I see happening in Leipzig. There are also devoted individuals willing to risk everything for God's Word and the Scriptures, yet a blasphemer can openly speak and write, treating God's sacred words as if they were merely the foolish ramblings of a jester at a carnival. Because my Lord Christ and His holy Word, He who gave His own blood to redeem us, are regarded as mere mockery and foolishness, I too must set aside all seriousness and see if I have learned how to play the fool and jester. You know, my Lord Jesus Christ, how I feel about these chief blasphemers. That is my hope, and I will let things unfold in Your name. Amen. They must always acknowledge You as the Lord. Amen.
I notice that these poor people are seeking naught else than to gain renown at my expense. They cling to me like mud to a wheel. They would rather have questionable honor shamefully acquired than remain quiet, and the evil spirit uses the designs of such people only to hinder me from doing more useful things. But I welcome the opportunity to give the laity[6] some explanation of the nature of the Church,[7] and to contradict the words of these seductive masters. Therefore I intend to treat of the subject-matter directly, rather than to answer their senseless prattle. I will not mention their names, lest they achieve their true purpose and boastfully regard themselves capable of arguing with me in the Scriptures.
I see that these poor people are only looking to gain fame at my expense. They cling to me like mud sticks to a wheel. They would rather have a questionable kind of honor that’s been shamefully earned than stay quiet, and the malicious spirit uses these people's schemes only to keep me from doing more worthwhile things. However, I welcome the chance to explain the nature of the Church to the laity and to refute what these misleading teachers say. So, I plan to address the subject directly instead of responding to their foolish chatter. I won’t mention their names, so they can’t fulfill their real goal of proudly claiming they can argue with me over Scripture.
THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE
We are discussing a matter which, taken by itself, is unnecessary, for any one could be a Christian without knowing anything about it. But these idlers who tread under foot all the great essentials of the Christian faith, must needs pursue such things and worry other people, in order to have some object in life.
We are talking about something that, on its own, isn't really needed because anyone can be a Christian without knowing anything about it. But these lazy people who trample on all the core essentials of the Christian faith feel they have to chase after such things and bother others to have some purpose in life.
[Sidenote: The Foundation of Papal Power]
[Sidenote: The Foundation of Papal Power]
This then is the question: Whether the papacy at Rome, possessing the actual power over all Christendom (as they say), is of divine or of human origin,[8] and this being decided, whether it is possible for Christians to say that all other Christians in that world are heretics and apostates, even if they agree with us in holding to the same baptism, Sacrament, Gospel, and all the articles of faith, but merely do not have their priests and bishops confirmed by Rome, or, as it is now, buy such confirmation with money and let themselves be mocked and made fools of like the Germans. Such are the Muscovites, Russians, Greeks, Bohemians, and many other great peoples in the world. For all these believe as we do, baptise as we do, preach as we do, live as we do, and also give due honor to the pope, only they will not pay for the confirmation of their bishops and priests. They will not, like the drunken, stupid Germans, submit to extortion and abuse with indulgences, bulls, seals, parchments, and other Roman stock in trade. They are ready, too, to hear the Gospel from the pope, or the pope's ambassadors, and yet they are not sent to them.
This is the question: Is the papacy in Rome, which claims to hold actual power over all Christians, of divine or human origin? And once that is determined, can Christians really say that all other Christians in the world are heretics and apostates, even if they share our views on baptism, the Sacrament, the Gospel, and all articles of faith, simply because they don't have their priests and bishops confirmed by Rome? Or, as is the case now, they pay for such confirmations with money and allow themselves to be disrespected and made fools of, like the Germans. This applies to the Muscovites, Russians, Greeks, Bohemians, and many other large groups around the world. All of these groups believe as we do, baptize as we do, preach as we do, live as we do, and also show respect for the pope; they just refuse to pay for the confirmation of their bishops and priests. They won’t, like the foolish Germans, submit to extortion and abuse through indulgences, bulls, seals, parchments, and other Roman practices. They are also willing to hear the Gospel from the pope or the pope's representatives, but they have not been sent to them.
Now the question is, whether all these may properly be called heretics by us Christians (for of such alone, and of no others, do I speak and write), or whether we are not rather the heretics and apostates, because we brand such Christians as heretics and apostates solely for the sake of money. For when the pope does not send the Gospel to them, and his messengers to proclaim it, although they are eager to receive them, it is clear as day that he is grasping for power and money through this confirmation of bishops and priests. But to this they will not agree, and therefore they are branded as heretics and apostates.
Now the question is whether we Christians can really call all these people heretics (because I’m only talking and writing about them), or if we might actually be the heretics and apostates ourselves for labeling these Christians as such just for the sake of money. When the pope doesn’t send the Gospel to them, nor his messengers to share it, even though they want to receive it, it clearly shows he is seeking power and money through this confirmation of bishops and priests. But they won’t accept this, and so they get labeled as heretics and apostates.
Now I have held, and still hold, that they are not heretics and apostates, but perhaps better Christians than we are, although not all, even as we are not all good Christians. This is challenged, after all its predecessors, by the fine little bare-foot book[9] of Leipzig, which comes along on clogs—nay, on stilts. It imagines that it alone (among all the others) does not step into the mud; perhaps it would gladly dance if some one would buy it a flute. I must have a try at it.
Now I believe, and still believe, that they aren't heretics or apostates, but maybe even better Christians than we are, though not all of them, just like not all of us are good Christians. This is questioned, after all its predecessors, by the nice little bare-foot book from Leipzig, which comes along on clogs—no, on stilts. It thinks it alone (out of all the others) stays out of the mud; maybe it would happily dance if someone bought it a flute. I have to give it a shot.
[Sidenote: The Insincerity of the Roman Claims]
[Sidenote: The Insincerity of the Roman Claims]
I say, first of all: No one should be so foolish as to believe that it is the serious opinion of the pope and of all his Romanists and flatterers, that his great power is of divine right. Pray observe, of all that is by divine right not the smallest jot or tittle is observed in Rome, nay, if they think of it at all, it is scorned as foolishness; all of which is as clear as day. They even suffer the Gospel and Christian faith everywhere to go to rack and ruin, and do not intend to lose a hair for it. Yea, all the evil examples of spiritual and temporal infamy flow from Rome, as out of a great sea of universal wickedness, into all the world. All these things cause laughter in Rome, and if any one grieves over them, he is called a Bon Christian, i. e., a fool. If they really took the commands of God seriously, they would find many thousand things more necessary to be done, especially those at which they now laugh and mock. For St. James says, "He that keepeth not one commandment of God, breaketh all." [Jas. 2:10] Who would be so stupid as to believe that they seek God's command in one thing, and yet make a mockery of all the others? It is impossible that any one should take one command of God to heart, and not at least be moved by all the others. Now there are ever so many who zealously guard the power of the pope, yet none of them ever ventures a word in favor of even one of the other much greater and more necessary commandments, which are so blasphemously mocked and scornfully rejected at Rome.
I want to start by saying: No one should be so naive as to think that the pope and all his followers truly believe that his immense power comes from God. Just look at it; none of what is said to be divinely ordained is actually followed in Rome. In fact, if they even think about it, it's dismissed as nonsense; this is obvious. They let the Gospel and Christian faith fall apart everywhere without a second thought. All the terrible examples of spiritual and worldly disgrace come from Rome, like a vast ocean of widespread wickedness, spilling out into the world. These situations make people laugh in Rome, and if anyone feels upset about it, they're labeled a Bon Christian, meaning a fool. If they truly respected God's commands, they would recognize countless things that need to be addressed, especially those they currently mock and laugh at. As St. James says, "Whoever keeps the whole law but stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it." [Jas. 2:10] Who would be foolish enough to think they are seeking God's will in one matter while making a joke of all the others? It's impossible for someone to genuinely care about one command from God without being affected by all the others. Yet, there are so many who fiercely defend the pope's authority, but none ever dare to speak up for even one of the other far more important and necessary commandments, which are so blasphemously ridiculed and harshly dismissed in Rome.
Furthermore, if all Germany were to fall on its knees, and to pray that the pope and the Romans should keep this power, and confirm our bishops and priests without payment, for nothing—even as the Gospel says, "Freely ye have received, freely give" [Matt. 10:8]—and provide all our churches with good preachers, because they have a sufficient abundance of riches to give money instead of taking it; and if it were urged and pressed, that this is their duty according to divine command: believe it surely, we should find all of them arguing with more insistence than any one ever did before, that it is not a divine command to go to so much trouble without pay. They would soon find a little gloss[10] with which to wind themselves out of it, just as they now find what they desire, to weave themselves into it. All our beseechings would not drive them to it. But since it means money, everything they dare to put forth must be divine command.
Furthermore, if all of Germany were to kneel down and pray for the pope and the Romans to keep this power and to confirm our bishops and priests for free, just as the Gospel says, "Freely you have received, freely give" [Matt. 10:8], and to provide all our churches with good preachers, since they have more than enough wealth to give money instead of taking it; and if it were insisted that this is their duty according to divine command: believe me, we would find them arguing more passionately than anyone ever has before, claiming that it’s not a divine command to go through so much trouble without payment. They would quickly find a little excuse to wriggle out of it, just like they currently find what they want to entangle themselves in it. All our pleas wouldn’t convince them. But since it involves money, everything they propose must be labeled as divine command.
[Sidenote: Roman Greed and Extortion]
[Sidenote: Roman Greed and Extortion]
The bishopric of Mainz alone, within the memory of men now living, has bought eight pallia[11] in Rome, every one costing about 30,000 gulden—not to mention the innumerable other bishoprics, prelacies and benefices. Thus are we German fools to be led by the nose and then they say: It is a divine command to have no bishop without Roman confirmation. I am surprised that Germany, which is by one-half or more in the possession of the Church,[12] still has so much as one pfennig left by reason of the unspeakable, innumerable, insufferable Roman thieves, knaves and robbers. It is said that Antichrist shall find the treasures of the earth; I trow the Romanists have found them to such an extent as to make our very life a burden. If the German princes and the nobility will not interfere very shortly, and with decisive courage, Germany will yet become a wilderness and be compelled to devour itself. That would furnish the greatest pleasure for the Romanists, who do not think of us otherwise than as brutes, and have made a proverb concerning us at Rome: "Squeeze the gold from German fools, in any way you can."
The bishopric of Mainz alone, in the memory of those living today, has bought eight pallia in Rome, each costing about 30,000 gulden—not to mention the countless other bishoprics, prelacies, and benefices. We Germans are foolishly led around, and then they say: It’s a divine requirement to have no bishop without Roman confirmation. I’m amazed that Germany, which is more than half owned by the Church, still has even one pfennig left because of the indescribable, countless, insufferable Roman thieves, crooks, and robbers. It’s said that Antichrist will find the treasures of the earth; I believe the Romans have found them enough to make our lives a burden. If the German princes and nobility don’t step in soon and act with real courage, Germany will become a wasteland and end up consuming itself. That would bring the greatest joy to the Romans, who see us as nothing but animals and have even made a saying about us in Rome: "Squeeze the gold from German fools, by any means necessary."
The pope does not prevent this scandalous villainy. They all wink at it, yea, they think far more highly of these supreme arch-villains than they do of the holy Gospel of God. They pretend that we are hopeless fools, and that it is a divine command that the pope should have his finger in every pie and do as he pleases with every one, just as if he were a god on earth, and should not rather be the servant of all,[13] without any pay, if he wished to be—or were—the very highest. But before consenting to this, they would much rather surrender this power and not call this a divine command any more than any other.
The pope doesn’t stop this shocking wrongdoing. They all turn a blind eye to it; in fact, they think way more of these top-level criminals than they do of the holy Gospel of God. They act like we’re completely clueless, and they believe it’s some kind of divine order that the pope should meddle in everything and do whatever he wants, as if he were a god on earth, rather than being the servant of everyone, without any pay, if he chose to be—or truly was—the highest. But before agreeing to this, they’d much rather give up this power and not treat it as a divine order any more than anything else.
But I hear you say, why do they fight so hard against you in this matter? Answer: I have attacked some higher things, which concern faith and God's Word. And when they were not able to contradict me, and saw that Rome does not trouble itself about such good things, they dropped them too, and attacked me on indulgences and the authority of the pope, in the hope of thus attaining the prize. For they knew very well that where money was concerned, the chief school of knaves in Rome would support them and not remain quiet. But Dr. Luther is just a little proud, and pays very little attention to the grunting and squealing of the Romanists; and this is well-nigh heartbreaking to them. But that does not bother my Lord Jesus, nor Dr. Luther, for we believe that the Gospel will and must continue. Let a layman ask such Romanists, and let them give answer, why they despoil and mock all of God's commandments, and rant so violently about this power, whereas they cannot show at all why it is necessary, or what it is good for. For ever since it has arisen, it has accomplished nothing but the devastation of Christendom, and no one is able to show anything good or useful that has resulted from it. Of this I will speak more fully if this Romanist comes again, and then, please God, I will throw light upon the Holy Chair at Rome and expose it as it deserves to be exposed.
But I hear you asking, why do they fight so hard against you in this issue? The answer is: I've challenged some deeper issues related to faith and God's Word. When they couldn't refute me and realized that Rome doesn't care about such good things, they abandoned those topics and instead targeted me regarding indulgences and the authority of the pope, hoping to gain traction that way. They knew very well that when it comes to money, the main group of schemers in Rome would back them up and wouldn’t stay silent. But Dr. Luther is a bit proud and pays very little attention to the whining and complaining of the Romans; this drives them nearly to despair. But that doesn’t bother my Lord Jesus or Dr. Luther, because we believe that the Gospel will and must endure. Let a regular person ask those Romans to explain why they distort and ridicule all of God's commandments and rant so furiously about this power, while they can't actually show why it’s necessary or what benefits it brings. Since it began, it has only led to the destruction of Christendom, and no one can point to anything good or useful it has produced. I will discuss this in more detail if this Roman comes back, and then, God willing, I will shed light on the Holy Chair in Rome and reveal it as it deserves to be revealed.
I have said this, not as a sufficient argument for disputing papal power, but in order to show the perverted opinions of those who strain the gnats, but let elephants go through [Matt. 23:24], who behold the mote in the brother's eye and permit the beams in their own to remain [Matt. 7:3], only to the end that others may be stifled by superfluous and unnecessary things, or at least branded as heretics or by any other epithet that occurs to them. One of than is this delicate, pious Romanist at Leipzig. Let us now have a look at him.
I’ve said this not as a strong argument against papal power, but to highlight the misguided views of those who focus on minor details while ignoring major issues [Matt. 23:24], who notice the speck in their brother’s eye but overlook the log in their own [Matt. 7:3], all to make sure others are suffocated by trivial and unnecessary things, or at least labeled as heretics or any other term they can think of. One example is this careful, devout Roman Catholic in Leipzig. Let’s take a closer look at him now.
I find three strong arguments by which this fruitful and noble little book[14] of the Romanist at Leipzig attacks me.
I see three strong arguments in which this valuable and admirable little book[14] from the Romanist in Leipzig criticizes me.
[Sidenote: The Arguments of the Romanists—1. Luther a Heretic and a Fool]
[Sidenote: The Arguments of the Roman Catholics—1. Luther is a Heretic and a Fool]
The first, and by far the strongest, is, that he calls me names—a heretic, a blind, senseless fool, one possessed by the devil, a serpent, a poisonous reptile, and many other names of similar import; not simply once, but throughout the book, almost on every page.[15] Such reproaches, slanders and calumnies are of no account in other books. But when a book is made at Leipzig, and issued from the cloister of the bare-foot friars, by a Romanist of the high and holy observance[16] of St. Frauds, such names are not merely fine examples of mediation, but likewise strong arguments with which to defend papal power, indulgences, Scripture, faith and the Church.[17] It is not necessary that any one of these should be proved by Scripture or by reason; it is quite enough that they have been put down in his book by a Romanist and holy observant of the order of St. Francis.
The first, and by far the most significant point, is that he insults me—calling me a heretic, a blind, senseless fool, someone possessed by the devil, a serpent, a poisonous reptile, and many other names with similar meanings; not just once, but throughout the book, almost on every page.[15] Such insults, slanders, and defamatory remarks are insignificant in other books. But when a book is published in Leipzig and comes from the cloister of the barefoot friars, written by a Romanist observing the high and holy traditions[16] of St. Francis, these names are not just clever examples of mediation, but also powerful arguments used to defend papal authority, indulgences, Scripture, faith, and the Church.[17] It's unnecessary for any of these to be proven by Scripture or reason; it's enough that they are written in his book by a Romanist and a devout member of the order of St. Francis.
And inasmuch as this Romanist himself writes that the Jews had overcome Christ on the cross with such arguments, I, too, must surrender, and acknowledge that as far as cursing and scolding, abuse and slander are concerned, the Romanist has surely beaten Dr. Luther. On this point he doubtless wins.
And since this Roman Catholic writes that the Jews defeated Christ on the cross with such arguments, I too have to give in and admit that when it comes to cursing, insults, abuse, and slander, the Catholic has definitely outdone Dr. Luther. On this matter, he certainly comes out on top.
[Sidenote: The Argument from Reason]
[Sidebar: The Argument from Reason]
The second argument, to express it tersely, is that of natural reason.
The second argument, to put it simply, is based on natural reason.
This is the argument: A. Every community[18] on earth, if it is not to fall to pieces, must have a bodily head, under the true head, which is Christ.
This is the argument: A. Every community[18] on earth, if it is not to fall apart, must have a physical leader, under the true leader, who is Christ.
B. Inasmuch as all Christendom is one community on earth, it must have a head, which is the pope.
B. Since all of Christianity is one community on earth, it must have a leader, which is the pope.
[Sidenote: The Futility of the Argument]
[Sidenote: The Futility of the Argument]
This argument I have designated with the letters A and B for the sake of clearness, and also to show that this Romanist has learned his A-B-C all the way down to B. However, to answer this argument: Since the question is whether the pope's power is by divine right, is it not a bit ridiculous that human reason (that ability which is drawn from experience in temporal things) is brought in and placed on a level with the divine law, especially since it is the intention of this poor presumptuous mortal to bring the divine law against me. For the teachings of human experience and reason are far below the divine law. The Scriptures expressly forbid us to follow our own reason, Deuteronomy xii, "Ye shall not do…every man whatsoever is right in his own eyes" [Deut. 12:8]; for human reason ever strives against the law of God, as Genesis vi. says: "Every thought and imagination of man's heart is only evil continually." [Gen. 6:5] Therefore the attempt to establish or defend divine order with human reason, unless that reason has previously been established and enlightened by faith, is just as futile as if I would throw light upon the sun with a lightless lantern, or rest a rock upon a reed. For Isaiah vii. makes reason subject to faith, when it says: "Except ye believe, ye shall not have understanding or reason." [Isa. 7:9] It does not say, "Except ye have reason, ye shall not believe." Therefore this scribe would better have left his perverted reason at home, or first have well established it with texts of Scripture, so as not to put forth so ridiculous and preposterous a claim and establish the faith and the divine law by mere reason. For if this reason of ours draws the conclusion that a visible community must have a visible overlord or cease to exist, it also must draw the further conclusion, that as a visible community does not exist without wives, therefore the whole Church[19] must have a visible, common wife, in order not to perish. What a valiant woman that would needs be! Again, a visible community does not exist without a common visible city, house and country; therefore the Church[19] must have a common city, house and country. But where will you find that? Verily, in Rome they are seeking just this with impatient eagerness, for they have made nearly the whole world their very own. Again, the Church[19] would likewise need to have in common its visible property, servants, maids, cattle, food, etc., for no community exists without them. See how gracefully human reason stalks along on its stilts.
This argument, which I've labeled A and B for clarity, shows that this Romanist has mastered his A-B-C all the way to B. However, to address this argument: since the question is whether the pope's power comes from divine right, is it not somewhat absurd that human reason—derived from experience in worldly matters—is placed on the same level as divine law? Especially since this presumptuous individual aims to use divine law against me. The teachings of human experience and reason are far inferior to divine law. The Scriptures explicitly warn us not to rely on our own reasoning, as stated in Deuteronomy 12: "You shall not do what is right in your own eyes" [Deut. 12:8]; for human reason constantly opposes God's law, as Genesis 6 states: "The thoughts and inclinations of the human heart are only evil all the time" [Gen. 6:5]. Therefore, trying to establish or defend divine order using human reason—unless that reason has been grounded and illuminated by faith—is as futile as trying to shine a light on the sun with a lantern that has no light, or balancing a rock on a reed. Isaiah 7 emphasizes that reason should be subject to faith when it says: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand" [Isa. 7:9]. It does not say, "Unless you have reason, you shall not believe." Thus, this scribe would have been better off leaving his flawed reasoning at home or first fortifying it with Scripture so as not to make such a ridiculous and absurd claim while attempting to support faith and divine law with mere reasoning. If our reasoning concludes that a visible community must have a visible leader or it ceases to exist, it must also conclude that since a visible community cannot exist without wives, then the whole Church must have a visible, common wife to avoid disappearance. What an extraordinary woman that would need to be! Furthermore, a visible community cannot exist without a common visible city, home, and country; thus, the Church must have a shared city, home, and country. But where would you find that? Indeed, in Rome, they are eagerly pursuing this, having claimed nearly the entire world as their own. Additionally, the Church must have common visible property, servants, maids, livestock, food, etc., since no community can exist without these. Observe how elegantly human reason wobbles on its stilts.
A professor of theology ought to have considered in advance the clumsiness of such an argument, and proved the divine laws and works by the Scriptures, and not by temporal analogies and worldly reason. For it is written that the divine commandments are justified in and by themselves, and not by any external help.[20] [Ps. 19:9]
A theology professor should have thought ahead about the awkwardness of this argument and demonstrated the divine laws and actions through the Scriptures, rather than relying on earthly analogies and human reasoning. It is written that divine commandments stand justified on their own, without any outside support.[20] [Ps. 19:9]
Again, the wise man says of the wisdom of God: "Wisdom hath overcome the proud with her power." [Prov. 11:3] It is most deplorable that we should attempt with our reason to defend God's Word, whereas the Word of God is rather our defence against all our enemies, as St. Paul teaches us. [Eph. 6:17] Would he not be a great fool who in the thick of battle sought to protect his helmet and sword with bare hand and unshielded head? It is no different when we essay, with our reason, to defend God's law, which should rather be our weapon.
Again, the wise man speaks of God's wisdom: "Wisdom has conquered the proud with her power." [Prov. 11:3] It's truly unfortunate that we try to use our reasoning to defend God's Word, when in reality, God's Word is our defense against all our enemies, as St. Paul instructs us. [Eph. 6:17] Wouldn't it be foolish for someone in the middle of a battle to try to protect their helmet and sword with bare hands and an unprotected head? It's no different when we attempt to defend God's law with our reasoning, which should instead be our weapon.
From this, I hope, it is clear that the flimsy argument of this prattler fails utterly, and, together with everything he constructs upon it, is found to be without any basis whatever. But that he may the better understand his own mummery, even in case I should grant that a process of reasoning might be entirely valid without the Scriptures, I will show that neither of his arguments is valid, neither the first, A, nor the second, B.
From this, I hope it's clear that the weak argument of this speaker falls completely flat, and everything built on it has no foundation at all. However, so he can better grasp his own nonsense, even if I were to concede that a reasoning process could be entirely valid without the Scriptures, I will demonstrate that neither of his arguments holds up, neither the first, A, nor the second, B.
[Sidenote: The Argument Answered]
[Side Note: The Argument Answered]
The first, A, is that every community on earth must have one visible head under Christ. This is simply not true. How many principalities, castles, cities, and houses we find where two brothers or lords reign—and with equal authority. The Roman empire governed itself for a long time, and very well, without the one head, and many other countries in the world did the same. How does the Swiss confederacy govern itself at present? Thus in the government of the world there is not one single overlord, yet we are all one human race, descended from the one father, Adam. The kingdom of France has its own king, Hungary its own, Poland, Denmark, and every other kingdom its own, and yet they are one people, the temporal estate in Christendom, without one common head; and still this does not cause these kingdoms to perish. And if there were no government constituted in just this manner, who could or would prevent a community from choosing not one, but many overlords, all clothed with equal power? Therefore it is a very poor procedure to measure the things which are of God's appointing by such vacillating analogies of worldly things, when they do not hold even in the appointments of men. But suppose I should grant this dreamer that his dream is true, and that no community can exist without one visible head; how does it follow that it must likewise be so in the Church?[21] I know very well that the poor dreamer has a certain conception, according to which a Christian community is the same as any other temporal community.[22] He thus reveals plainly that he has never learned to know what Christendom, or the Christian community, really is. I had not believed it possible to meet such dense, massive, stubborn error and ignorance in any man, much less in a saint of Leipzig.
The first point, A, is that every community on earth must have one visible leader under Christ. This is simply not true. Look at how many principalities, castles, cities, and households exist where two brothers or lords rule—and with equal authority. The Roman Empire managed itself for a long time, and very well, without a single head, and many other countries did the same. How does the Swiss confederacy govern itself today? In the world's governance, there is not one single overlord, yet we are all one human race, descended from the one father, Adam. France has its own king, Hungary has its own, Poland, Denmark, and every other kingdom has its own rulers, and still, they are one people within the temporal estate of Christendom, without a common head; and this doesn’t lead to the downfall of these kingdoms. If there were no government structured in this way, who could or would stop a community from choosing many overlords, all with equal power? Therefore, it's a poor strategy to judge God's appointed matters by such unreliable comparisons to worldly things when those comparisons don't even hold true in human affairs. But suppose I concede to this dreamer that his vision is correct, and that no community can exist without one visible head; how does it follow that this must also be true in the Church? I understand very well that this misguided dreamer has a certain idea, leading him to think that a Christian community is just like any other earthly community. He clearly shows that he has never grasped what Christendom, or the Christian community, truly is. I never thought I would encounter such thick, stubborn error and ignorance in any individual, let alone in a saint of Leipzig.
For the benefit, therefore, of this numskull, and of those led astray by him, I must first of all explain what is meant by these things—the Church,[23] and the One Head of the Church.[23] I must talk bluntly, however, and use the same words which they have so barbarously perverted.
For the sake of this fool and anyone misled by him, I first need to clarify what these terms mean—the Church,[23] and the One Head of the Church.[23] I have to be straightforward, though, and use the same words they have distorted so horribly.
[Sidenote: What is the Church?]
[Sidenote: What is the Church?]
[Sidenote: The Communion of Saints]
The Communion of Saints
[Sidenote: The Unity of the Church Not External]
[Sidenote: The Unity of the Church Not External]
The Scriptures speak of the Church[23] quite simply, and use the term in only one sense; these men have added and brought into general use two more. The first use, according to the Scriptures, is this, that the Church[23] is called the assembly of all the believers in Christ upon earth, just as we pray in the Creed: "I believe in the Holy Ghost, a communion of saints." This community or assembly consists of all those who live in true faith, hope and love; so that the essence, life and nature of the Church[23] is not a bodily assembly, but an assembly of hearts in one faith, as St. Paul says, Ephesians iv, "One baptism, one faith, one Lord." [Eph. 4:5] Thus, though they be a thousand miles apart in body, yet they are called an assembly in spirit because each one preaches, believes, hopes, loves, and lives like the other. So we sing of the Holy Ghost: "Thou, who through divers tongues gatherest together the nations in the unity of the faith."[24] That means in reality a spiritual unity, because of which men are called a communion of saints. And this unity is of itself sufficient to make a Church,[23] and without it no unity, be it of place, of time, of person, of work, or of whatever else, makes a Church.[23] On this point we must hear the word of Christ, Who, when Pilate asked Him concerning His kingdom, answered: "My kingdom is not of this world." [John 18:36] This is indeed a dear passage, in which the Church[23] is made separate from all temporal communities, as not being anything external. And this blind Romanist makes of it an external community, like any other. Christ says even more clearly, Luke xvii, "The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: neither shall they say, Lo, here, or lo, there! for behold, the kingdom of God is within you." [Luke 17:20, 21]
The Scriptures talk about the Church[23] quite simply and use the term in only one way; these people have added and made two more meanings common. The first meaning, according to the Scriptures, is that the Church[23] is the gathering of all believers in Christ on earth, just as we declare in the Creed: "I believe in the Holy Ghost, a communion of saints." This community or gathering consists of all who live in true faith, hope, and love; therefore, the essence, life, and nature of the Church[23] is not a physical gathering, but a gathering of hearts in one faith, as St. Paul says in Ephesians 4, "One baptism, one faith, one Lord." [Eph. 4:5] So, even if they are a thousand miles apart in body, they are still considered a gathering in spirit because each one preaches, believes, hopes, loves, and lives like the other. So we sing about the Holy Ghost: "You, who through diverse tongues gather the nations in the unity of the faith."[24] This truly means a spiritual unity, which is why people are called a communion of saints. This unity alone is enough to form a Church,[23] and without it, no unity—be it of place, time, persons, works, or anything else—makes a Church.[23] On this matter, we need to listen to the words of Christ, who, when Pilate asked Him about His kingdom, responded: "My kingdom is not of this world." [John 18:36] This is indeed a significant passage, as it separates the Church[23] from all temporary communities, indicating that it is not something external. And this misguided Romanist turns it into an external community, like any other. Christ says even more clearly in Luke 17, "The kingdom of God doesn’t come with observation: nor will they say, 'Look, here!' or 'Look, there!' For indeed, the kingdom of God is within you." [Luke 17:20, 21]
I am astounded, that such strong, clear words of Christ are treated as a farce by these Romanists. For by these words it is clear to every one that the kingdom of God (for so He calls His Church[25]) is not at Rome, nor is it bound to Rome or any other place, but it is where there is faith in the heart, be a man at Rome, or here, or elsewhere. It is a nauseating lie,[26] and Christ is made a liar when it is said that the Church[25], is in Rome, or is bound to Rome—or even that the head and the authority are there by divine right.
I am shocked that such strong, clear words from Christ are treated as a joke by these Romanists. His words clearly show that the kingdom of God (which He calls His Church[25]) is not in Rome, nor is it tied to Rome or any other location; it exists wherever there is faith in the heart, whether a person is in Rome, here, or anywhere else. It’s a disgusting lie,[26] and it makes Christ a liar when people say that the Church[25] is in Rome or that it is connected to Rome—or even that the head and authority are there by divine right.
Moreover, in Matthew xxiv. He foretold the gross deception which now rules under the name of the Roman Church, when He says: "Many false prophets and false Christs shall come in My name, saying: I am Christ; and shall deceive many, and show great signs, that if possible they shall deceive the very elect. Wherefore, if they shall say unto you: Behold, in the secret chambers is Christ, believe it not; behold, He is in the desert, go not forth. Behold, I have told you before." [Matt. 24:24-26] Is this not a cruel error, when the unity of the Christian Church[25], separated by Christ Himself from all material and temporal cities and places, and transferred to spiritual realms, is included by these preachers of dreams in material communities,[27] which must of necessity be bound to localities and places. How is it possible, or whose reason can grasp it, that spiritual unity and material unity should be one and the same? There are those among Christians who are in the external assembly and unity, who yet by their sins exclude themselves from the inner, spiritual unity.
Moreover, in Matthew 24, He predicted the major deception that now exists under the name of the Roman Church, when He says: "Many false prophets and false Christs will come in My name, claiming: I am the Christ; and they will deceive many, displaying great signs, so much so that, if possible, they would mislead even the chosen ones. Therefore, if they say to you: Look, He is in the secret chambers, don't believe it; look, He is in the desert, don’t go out there. Look, I have warned you ahead of time." [Matt. 24:24-26] Isn’t this a severe mistake, when the unity of the Christian Church, separated by Christ Himself from all physical and temporary places, and moved to spiritual realms, is included by these dream-preachers in physical communities, which must inevitably be tied to specific locations? How is it possible, or how can anyone understand, that spiritual unity and physical unity could be the same? There are people among Christians who are part of the external assembly and unity, yet through their sins exclude themselves from the inner, spiritual unity.
Therefore, whosoever maintains that an external assembly or an outward unity makes a Church,[25] sets forth arbitrarily what is merely his own opinion, and whoever endeavors to prove it by the Scriptures, brings divine truth to the support of his lies, and makes God a false witness, just as does this miserable Romanist, who explains everything that is written concerning the Church[28] as meaning the outward show of Roman power; and yet he cannot deny that the large majority of these people, particularly in Rome itself, because of unbelief and evil lives, is not in the spiritual unity, i. e., the true Church.[28] For if to be in the external Roman unity made men true Christians, there would be no sinners among them, neither would they need faith nor the grace of God to make them Christians; this external unity would be enough.
Therefore, anyone who claims that an external gathering or outward unity creates a Church sets forth merely their own opinion, and anyone who tries to back this up with the Scriptures is misusing divine truth to support their lies, making God a false witness. This is similar to what this unfortunate Romanist does, who interprets everything written about the Church as referring to the outward display of Roman authority. Yet, he cannot deny that the vast majority of these people, especially in Rome itself, because of their lack of belief and immoral lives, are not in spiritual unity, meaning they are not part of the true Church. If being part of the external Roman unity made someone a true Christian, there would be no sinners among them, and they wouldn't need faith or the grace of God to be Christians; that external unity would be enough.
[Sidenote: What Makes a Christian]
What Defines a Christian
From this we conclude, and the conclusion is inevitable, that just as being in the Roman unity does not make one a Christian, so being outside of that unity does not make one a heretic or unchristian. I should like to hear who would dispute this. For that which is essential must make a true Christian; but if it does not make a true Christian, it cannot be essential; just as it does not make me a true Christian to be at Wittenberg or to be at Leipzig. Now it is clear that external fellowship with the Roman communion[29] does not make men Christians, and so the lack of that fellowship certainly does not make a man a heretic or an apostate. Therefore it must also be false, that it is a divine command to be in connection with the Roman Church.[28] For whosoever keepeth one divine command, keepeth them all, and none can be kept without keeping the others[30]. Therefore it is an open and blasphemous lie against the Holy Ghost to say that the external unity under Roman authority is the fulfilment of a divine commandment, since there are so many in that unity who neither regard nor fulfil any of the Divine commandments. Hence, to be in this place or that, does not make a heretic: but to be without true faith makes a man a heretic.
From this, we conclude, and it's an unavoidable conclusion, that just as being part of the Roman unity doesn't make someone a Christian, being outside of that unity doesn't make someone a heretic or unchristian. I'd like to see who would argue with this. What truly matters is what makes a genuine Christian; if something doesn't lead to true Christianity, it can't be essential. Just like being in Wittenberg or Leipzig doesn’t make me a true Christian. It's clear that external membership in the Roman Church doesn't make someone a Christian, so not having that membership definitely doesn’t make someone a heretic or an apostate. Therefore, it's also false to say that it's a divine command to be connected with the Roman Church. For whoever keeps one divine command keeps them all, and you can't keep one without keeping the others. So, it’s a blatant and blasphemous lie against the Holy Spirit to claim that external unity under Roman authority fulfills a divine commandment, especially when so many within that unity neither acknowledge nor follow any Divine commandments. Thus, being in this place or that doesn’t make someone a heretic; rather, lacking true faith makes someone a heretic.
Again, it is clear that to be a member of the Roman communion[31] does not mean to be in true faith, and to be outside of it does not mean to be in unbelief; otherwise those within it would all be believers and truly saved, for no one article of faith is believed without all the other articles.
Again, it's clear that being part of the Roman communion[31] doesn't mean having true faith, and being outside of it doesn't mean lacking belief; otherwise, everyone inside would be a believer and truly saved, because no single article of faith is believed without accepting all the others.
Therefore all those who make the Christian communion[32] a material and outward thing, like other communities, are in reality Jews (for the Jews likewise wait for their Messiah to establish an external kingdom at a certain definite place, namely, Jerusalem), and thus sacrifice the faith, which alone makes the kingdom of Christ a thing spiritual and of the heart.
Therefore, all those who treat the Christian communion as a material and external thing, similar to other communities, are essentially Jews (since the Jews also await their Messiah to create an external kingdom in a specific location, namely, Jerusalem), and thus sacrifice the faith that makes the kingdom of Christ a matter of the spirit and the heart.
[Sidenote: The Head of the Church]
[Sidenote: The Head of the Church]
Again, if every temporal community is called after its head, and we say of this city, it is Electoral, and of that, it is Ducal, and of another, it is Frankish; then by right all Christendom should be called Roman, or Petrine, or Papal. But why, then, is it called Christendom? Why are we called Christians, if not from our head, although we are still upon earth? Hereby it is shown that for Christendom there is no other head, even upon earth, than Christ, for it has no other name than the name of Christ For this reason St. Luke tells us that the disciples were at first called Antiochians, but soon this was changed and they were called Christians. [Acts 11:26][33]
Again, if every community is named after its leader, and we say this city is Electoral, that one is Ducal, and another is Frankish; then all of Christendom should be called Roman, or Petrine, or Papal. But why is it called Christendom? Why do we call ourselves Christians, if not based on our leader, even while we are still on earth? This shows that for Christendom, there is no other head, even on earth, except Christ, as it has no other name than the name of Christ. For this reason, St. Luke tells us that the disciples were initially called Antiochians, but soon this was changed, and they were called Christians. [Acts 11:26][33]
Furthermore, though a man consists of two natures, namely, body and soul, yet he is not reckoned a member of the Church according to his body, but according to his soul, nay, according to his faith. Otherwise it might be said that a man is a nobler Christian than a woman, because his physical structure is superior to that of a woman, or that a man is a greater Christian than a child, a healthy person a stronger Christian than an invalid; lords and ladies, the rich and powerful, better Christians than servants, maids, and the poor and lowly; whereas Paul writes, Galatians v, "In Christ is neither male nor female, neither lord nor servant, neither Jew nor Greek," [Gal. 3:28; 5:6] but as far as the body is concerned they are all equal. But he is the better Christian who is greater in faith, hope and love; so that it is plain that the Church[34] is a spiritual community, which can be classed with a temporal community as little as spirits with bodies, or faith with temporal possessions.
Furthermore, even though a person is made up of two natures, body and soul, they are not considered a member of the Church based on their body, but rather based on their soul, specifically their faith. Otherwise, one might claim that a man is a better Christian than a woman because his physical makeup is superior, or that a man is a greater Christian than a child, or that a healthy person is a stronger Christian than someone who is ill; lords and ladies, the rich and powerful, better Christians than servants, maids, and the poor and lowly. However, Paul writes in Galatians v, "In Christ, there is neither male nor female, nor lord or servant, nor Jew or Greek," [Gal. 3:28; 5:6] indicating that, as far as the body is concerned, they are all equal. The better Christian is the one who excels in faith, hope, and love; thus, it is clear that the Church is a spiritual community, which can hardly be compared to a temporal community, just as spirits cannot be compared with bodies, or faith with earthly possessions.
This, indeed, is true, that just as the body is a figure or image of the soul, so also the bodily community is a figure of this Christian, spiritual community, and as the bodily community has a bodily head, so the spiritual community has a spiritual head. But who would be so bereft of sense as to maintain that the soul must have a bodily head? That would be like saying that every live animal must have on its body a painted head. If this literalist (I should say, literary person) had really understood what the Church[34] is, without doubt he would have been ashamed even to contemplate such a book as his. What wonder, therefore, that from a darkened and wandering brain issues no light, but thick, black darkness St. Paul says, Colossians iii, "Our life is not on earth, but hid with Christ in God." [Col. 3:3] For if the Church were a bodily assembly, you could tell by looking at the body whether any one were Christian, Turk or Jew; just as you can tell by the body whether a person is a man, woman or child, or whether he is white or black. Again, I can tell whether one is gathered in temporal assembly with others in Leipzig, Wittenberg, or elsewhere; but I cannot tell at all whether he is a believer or not.
This is indeed true: just like the body represents the soul, the physical community reflects this Christian, spiritual community. And just as the physical community has a physical leader, the spiritual community has a spiritual leader. But who would be so lacking in common sense as to claim that the soul needs a physical head? That would be like saying that every living animal needs to have a painted head on its body. If this literalist (or to put it more accurately, this literary person) had truly understood what the Church is, he would have been embarrassed to even think about writing such a book. So, it’s no surprise that from a confused and misguided mind comes nothing but thick, black darkness. St. Paul says in Colossians iii, "Our life is not on earth, but hidden with Christ in God." [Col. 3:3] Because if the Church were just a physical gathering, you could tell just by looking at someone whether they were Christian, Turk, or Jew, just like you can see whether someone is a man, woman, or child, or whether they are white or black. I can tell if someone is part of a physical gathering in Leipzig, Wittenberg, or elsewhere, but I can’t tell at all whether they are a believer or not.
[Sidenote: The Church a Spiritual Thing]
[Sidenote: The Church is a Spiritual Matter]
Whosoever would not go astray should, therefore, hold fast to this, that the Church[34] is a spiritual assembly of souls in one faith, and that no one is reckoned a Christian for his body's sake; in order that he may know that the true, real, right, essential Church[34] is a spiritual thing, and not anything external or outward, by whatever name it may be called. For one who is not a Christian may have all those other things, and they will never make him a Christian without true faith, which alone makes Christians. For this reason we are called Christian believers, and on Pentecost we sing:
Whoever doesn't want to go off track should remember that the Church[34] is a spiritual gathering of souls united in one faith, and that no one is considered a Christian just because of their physical presence; so they can understand that the true, real, essential Church[34] is a spiritual entity, not something external or superficial, regardless of what name it goes by. A person who isn’t a Christian might have all those other things, but they won’t become a Christian without genuine faith, which is what truly makes someone a Christian. That’s why we’re called Christian believers, and on Pentecost we sing:
We beseech Thee, Holy Spirit[35],
Let true faith our portion be.
We ask You, Holy Spirit,
Let true faith be our share.
It is in this wise, and never in any other, that the Holy
Scriptures speak of the Holy Church and of Christendom.
It is this way, and not any other, that the Holy
Scriptures talk about the Holy Church and about Christendom.
[Sidneote: The External Church]
[Sidneote: The Outside Church]
Beyond that, another way of speaking of Christendom has come into use. According to this, the name Church[36] is given to an assembly in a house or a parish, a bishopric, an archbishopric, or the papacy, in which assembly external rites are in use, such as chanting, reading, vestments. And primarily the name of "spiritual estate" is given to the bishops, priests and members of the holy orders; not on account of their faith, which they perhaps do not have, but because they have been consecrated with an external anointing, wear crowns, use a distinctive garb, make special prayers and do special works, say mass, have their places in the choir, and attend to all such external matters of worship. But violence is done to the word "spiritual," or "Church," when it is used for such external affairs, whereas it concerns faith alone, which, working in the soul, makes right and true spirituales and Christians; yet this maimer of using it has spread everywhere, to the great injury and perversion of many souls, who think that such outward show is the spiritual and only true estate in Christendom or the Church.
Beyond that, another way of talking about Christendom has emerged. In this view, the term Church is used to refer to a gathering in a home or a parish, a diocese, an archdiocese, or the papacy, where rituals like chanting, reading, and special clothing are practiced. The term "spiritual estate" is mainly applied to bishops, priests, and members of religious orders—not because of their faith, which they might lack, but because they have been ceremonially anointed, wear crowns, don specific attire, say special prayers, perform distinct rituals, celebrate mass, have their designated spots in the choir, and handle all these external aspects of worship. However, using the term "spiritual" or "Church" to describe these external activities diminishes the true meaning, which pertains solely to faith that, nurturing the soul, creates genuine and true spiritual members and Christians. Yet, this way of thinking has spread widely, causing significant harm and distortion to many souls who believe that such outward displays represent the spiritual and only genuine state within Christendom or the Church.
There is not one letter in the Holy Scriptures to show that such a purely external Church has been established by God; and I hereby challenge all those who have made this blasphemous, damnable, heretical book, or would defend it, together with all their followers, even if all the universities hold with them. If they can show me that even one letter of the Scriptures speaks of it, I am willing to recant. But I know that they cannot do it. The Canon Law and human statutes, indeed, give the name of Church or Christendom to such a thing, but that is not now before us. Therefore, for the sake of brevity and a better understanding, we shall call the two churches by different names. The first, which is the natural, essential, real and true one, let us call a spiritual, inner Christendom. The other, which is man-made and external, let us call a bodily, external Christendom: not as if we would part them asunder, but just as when I speak of a man, and call him, according to the soul, a spiritual, according to the body, a physical, man; or as the Apostle is wont to speak of the inner and of the outward man. [Rom. 7:22] Thus also the Christian assembly, according to the soul, is a communion[37] of one accord in one faith, although according to the body it cannot be assembled at one place, and yet every group is assembled in its own place. This Christendom is ruled by Canon Law and the prelates of the Church.[38] To this belong all the popes, cardinals, bishops, prelates, monks, nuns and all those who in these external things are taken to be Christians, whether they are truly Christians at heart or not. For though membership in this communion[37] does not make true Christians, because all the orders mentioned may exist without faith; nevertheless this communion is never without some who at the same time are true Christians, just as the body does not give the soul its life, and yet the soul lives in the body and, indeed, can live without the body. Those who are without faith and are outside of the first community, but are included in this second community, are dead in the sight of God, hypocrites, and but like wooden images of true Christians. And so the people of Israel were a type of the spiritual people, assembled in faith.
There isn't a single letter in the Holy Scriptures that indicates a purely external Church has been established by God; and I challenge anyone who has created this blasphemous, damnable, heretical book, or who supports it, along with all their followers, even if every university agrees with them. If they can show me that even one letter of the Scriptures mentions this, I'm willing to take back my words. But I know they can't do that. Canon Law and human rules might call it a Church or Christendom, but that's not our focus right now. Therefore, to keep things clear and easier to understand, we'll refer to the two churches by different names. The first, which is natural, essential, real, and true, we’ll call a spiritual, inner Christendom. The second, which is man-made and external, we'll call a bodily, external Christendom. This isn’t about separating them completely; it’s similar to how I refer to a person, calling them spiritual when discussing the soul and physical when discussing the body; or as the Apostle talks about the inner and outer man. [Rom. 7:22] Likewise, the Christian assembly, in terms of the soul, is a community unified in faith, even though physically they can't all gather in one place, and yet each group gathers in its own location. This Christendom is governed by Canon Law and the Church’s leaders.[38] This includes all the popes, cardinals, bishops, prelates, monks, nuns, and everyone else who, in these external matters, are recognized as Christians, regardless of whether they are truly Christians at heart. Because while being part of this community[37] doesn't make someone a true Christian—since all the roles mentioned can exist without faith—this community still includes some who are genuine Christians, just as the body doesn’t give life to the soul, but the soul lives in the body, and can indeed live without the body. Those without faith who exist outside of the first community, but are included in this second community, are dead in God's eyes, hypocrites, and just like wooden images of true Christians. And so, the people of Israel were a model of the spiritual people, gathered in faith.
[Sidenote: The Church as a Building]
[Sidenote: The Church as a Building]
The third use of the term applies the word Church, not to Christendom, but to the edifices erected for purposes of worship. And the word "spiritual" is so stretched as to cover temporal possessions, not the possessions which are truly spiritual because of faith, but those which are in the second or external Church,[39] and such possessions are called "spiritual" or Church possessions.[40] Again, the possessions of the laity are called "worldly," although the laymen who are in the first or spiritual Church[39] are much better than the worldly clergy and are truly spiritual. After this fashion it now goes with almost all the works and the government of the Church;[39] and the name "spiritual possessions" has been so exclusively applied to worldly possessions that now no one understands it to mean anything else, and this has gone so far that men regard neither the spiritual nor the external Church any more, and they squabble and quarrel about temporal possessions like the heathen, and say, they do it for the sake of the Church and of spiritual possessions. Such perversion and misuse of words and things has come from the Canon Law and human statutes, to the unspeakable corruption of Christendom.
The third use of the term refers to the Church, not as a whole Christian community, but to the buildings made for worship. The word "spiritual" has been stretched to include material possessions—not the truly spiritual possessions that come from faith, but those that belong to the second or external Church,[39] which are referred to as "spiritual" or Church possessions.[40] Meanwhile, possessions of the laity are labeled as "worldly," even though the laypeople in the first or spiritual Church[39] are often much better than the worldly clergy and are genuinely spiritual. This situation reflects almost all the actions and governance of the Church;[39] the term "spiritual possessions" has become so exclusively associated with material possessions that most people no longer understand it in any other way. This has led to a disregard for both the spiritual and external Church, with people arguing and fighting over material possessions like non-believers while claiming to do it in the name of the Church and spiritual possessions. Such a distortion and misuse of language and concepts has arisen from Canon Law and human regulations, contributing to the deep corruption of Christendom.
[Sidneote: The Head of the Church: Christ]
[Sidneote: The Head of the Church: Christ]
Now let us consider the head of Christendom. From the foregoing it follows that the first-named Christendom, which alone is the true Church, may not and cannot have Church: a head upon earth, and that no one on earth, neither bishop nor pope, can rule over it; only Christ in heaven is the head, and He ruleth alone.
Now let’s think about the leader of Christianity. From what we’ve discussed, it’s clear that the first mentioned Christianity, which is the only true Church, cannot and does not have a leader on earth, and that no one on earth, neither bishop nor pope, can govern it; only Christ in heaven is the leader, and He rules alone.
[Sidenote: Why the Church Cannot Have an Earthly Head]
[Sidenote: Why the Church Cannot Have an Earthly Head]
This is proved, first of all, in this way: How can a man rule over anything which he does not know or understand? And who can know whether a man truly believes or not? Aye, if the power of the pope extended to this point, then he could take away a Christian's faith, or direct its progress, or increase it, or change it, according to his pleasure, just as Christ can do.
This is proven, first of all, in this way: How can a person control anything they don’t know or understand? And how can anyone know if a person truly believes or not? Yes, if the pope's power reached this level, he could take away a Christian's faith, guide its development, increase it, or change it, according to his wishes, just like Christ can do.
In the second place, it is proved by the nature of the head. For it is the nature of every head joined to a body to infuse into all its members life and feeling and activity. This will be found to be true of the heads in worldly affairs. For the ruler of a country instils into his subjects all the things which are in his own mind and will, and causes all his subjects to be of like mind and will with himself, and thus they do the work he wishes to have done, and this work is truly said to have been instilled into the subjects by the prince, for without him it would not have been done. Now no man can instil into the soul of another, nor into his own soul, true faith, and the mind, will and work of Christ, but this Christ Himself must do. For neither pope nor bishop can produce faith in a man's heart, nor anything else a Christian member should have. But a Christian must have the mind and will which Christ has in heaven, as the apostle says, I. Corinthians ii [1. Cor. 2:16; 3:23]. It may also happen that a Christian member has the faith which neither pope nor bishop has; how then can the pope be his head? And if the pope cannot give to himself the life of the spiritual church, how can he instil it into another? Who has ever seen a live animal with a lifeless head? The head must give life to the body, and therefore it is clear that on earth there is no other head of the spiritual Christendom but Christ alone. Moreover, if a man were its head here below, Christendom would perish as often as a pope dies. For the body cannot live when the head is dead.
In the second place, it's demonstrated by the nature of the head. Every head connected to a body naturally gives life, feeling, and activity to all its members. This can be seen in worldly matters. The ruler of a country imparts his thoughts and intentions to his subjects, aligning them with his own mindset and desires, so they carry out the work he wants done, which is genuinely said to have been instilled in them by the prince; without him, it wouldn't happen. However, no one can instill true faith or the mind, will, and work of Christ into another person's soul, nor into their own—only Christ can do that. Neither pope nor bishop can create faith in a person's heart or anything else a Christian should possess. A Christian must embody the mind and will that Christ has in heaven, as stated by the apostle in 1 Corinthians 2:16; 3:23. It is also possible for a Christian to have faith that neither pope nor bishop possesses; so how can the pope be considered his head? And if the pope cannot provide the life of the spiritual church to himself, how can he pass it on to someone else? Has anyone ever seen a living creature with a lifeless head? The head must provide life to the body; therefore, it's clear that on earth there is no other head of spiritual Christendom but Christ alone. Moreover, if a man were its head here on earth, Christendom would cease to exist every time a pope dies. The body cannot live when the head is dead.
It follows further, that in this Church Christ can have no vicar, and therefore neither pope nor bishop is Christ's vicar or regent in this Church, nor can he ever become such. And this is proved as follows: A regent, if obedient to his lord, labors with and urges on the subjects and instils into them the same work which his lord himself instils, just as we see in temporal government, where there is one mind and will in lord, regents, and subjects. And if he were more holy than St. Peter, the pope can never instill into or create in a Christian man the work of Christ his Lord, i. e., faith, hope, love, and every grace and virtue.
It follows that in this Church, Christ can have no representative, and therefore neither the pope nor a bishop acts as Christ's representative or leader in this Church, nor can they ever be such. This is supported by the following argument: A leader, if loyal to their superior, works with and motivates the people, instilling in them the same mission that their superior instills, just like we see in government, where there is a shared mindset and will among the leader, representatives, and subjects. Even if the pope were holier than St. Peter, he can never instill or create in a Christian the work of Christ his Lord, meaning faith, hope, love, and every grace and virtue.
And if such illustration and proof were not without flaw, though founded on the Scriptures, yet St. Paul stands strong and immovable in Ephesians iv, giving to Christendom but one head and saying, "Let us be true (i. e., not external, but real and true Christians) and grow up into Him in all things, which is the head, even Christ, from Whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love." [Eph. 4:15,16] Here the apostle says clearly that the building up and increase of Christendom, which is the body of Christ, cometh alone from Christ, Who is its Head. And where can there be found another head on earth to whom such nature could be ascribed, especially since these "heads" in most cases have neither love nor faith? Besides, St. Paul referred in these words to himself, to St. Peter, and to every other Christian; and if another head were necessary he would have been utterly false in saying nothing about it.
And even if this explanation and evidence have their flaws, even though they’re based on the Scriptures, St. Paul remains solid and unshakeable in Ephesians 4, giving Christianity only one head and stating, "Let us be genuine (meaning, not just superficially, but truly and authentically Christians) and grow into Him in all things, who is the head, Christ. From Him, the whole body is properly joined together and united by what each part supplies, according to the effective working of each individual part, causing the body to grow and build itself up in love." [Eph. 4:15,16] Here, the apostle clearly states that the growth and building up of Christianity, which is the body of Christ, comes only from Christ, who is its Head. And where can there be another head on earth that could be described in such a way, especially since these so-called "heads" generally lack both love and faith? Additionally, St. Paul was referring to himself, St. Peter, and every other Christian; if another head were necessary, he would have been completely misleading by not mentioning it.
I know very well that there are some who dare to say in reference to this and similar passages that though Paul was silent [1 Cor. 3:1], he did not thereby deny that St. Peter was also a head, but was feeding the unwise with milk. Just listen to this: they claim that it is necessary for salvation to have St. Peter for a head, and yet they have the effrontery to say that Paul concealed the things which are necessary to salvation. Thus these senseless goats would rather blaspheme Paul and the Word of God than be convinced of their error, and they call it "milk for babes" when Christ is proclaimed, and "strong meat" when St. Peter is proclaimed, just as if Peter were higher, greater, and more difficult to understand than Christ himself. And this is called explaining the Scriptures and overcoming Dr. Luther; this is the way to run out of the rain and fall into the trough. What could such babblers accomplish if we should have a disputation with the Bohemians[41] and the heretics? Truly nothing, except that we should be made a mockery for all, and give them due cause to look upon us all as blustering idiots, and they become more strongly entrenched in their own belief through the foolishness of our side.
I know very well that some people have the audacity to say regarding this and similar passages that even though Paul was silent [1 Cor. 3:1], he didn't deny that St. Peter was also a leader, but was simply feeding the unwise with basic teachings. Just listen to this: they insist that it's essential for salvation to have St. Peter as a leader, and yet they shamelessly claim that Paul hid the things necessary for salvation. So, these foolish people would rather insult Paul and the Word of God than admit they’re wrong, calling it "milk for babies" when Christ is preached, and "strong meat" when St. Peter is mentioned, as if Peter were greater, higher, and harder to grasp than Christ himself. This is what they call explaining the Scriptures and refuting Dr. Luther; this is like trying to escape a rainstorm only to fall into a trough. What could such chatterboxes achieve if we were to debate with the Bohemians[41] and the heretics? Truly nothing, except that we would become a laughingstock and give them every reason to see us as blustering fools, making them more entrenched in their beliefs through our side's foolishness.
[Sidenote: The Equality of Bishops]
[Bishop Equality]
But then you ask: If the prelates are neither heads nor regents of the spiritual Church, what are they?
But then you ask: If the church leaders are neither heads nor rulers of the spiritual Church, what are they?
Let the laymen answer this, when they say: St. Peter is a messenger[42] and the other apostles are messengers too. Why should the pope be ashamed to be a messenger, if St. Peter himself is no more? But beware, ye laymen, or the super-learned Romanists will burn you at the stake as heretics because ye would make the pope a messenger and letter-carrier. But ye have a strong argument, for the Greek Apostolos is in German "messenger," and thus are they called throughout the Gospel.
Let the ordinary people answer this when they say: St. Peter is a messenger and the other apostles are messengers too. Why should the pope be embarrassed to be a messenger if St. Peter himself is just the same? But be careful, you ordinary folks, or the overly educated Romanists will condemn you as heretics because you would categorize the pope as just a messenger and letter-carrier. But you have a solid point, since the Greek Apostolos translates to "messenger" in German, and that's what they’re called throughout the Gospel.
If, then, they are all messengers of the one Lord Christ, who would be so foolish as to say that so great a lord, in a matter of such great importance for the whole world, sends but one messenger, and he, in turn, sends other messengers of his own? Then St. Peter would have to be called, not a Zwölfbote (one of the twelve messengers), but an only-messenger, and none of the others would remain Zwölfboten, but they would all be St. Peter's Elfboten (i. e., his eleven messengers). But what is the custom at court? Is it not true that a lord has many messengers? Aye, when does it happen that many messengers are sent with the same message to one place, as now we have priest, bishop, archbishop and pope, all ruling over the same city, not to mention other tyrants, who shove in their rule somewhere between the rest? Christ sent all the apostles into the world with His Word and message with full, equal powers, as St. Paul says: "We are ambassadors for Christ." [1 Cor. 5:20] And in I. Corinthians iii. he says: "What is Peter? What is Paul? Servants through whom ye believed." [1 Cor. 3:5] This ambassadorship means to feed, to rule, to be bishop, and so forth. But that the pope makes all the messengers of God to be subject to himself, is the same as if one messenger of a prince detained all the other messengers, and then sent them out when it suited his pleasure, while he himself went nowhere. Would that be pleasing to the prince, if he found it out?
If they are all messengers of the one Lord Christ, who would be foolish enough to claim that such a great lord, concerning something so significant for the entire world, sends just one messenger, who then sends out his own messengers? Then St. Peter would have to be called not a Zwölfbote (one of the twelve messengers), but the only messenger, and none of the others would remain Zwölfboten, but they would all just be St. Peter's Elfboten (i.e., his eleven messengers). But what's the custom at court? Isn't it true that a lord has many messengers? Yes, when do we ever see multiple messengers sent with the same message to one place, just like we have priests, bishops, archbishops, and the pope all governing the same city, not to mention other tyrants who impose their rule among the rest? Christ sent all the apostles into the world with His Word and message, giving them full, equal powers, as St. Paul states: "We are ambassadors for Christ." [1 Cor. 5:20] And in 1 Corinthians 3, he says: "What is Peter? What is Paul? Servants through whom you believed." [1 Cor. 3:5] This ambassadorship means to feed, to rule, to be a bishop, and so forth. But the fact that the pope makes all God’s messengers subject to himself is like one messenger of a prince holding back all the other messengers and then sending them out only when it suits him, while he himself does nothing. Would the prince be pleased if he found that out?
Should you say: True, but one messenger may be above another; I would reply: One may indeed be better and more skilful than another, as St. Paul was when compared with Peter; but since they bring one and the same message, one cannot be above another by reason of his office. But, put the other way, St. Peter is not a Zwölfbote at all, but a special messenger and lord over the Eleven. What can it be that one has above the others, if they all have one and the same message and commission from the one Lord?
Should you say: True, but one messenger might be better than another; I would respond: One can indeed be more skilled and talented than another, as St. Paul was in comparison to Peter; however, since they deliver the same message, one cannot be considered superior to another because of their position. On the flip side, St. Peter is not a Zwölfbote at all, but rather a special messenger and leader over the Eleven. What advantage does one have over the others if they all share the same message and mission from the one Lord?
Forasmuch then as all bishops are equal by divine right and sit in the Apostles' places, I may gladly concede that by human right one is above the other in the external Church. For here the pope instils what is in his own mind, as, for instance, his Canon Law and human inventions, whereby Christendom is ruled with outward show; but that does not make Christians, as I have said above[43]; neither are they heretics who are not under the same laws and ceremonies or human ordinances. For customs change with the country.
Since all bishops are equal by divine right and occupy the positions of the Apostles, I can happily agree that, by human right, one can be above another in the outward Church. Here, the pope imposes his own ideas, like his Canon Law and human creations, which govern Christendom with an outward appearance; however, that doesn’t define who is a Christian, as I mentioned earlier[43]; nor are those who do not follow the same laws, ceremonies, or human rules considered heretics. Customs vary depending on the country.
All this is confined by the article in the Creed: "I believe in the Holy Ghost, one Holy Christian Church, the Communion of Saints." No one says: "I believe in the Holy Ghost, one Holy Roman Church, a Communion of the Romans." Thus it is clear that the Holy Church is not bound to Rome, but is as wide as the world, the assembly of those of one faith, a spiritual and not a bodily thing, for that which one believes is not bodily or visible. The external Roman Church we all see, therefore it cannot be the true Church, which is believed, and which is a community or assembly of the saints in faith, for no one can see who is a saint or a believer.
All of this is stated in the Creed: "I believe in the Holy Spirit, one Holy Christian Church, the Communion of Saints." No one says: "I believe in the Holy Spirit, one Holy Roman Church, a Communion of the Romans." So it's clear that the Holy Church isn't limited to Rome, but encompasses the whole world, being the gathering of those who share the same faith—it's spiritual, not physical, because what one believes isn't something you can touch or see. The external Roman Church is visible to all of us, so it can't be the true Church, which is based on belief and is a community or gathering of the faithful, because no one can see who is a saint or a believer.
[Sidenote: The Marks of the Church]
[Sidenote: The Marks of the Church]
The external marks, whereby one can perceive where this Church is on earth, are baptism, the Sacrament, and the Gospel; and not Rome, or this place, or that. For where baptism and the Gospel are, no one may doubt that there are saints, even if it were only the babes in their cradles. But neither Rome nor the papal power is a mark of the Church,[44] for that power cannot make Christians, as baptism and the Gospel do; and therefore it does not belong to the true Church[44] and is but a human ordinance.
The signs that show where this Church exists on earth are baptism, the Sacrament, and the Gospel—not Rome, or this place, or that. Wherever baptism and the Gospel are present, there's no doubt that there are believers, even if they are just babies in their cribs. But neither Rome nor the papal authority is a sign of the Church,[44] because that authority can't create Christians like baptism and the Gospel can; therefore, it doesn’t belong to the true Church[44] and is just a human institution.
Therefore I would advise this Romanist to go to school another year, and to learn what the Church or the head of the Church[44] really means, before he drives out the poor heretics with writings of such height, depth, breadth and length. It grieves me to the heart that we must suffer these mad saints to tear asunder and blaspheme the Holy Scriptures with such insolence, license, and shamelessness, and that they make bold to deal with the Scriptures, whereas they are not fit to care for a herd of swine. Heretofore I have held that where something was to be proved by the Scriptures, the Scriptures quoted must really refer to the point at issue. I learn now that it is enough to throw many passages together helter-skelter, whether they are fit or not. If this is to be the way, then I can easily prove from the Scriptures that beer is better than wine.[45]
Therefore, I would advise this Romanist to attend school for another year and learn what the Church or the head of the Church really means before he drives away the poor heretics with writings of such great depth, breadth, and complexity. It truly pains me that we have to endure these mad saints tearing apart and blaspheming the Holy Scriptures with such arrogance, carelessness, and shamelessness, and that they have the audacity to deal with the Scriptures when they’re not even fit to look after a herd of pigs. Until now, I believed that when something was to be proved by the Scriptures, the quoted passages had to actually relate to the issue at hand. I’ve now learned that it’s enough to throw a bunch of passages together randomly, regardless of their relevance. If this is the way it’s going to be, then I can easily prove from the Scriptures that beer is better than wine.
Of the same character is his statement in both his Latin and his German treatise[46] that Christ is the head of the Turks, heathen, Christians, heretics, robbers, harlots and knaves. It would be no wonder if all the stone and timber in the cloister stared and hooted this miserable wretch to death for his horrible blasphemy. What shall I say? Has Christ become a keeper of all the houses of shame, a head of all the murderers, of all heretics, of all rogues? Woe unto thee, thou miserable wretch, that thou thus holdest up thy Lord for all the world to blaspheme! The poor man would write about the head of Christendom, and in utter madness imagines that "head" and "Lord" are one and the same. Christ is, indeed, Lord of all things, of all the good and the evil, of the angels and the devils, the virgins and the harlots; but He is not the head, except only of the good, believing Christians, assembled in the spirit. For a head must be united with its body, as I showed above from St. Paul in Ephesians iv,[47] and the members must cleave to the head and receive from it their activity and life. For this reason Christ cannot be the head of an evil community, although it is subject unto Him as Lord; even as His kingdom, namely Christendom, is not a bodily community or kingdom, yet all things are subject unto Him, be they spiritual or bodily, of hell or of heaven.
Of the same nature is his claim in both his Latin and German writings[46] that Christ is the head of the Turks, pagans, Christians, heretics, thieves, prostitutes, and scoundrels. It wouldn’t be surprising if all the stone and wood in the cloister screamed and jeered this wretched fool to death for his terrible blasphemy. What can I say? Has Christ become a keeper of all the houses of shame, the leader of all murderers, all heretics, all crooks? Woe to you, miserable wretch, for presenting your Lord for the whole world to blaspheme! The poor man would write about the head of Christendom and in sheer madness believes that "head" and "Lord" are one and the same. Christ is indeed Lord of all things, both good and evil, angels and devils, virgins and harlots; but He is only the head of the good, believing Christians gathered in spirit. A head must be connected to its body, as I previously demonstrated from St. Paul in Ephesians iv,[47] and the members must adhere to the head and draw their energy and life from it. For this reason, Christ cannot be the head of an evil community, even though it is subject to Him as Lord; just as His kingdom, known as Christendom, is not a physical community or kingdom, yet all things are subject to Him, whether they are spiritual or physical, from hell or heaven.
Thus in his first argument this reviler vilified and slandered me; in this second argument he reviled Christ much more than me. For even if he thinks much of his own holy prayers and fastings in contrast to a poor sinner like me, yet he has not called me a brothelkeeper and archknave, as he has Christ.
Thus in his first argument this critic insulted and slandered me; in this second argument he insulted Christ even more than me. For even if he thinks highly of his own holy prayers and fasting compared to a poor sinner like me, he still hasn't called me a brothel keeper and arch villain, as he has Christ.
[Sidenote: III. The Argument from Scripture]
[Sidenote: III. The Argument from Scripture]
Now comes the third argument, in which the high majesty of God is made a target, and the Holy Spirit becomes a liar and a heretic, so that by all means the contention of the Romanists may be upheld.
Now comes the third argument, where the greatness of God is attacked, and the Holy Spirit is labeled a liar and a heretic, all to support the claims of the Roman Catholics.
The third argument is taken from the Scriptures, just as the second was taken from reason and the first from folly, so that everything may be done in proper order. It runs as follows: The Old Testament was a type of the New Testament, and because it had a bodily high-priest, the New Testament must have one likewise—how else shall the type be fulfilled? For has not Christ Himself said: "Not one jot or tittle of the law shall pass away; it shall all be fulfilled"? [Matt. 5:18]
The third argument comes from the Scriptures, just like the second came from reason and the first from foolishness, ensuring that everything is done in the right order. It goes like this: The Old Testament served as a model for the New Testament, and since it had a physical high priest, the New Testament must have one too—otherwise, how will the model be fulfilled? After all, hasn’t Christ Himself said: "Not one jot or tittle of the law shall pass away; it shall all be fulfilled"? [Matt. 5:18]
A book more foolish, senseless, and blind I have never seen. Once before, another[48] wrote the same thing against me, so coarse and foolish that I could not but scorn it. But because they have not sharpened their wits, I must speak bluntly for the thickheads; I see that the ass does not appreciate a harp, I must offer him thistles.
A book more foolish, senseless, and clueless I've never seen. One other person wrote something similar against me before, so crude and silly that I couldn't help but laugh at it. But since they haven't gotten any smarter, I have to be straightforward for the dense ones; I see that the donkey doesn't understand a harp, so I have to give him thorns.
[Sidenote: Type and Fulfillment]
[Note: Type and Fulfillment]
In the first place, it is evident that a type is material and external, and the fulfilment of the type is spiritual and internal; what the type reveals to the bodily eye, its fulfilment must reveal to the eye of faith alone, or it is not really a fulfilment.
In the first place, it's obvious that a type is material and external, while the fulfillment of the type is spiritual and internal; what the type shows to the physical eye, its fulfillment must show to the eye of faith alone, or it isn't truly a fulfillment.
I must prove that by illustration. By many miracles the Jewish people came in a bodily manner out of the bodily land of Egypt, as is written in the book of Exodus [Ex. 13:18 ff.]. This type does not mean that we, too, shall in a bodily manner come out of Egypt, but that our souls by a right faith shall come forth from sins and the spiritual power of the devil; so that the bodily assembly of the Jewish people signifies the spiritual and internal assembly of the Christian people in faith. Thus, as they drank water from a bodily rock, and ate bodily manna with the bodily mouth, so with the mouth of the heart we drink and eat of the spiritual Rock, the Lord Christ, when we believe in Him [1 Cor. 10:3]. Again, Moses set a serpent on a pole, and whosoever looked upon it was made whole [Num. 21:8]. That signifies Christ on the Cross; whosoever believeth in Him, is saved. And so throughout the entire Old Testament, all the bodily, visible things in it signify in the New Testament spiritual and inward things, which one cannot see, but possesses only in faith. St. Augustine understood the types in this manner, when he says[49] on John iii, "This is the difference between the type and its fulfilment: the type gave temporal goods and life, but the fulfilment gives spiritual and eternal life." [John 3:14] Now the outward show of Roman power can give neither temporal nor eternal life, and therefore it is not only no fulfilment of the type of Aaron, but far less than the type, for that was established by divine direction. For if the papacy could give either eternal or temporal life, all the popes would be saved and be in good health. But he who has Christ and the spiritual Church, is truly saved and has the fulfilment of the type, yet only in faith. And since the pope's external show and the oneness of his Church can be seen with the eyes, and we all see it, it is not possible that he can be the fulfilment of any type. For the fulfilment of types must not be seen, but believed.
I need to illustrate this. The Jewish people physically left the land of Egypt through many miracles, as described in the book of Exodus [Ex. 13:18 ff.]. This doesn’t mean we will also leave Egypt physically, but rather that our souls, through true faith, will break free from sin and the spiritual influence of the devil. The physical gathering of the Jewish people represents the spiritual and internal gathering of Christians through faith. Just as they drank water from a physical rock and ate physical manna with their mouths, we, with the mouth of our hearts, drink and eat from the spiritual Rock, the Lord Christ, when we believe in Him [1 Cor. 10:3]. Moreover, when Moses set a serpent on a pole, anyone who looked at it was healed [Num. 21:8]. This symbolizes Christ on the Cross; whoever believes in Him is saved. Throughout the Old Testament, all the physical, visible things point to spiritual, internal truths in the New Testament, which cannot be seen but are held through faith. St. Augustine understood these symbols when he said [49] on John iii, “This is the difference between the type and its fulfillment: the type provided temporary goods and life, but the fulfillment grants spiritual and eternal life.” [John 3:14] The visible display of Roman power cannot provide either temporary or eternal life, so it is not only not the fulfillment of Aaron’s type, but much less than the type, as that was established by divine guidance. If the papacy could provide eternal or temporary life, all the popes would be saved and healthy. But those who have Christ and the spiritual Church are truly saved and fulfill the type, though only in faith. Since the pope's external display and the unity of his Church can be seen, and we can all witness it, it’s impossible for him to fulfill any type. Fulfillments of types must be believed, not seen.
[Sidenote: The High-Priest Not a Type of the Pope]
[Sidenote: The High Priest Is Not a Type of the Pope]
Now see—are they not skilful masters who make the high-priest of the Old Testament to be a type of the pope, when the latter makes as much, nay more of an external show than the former, and thus a bodily thing is made to be the fulfilment of a bodily type! That would mean that type and fulfilment are exactly alike. But if this type is to stand, the new high-priest must be spiritual, and his graces and adornment likewise spiritual. The prophets also saw this when they said of us, Psalm cxxxii, "Thy priests shall be clothed with faith or righteousness, and Thine anointed ones shall be adorned with joy." [Ps. 132:9] As if he would say: Our priests are types, and are clothed externally with silks and purples, but your priests shall be clothed with grace inwardly. Thus is this miserable Romanist routed with his "type," and his jumbling together of much Scripture has been in vain. For the pope is an external priest, and they think of him in his external power and adornment. Therefore Aaron cannot have been a type of him; we must have another.
Now look—aren’t they skillful masters who make the high priest of the Old Testament a representation of the pope, when the latter creates just as much, if not more, of an external display than the former? This way, a physical being is turned into the realization of a physical type! That would suggest that the type and its fulfillment are exactly the same. However, if this type is to hold, the new high priest must be spiritual, and his qualities and adornments must also be spiritual. The prophets recognized this when they said about us in Psalm 132, "Your priests will be clothed with faith or righteousness, and Your anointed ones will be decorated with joy." [Ps. 132:9] It’s as if he’s saying: Our priests are types, and are clothed outwardly with silks and purples, but Your priests will be inwardly clothed with grace. Thus, this unfortunate Romanist is defeated with his "type," and his mishmash of Scripture has been in vain. For the pope is an external priest, and people think of him in terms of his external power and adornment. So, Aaron cannot have been a type of him; we need another one.
[Sidenote: Scriptural Types Interpreted in Scripture]
[Sidenote: Scriptural Types Interpreted in Scripture]
In the second place—in order that they may realize how far they are from the truth—even if they had been wise enough to give a spiritual fulfilment to the type, yet that would not stand the test, unless they had a clear passage from the Scriptures, which brought the type and its spiritual fulfilment together; otherwise every one could make out of it what he desired. For instance, that the serpent lifted up by Moses signifies Christ, is taught by John iii [John 3:14]. If it were not for that passage my reason might evolve very strange and weird fancies out of that type. Again, that Adam was a type of Christ, I learn not from myself, but from St. Paul in Romans v [Rom. 5:14]. Again, that the rock in the wilderness signifies Christ, is not so stated by my reason, but by St. Paul in I. Corinthians x. [1 Cor. 10:4] Therefore, let none other explain the type but the Holy Spirit Himself, Who has given the type and wrought the fulfilment, in order that both promise and performance, type and fulfilment, and the interpretation of both, may be God's own and not man's, and our faith be founded not on human, but on divine works and words.
In the second place—in order for them to realize how far they are from the truth—even if they had been wise enough to give a spiritual meaning to the type, it wouldn't hold up unless they had a clear reference from the Scriptures that connected the type and its spiritual meaning; otherwise, anyone could interpret it however they wanted. For example, that the serpent lifted up by Moses represents Christ is stated in John 3:14. Without that passage, my reasoning could come up with very strange and bizarre interpretations of that type. Similarly, the idea that Adam was a type of Christ comes not from my own thoughts, but from St. Paul in Romans 5:14. Again, the interpretation that the rock in the wilderness represents Christ is not something I derive from my reasoning, but from St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 10:4. Therefore, let no one explain the type except the Holy Spirit Himself, Who has given the type and brought about the fulfillment, so that both the promise and the reality, the type and its fulfillment, and the understanding of both, may come from God and not from humans, ensuring that our faith is based not on human efforts, but on divine works and words.
What leads the Jews astray but that they interpret the types as they please, without the Scriptures? What has led so many heretics astray but the interpretation of the types without reference to the Scriptures? And though the pope were something spiritual, yet even then it would count for nothing if I made Aaron to be his type, unless I could point to a passage where it is explicitly stated: Behold, Aaron was a type of the pope. Otherwise who could prevent me from assuming that Aaron was a type of the bishop of Prague? St. Augustine has stated that types are not valid in controversy unless supported by the Scriptures.[50]
What leads the Jews off track except for their own interpretations of the types without considering the Scriptures? What has caused so many heretics to go astray but their interpretation of the types without referencing the Scriptures? And even if the pope were something spiritual, it wouldn't matter if I claimed Aaron was a type of him, unless I could point to a specific passage that says: Look, Aaron was a type of the pope. Otherwise, who could stop me from saying that Aaron was a type of the bishop of Prague? St. Augustine said that types aren't valid in disputes unless they are backed by the Scriptures.[50]
But now this poor chatterbox has neither: no spiritual, inward high-priest and no passage of the Scriptures; he goes at it blindly with his own dreams, and assumes as his basis that Aaron was the type of St. Peter, the very thing which is in greatest need of foundation and proof, and he just goes on prattling that the law must be fulfilled and not one iota omitted. My dear Romanist, who has ever doubted that the law of the Old Testament and its types must be fulfilled in the New? There was no need of your scholarship to establish that. But here you might make a great show and demonstrate by your ingenuity that this fulfilment occurs in Peter or in the pope. You are as mute as a stick when it is time to speak out, and a chatterbox when speech is unnecessary. Have you not learned your logic better than that? You argue your major premises, which no one questions, and assume the correctness of your minor premises, which every one questions, and then you draw the conclusion to suit yourself.
But now this poor chatterbox has neither: no spiritual leader and no scripture to guide him; he goes about it blindly with his own dreams, assuming that Aaron was the model for St. Peter, which is precisely the claim that needs solid evidence and support, and he just keeps babbling that the law has to be followed and not a single dot should be missed. My dear Romanist, who has ever doubted that the law of the Old Testament and its symbols must be realized in the New? You didn’t need your expertise to prove that. But here you could really shine and show with your cleverness that this fulfillment happens in Peter or in the pope. You’re as silent as a log when it’s time to speak up, and a chatterbox when words are unnecessary. Haven’t you learned your logic better than that? You argue your main points that no one questions and assume the truth of your supporting points, which everyone questions, and then you draw a conclusion that favors you.
[Sidenote: A Lesson in Logic]
[Sidenote: A Lesson in Logic]
Listen to me, I will give you a better lesson in logic. I agree with you in saying: All that is typified by the high-priest in the Old Testament must be fulfilled in the New, as St. Paul says in I. Corinthians i. Thus far we agree. Now you continue: St. Peter, or the pope, was typified by Aaron. Here I say, Nay. And what can you do then? Now show your learning, and call the whole crowd of Romanists to assist you, bring just one jot or tittle from the Scriptures in defence, and I will call you a hero. On what foundation have you builded, however? On your own dreams; and yet you boast you will argue against me with the Scriptures. It was not necessary for you thus to play the fool against me, I should have had a fool to overcome at any rate.
Listen to me, I’ll give you a better lesson in logic. I agree with you that everything represented by the high priest in the Old Testament must be fulfilled in the New, as St. Paul states in 1 Corinthians. So far, we agree. Now you continue: St. Peter, or the pope, was represented by Aaron. Here I say, no. And what can you do now? Show your knowledge, gather all the Romanists to support you, bring just one tiny bit from the Scriptures as defense, and I’ll call you a hero. But what have you built your argument on? Your own fantasies; and yet you brag about debating me with the Scriptures. You didn't need to act foolishly against me; I would have had a fool to defeat regardless.
[Sidenote: Aaron a Type of Christ]
[Sidenote: Aaron a Type of Christ]
Listen to me further: I say that Aaron was a type of Christ, and not of the pope. And when I say this, I do not utter my own invention, as you do; but I will prove it, so that neither you, nor the world, nor all the devils shall overthrow it. In the first place, Christ is a spiritual priest for the inner man; for He sitteth in heaven, and maketh intercession for us as a priest, teaches us inwardly in the heart, and does everything a priest should do in mediating between God and man, as St. Paul says, Romans iii, and the whole Epistle to the Hebrews. Aaron, the type, is bodily and external, but the fulfilment is spiritual and inward, and the two agree together. [Rom. 3:25]
Listen to me for a moment: I’m saying that Aaron represented Christ, not the pope. And when I say this, I’m not just coming up with my own ideas like you do; I’ll prove it in a way that neither you, nor anyone else, nor all the devils can challenge it. First of all, Christ is a spiritual priest for our inner selves; He sits in heaven and intercedes for us as a priest, teaches us from within our hearts, and performs all the duties a priest should when mediating between God and humanity, just as St. Paul mentions in Romans 3 and throughout the Book of Hebrews. Aaron, as a type, is physical and external, while the fulfillment is spiritual and internal, and these two concepts align. [Rom. 3:25]
Secondly, in order not to bring my own thoughts, I have the passage, Psalm cx, "The Lord hath sworn and will not repent: Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek." [Ps. 110:4] Can you also bring a passage like that about St. Peter or the pope? For I think that you will not deny that this passage refers to Christ, as St. Paul, in Hebrews v. [Heb. 5:6] and at many other places, and our Lord Christ Himself, in Matthew xxii, so explain it [Matt. 22:44]. Thus we can see how beautifully the Romanists treat the Scriptures and make out of them what they like, as if they were a nose of wax, to be pulled around at will.
Secondly, to avoid inserting my own opinions, I have the passage, Psalm 110:4, "The Lord has sworn and will not change His mind: You are a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek." Can you also provide a passage like that about St. Peter or the pope? I believe you won't deny that this passage refers to Christ, as St. Paul points out in Hebrews 5:6 and in many other places, and our Lord Christ Himself, in Matthew 22:44, explains it. This shows how conveniently the Romanists interpret the Scriptures, twisting them to fit their needs, as if they were a piece of clay to be shaped at will.
Now we have proved by the Scriptures that Christ is the High-priest of the New Testament. Clearer still is Paul's comparison of Aaron and Christ in Hebrews ix, when he says: "Into the first tabernacle the priests went every day, to offer the sacrifices; but into the second went the high-priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself and for the sin of the people. The Holy Ghost thus signifying that the way to the true, holy tabernacle was not yet made manifest, while the first tabernacle was yet standing, which was a type or figure needful for the time then present. But Christ being come, a high-priest of spiritual possessions to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this temporal building: neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by His own blood He entered in once into the holy place, having obtained an eternal redemption." [Heb. 9:6 ff.]
Now we have proven through the Scriptures that Christ is the High Priest of the New Testament. Paul's comparison of Aaron and Christ in Hebrews 9 makes this even clearer when he says: "The priests went into the first tabernacle every day to offer sacrifices; but the high priest went into the second one alone once a year, not without blood, which he offered for himself and for the sins of the people. The Holy Spirit was indicating that the way to the true, holy tabernacle had not yet been revealed while the first tabernacle was still standing, which was a necessary symbol for that time. But now that Christ has come, a high priest of the spiritual blessings to come, He has entered through a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made by human hands, meaning not of this temporary structure: and not by the blood of goats and calves, but by His own blood, He entered once into the holy place, having secured an eternal redemption." [Heb. 9:6 ff.]
What do you say to this, my super-learned Romanist? Paul says: The high-priest typified Christ; you say, St. Peter. Paul says, Christ entered not into a temporal building; you say, He is in the temporal building at Rome. Paul says, He entered in once, and hath obtained an eternal redemption, and makes the type to be altogether spiritual and heavenly, which you make to be earthly and external. What can you do now? My advice is this: Clench your fist, smite him on the jaw, and say he is a liar, a heretic, a poisoner, just as you do to me; and you will be like your father Zedekiah, who smote Micaiah on the cheek [1 Kings 22:24]. Do you not see, wretched blasphemer, whither your counsellors and your own madness have brought you? [John 5:43] Where are they now, those big-wigs, who interdicted my sermon on both kinds in the Sacrament?[51] It served them right. They would not tolerate nor hear the Gospel, and now they shall hear instead the lies and blasphemies of the Evil Spirit, even as Christ says to the Jews, "I am come in My Father's name, and ye receive Me not; another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive." [John 5:43]
What do you think of this, my highly educated Romanist? Paul says: The high priest represented Christ; you say it's St. Peter. Paul says, Christ didn't enter a physical building; you say He is in the physical building in Rome. Paul says, He entered once and obtained eternal redemption, making the representation purely spiritual and heavenly, while you make it earthly and external. What can you do now? My advice is this: Clench your fist, hit him on the jaw, and call him a liar, a heretic, a poisoner, just like you do to me; and you will be like your father Zedekiah, who struck Micaiah on the cheek [1 Kings 22:24]. Do you not see, wretched blasphemer, where your advisors and your own madness have led you? [John 5:43] Where are those big shots now, who banned my sermon on both kinds in the Sacrament?[51] They got what they deserved. They wouldn't tolerate or listen to the Gospel, and now they'll hear instead the lies and blasphemies of the Evil Spirit, just as Christ says to the Jews, "I came in My Father's name, and you do not accept Me; another will come in his own name, him you will accept." [John 5:43]
But you might say, St. Peter too is typified by Aaron, along with Christ; and I answer, if you must keep on, you could also say that Aaron was a type of the Turk; and who could prevent you, since you delight in such senseless chatter. But you have given promise to argue from the Scriptures; now do it, and leave your dreams at home. Moreover, where faith is concerned, one must contend not with uncertain Scripture texts, but with those that refer to the issue in a way that is certain, clear, and simple; otherwise the Evil Spirit would toss us hither and yon, until at last we should not know at all where we were; just as has happened to many with these little words, Petros and Petra[52] in Matthew xvi [Matt. 16:18].
But you might say that St. Peter is also represented by Aaron, along with Christ; and I respond, if you must continue, you could also say that Aaron was a representation of the Turk; and who could stop you, since you enjoy such pointless talk. However, you promised to argue based on the Scriptures; so go ahead and do that, and leave your fantasies aside. Moreover, when it comes to faith, one must argue not with ambiguous Scripture passages, but with those that address the issue clearly, directly, and straightforwardly; otherwise, the Evil Spirit would lead us all over the place, until we wouldn’t know at all where we were; just like what has happened to many with these small words, Petros and Petra[52] in Matthew xvi [Matt. 16:18].
It would have been something less of a lie and a blasphemy for you to have said that Aaron was a type of Christ and also of St. Peter. But now you just scream with all your might that Aaron was not a type of Christ, but of St. Peter, and wantonly you strike St. Paul in the face. And in order that nothing may be lacking in this perfect piece of folly, you go on to say: Moses was a type of Christ. And you say this not only without any cause or indication in the Scriptures—just as if you were more than God, and everything which you emit must be taken for Gospel—but contrary to all the Scriptures, which make Moses a type of the Law, as St. Paul does in II. Corinthians iii. [2 Cor. 3:7] It is not necessary to go into this just now, else you might strike him on the jaw again in your wantonness and insolence. Such venom you have imbibed from that man Emser's heretical and blasphemous output,[53] which I will give the answer it deserves when Sir Knight Eck comes along with his flourish.[54] You cannot carry it off in that way, my dear Romanists. I cannot prevent it by force, but you shall not bring any Scripture in support of it. Praise God, I am not quite ready to bite the dust.
It would have been less of a lie and a disgrace for you to say that Aaron was a representation of Christ and also of St. Peter. But now you just shout with all your strength that Aaron was not a representation of Christ, but of St. Peter, and you brazenly slap St. Paul in the face. And to make this complete foolishness even worse, you go on to say: Moses was a representation of Christ. You say this not only without any reason or evidence in the Scriptures—acting as if you’re above God and everything you say must be taken as truth—but also against all the Scriptures, which identify Moses as a representation of the Law, as St. Paul does in II. Corinthians iii. [2 Cor. 3:7] There’s no need to delve into this right now, or you might hit him again in your arrogance and insolence. You’ve absorbed such venom from that man Emser’s heretical and blasphemous writings,[53] which I will respond to as it deserves when Sir Knight Eck comes along with his showy arguments.[54] You can’t get away with it like that, my dear Romanists. I can't stop you with force, but you won’t find any Scripture to back it up. Thank God, I’m not ready to give in just yet.
[Sidenote: Types of the Apostles]
[Sidenote: Types of Apostles]
Now it is clear, I take it, that the third argument of his Romanist is rank heresy and blasphemy, for it flatly contradicts God the Holy Ghost and makes Him a liar, and utterly demolishes St. Paul. For since Aaron is a type of Christ, he cannot be a type of St. Peter. For what the Scriptures ascribe to Christ must not be ascribed to any other, so that the Scriptures may ever have one simple, direct, indisputable meaning, on which our faith may rest without wavering [Exod. 28:17 ff.]. This I will grant, that Peter is one of the twelve precious stones in the breastplate of Aaron, whereby there may be signified that the twelve Apostles, chosen in Christ, and known from all eternity, are the highest and most precious jewels in Christendom, but I can never allow Peter to become Aaron. Again, I will admit that St. Peter is one of the twelve lions that stood beside Solomon's great throne [1 Kings 10:19], but Christ must remain for me the one King Solomon. I will let the twelve Apostles be the twelve wells of water in the wilderness of Elim [Exod. 15:27], on this condition, however, that the bright cloud and pillar shall be nothing other than Christ himself. And just as little as the power of any one of these twelve extends over the others, so little does Peter have power over the other apostles, and the pope over other bishops and priests, by divine right.
Now it's clear, I think, that the third argument of his Romanist is pure heresy and blasphemy, as it directly contradicts God the Holy Spirit and makes Him a liar, completely undermining St. Paul. Since Aaron represents Christ, he cannot represent St. Peter. What the Scriptures attribute to Christ should not be attributed to anyone else, ensuring that the Scriptures always have one straightforward, clear, undeniable meaning, upon which our faith can rest without doubt [Exod. 28:17 ff.]. I’ll acknowledge that Peter is one of the twelve precious stones in Aaron's breastplate, symbolizing that the twelve Apostles, chosen in Christ and known from all eternity, are the most significant and cherished jewels in Christianity, but I can never accept Peter as Aaron. Again, I will agree that St. Peter is one of the twelve lions beside Solomon's great throne [1 Kings 10:19], but Christ must remain the one true King Solomon for me. I’ll accept the twelve Apostles as the twelve wells of water in the wilderness of Elim [Exod. 15:27], on the condition that the bright cloud and pillar represent nothing other than Christ Himself. Just as none of these twelve have authority over the others, Peter has no authority over the other apostles, and the pope has no divine right over other bishops and priests.
[Sidenote: Wherein the Pope is Untrue to the Type of Aaron]
[Sidenote: Where the Pope is Unfaithful to the Type of Aaron]
One thing more, my good, dear Romanists, and then I have done. I ask most graciously for a correct answer. If Aaron was a type of the pope in external authority, vestments and state, why was he not a type in all other external and bodily matters; if it holds in one thing, why not in all the others?
One more thing, my good, dear Romanists, and then I'll be done. I kindly ask for a clear answer. If Aaron represented the pope in terms of external authority, clothing, and status, why wasn’t he a representation in all other external and physical matters? If it works for one thing, why not for all the others?
It is written that the high-priest shall not take a widow or a divorced woman, but shall wed a virgin [Lev. 21:14]; why do they not give the pope a virgin to wed, so that the type may be fulfilled? Nay, why does the pope forbid matrimony to the whole priesthood, not only contrary to the Old Testament type, but also in opposition to God, and against right, reason, and nature, a thing which he has no authority, nor power, nor right to do, and over which the Church has never exercised authority, nor should it ever do so. So by his own caprice, without need, he has caused Christendom to be filled with whores, sinners, and guilty consciences, as St. Paul says of him, I. Timothy iv: "In the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their conscience seared with a hot iron, forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created, etc." [1 Tim. 4:1 ff.]
It is stated that the high priest should not marry a widow or a divorced woman, but should take a virgin [Lev. 21:14]; so why don’t they give the pope a virgin to marry, to fulfill that role? Furthermore, why does the pope prohibit marriage for all priests, which is not only against the Old Testament example but also goes against God, right, reason, and nature? He has no authority, power, or right to do this, and the Church has never held authority on this matter, nor should it ever. By his own whim, unnecessarily, he has led Christendom to be filled with prostitutes, sinners, and guilty consciences. As St. Paul mentions about him in I Timothy 4: "In the latter times, some will abandon the faith, paying attention to deceiving spirits and teachings of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, with their consciences seared as with a hot iron, forbidding marriage, and commanding abstention from foods that God created, etc." [1 Tim. 4:1 ff.]
Does Paul herein not hit the Roman laws, which forbid the priesthood to marry, and command all Christians to abstain from butter, eggs, milk, and meats on certain days, while God Himself has left it to the free choice of Christians in every estate to eat or to marry, as they desire? Where are you now, my Romanist of the observance, with all your ranting that not one detail of the Old Testament type shall be omitted, and that every iota must be fulfilled? Yea, where is the pope, the successor of St. Peter, who was married, as was St. Paul[55] and all the Apostles?
Does Paul not criticize the Roman laws that prohibit priests from marrying and require all Christians to avoid butter, eggs, milk, and meat on certain days, while God has allowed Christians in every situation the freedom to choose whether to eat or marry as they wish? Where are you now, my Roman friend who observes all these rules, with all your claims that not a single detail of the Old Testament should be ignored and that every tiny aspect must be fulfilled? And where is the pope, the successor of St. Peter, who was married, just like St. Paul and all the Apostles?
[Sidenote: The Tonsure]
[Sidenote: The Haircut]
Again, the Old Testament high-priest was not permitted to have his head shorn [Lev. 21:5]. But why does the pope have a tonsure, and all the other priests, too? Wherein is the type fulfilled here to the very dot? Again, the High-priest was forbidden to own any portion of Israel's land, but subsisted entirely on the offerings of the people. Pray, why is the occupant of the papal throne so furious to possess the whole world, and has not only stolen lands and cities, principalities and kingdoms,[56] but has arrogated to himself the power to make kings and princes, seat and unseat and change them according to his pleasure, as if he were Antichrist. Wherein is there here a fulfilment of the type?
Again, the Old Testament high priest wasn't allowed to cut his hair [Lev. 21:5]. But why does the pope have a tonsure, along with all the other priests? How does that perfectly match the original type? Also, the high priest wasn't allowed to own any land in Israel; he lived solely off the offerings from the people. So why is the pope so eager to possess the entire world, and not only has he taken lands, cities, principalities, and kingdoms,[56] but he also claims the power to make and unmake kings and princes, manipulating them as he wishes, like he’s Antichrist? Where’s the fulfillment of the type in that?
[Sidenote: Worldly Pretensions]
[Sidenote: Global Pretensions]
Again, the Old Testament high-priest was a subject under the rule of the kings. Why then does the pope have men kiss his feet, and aspire to be king of kings, which Christ Himself did not? Wherein is the type fulfilled here? Again, the high-priest was circumcised. And, finally, if having the external things in the New Testament identical with those of the Old be the fulfilment of types, why do we not become Jews again and keep the whole law of Moses? If we must observe it in one particular, why not in all? If not in all, why in one?
Again, the high priest in the Old Testament was under the authority of the kings. So why does the pope have people kiss his feet and claim to be the king of kings, something Christ Himself didn’t do? Where is the fulfillment in this? Also, the high priest was circumcised. Finally, if having the external practices in the New Testament be the same as those in the Old is considered the fulfillment of types, then why don’t we return to being Jews and follow the entire law of Moses? If we have to follow one part, why not all of it? If not all of it, then why just one part?
[Sidenote: Holy Men Not Under the High-Priest]
[Sidenote: Holy People Not Under the High Priest]
If it be desired to elevate the New Testament above the Old in the matter of outward splendor, would it not be the reasonable to suppose that there should be more than one high-priest in the New Testament, to make it more splendid and glorious than the Old, which did not have more than one? If reason should judge in this case and follow its own bent, what do you suppose it would do? Again, in the time of the Old Testament high-priest there were many holy men who were not under him, such as Job and his family—for he was not alone. Likewise the king of Babylon, the queen of Sheba, the widow of Zarephath, the prince Naaman of Syria, and many others in Eastern lands, together with their families, who are all commended in the Scriptures. Why does not the type hold in these instances, even to the letter? And yet the pope will let no one be a Christian except he be subject to him, and buy his seals and parchments at any price his Romanists please to charge. Or do the Romanists have power to interpret types as they please and as far as they please, without any warrant of the Scriptures?
If you want to elevate the New Testament above the Old in terms of outward splendor, wouldn’t it make sense to have more than one high priest in the New Testament to make it more splendid and glorious than the Old, which had only one? If reason were to judge in this case and follow its own course, what do you think it would conclude? Also, during the time of the Old Testament high priest, there were many holy people who were not under him, like Job and his family—he wasn't alone. Similarly, there was the king of Babylon, the queen of Sheba, the widow of Zarephath, Prince Naaman of Syria, and many others in the East, along with their families, all praised in the Scriptures. Why doesn't the type apply in these cases, even literally? Yet the pope insists that no one can be a Christian unless they are subordinate to him and pay whatever fee his followers demand for his seals and documents. Or do the Romanists believe they can interpret types as they wish and as far as they wish, without any scriptural authority?
Do you not see, my good Romanist, how envy and hatred have blinded you and your kind? Would it not have been a more seemly thing for you to have remained in your cell praying your vigils until you had been called or urged into this case? You do not know what a type is or signifies, and yet you boast of being a teacher and master of all the Holy Scriptures.[57] Yea, verily, a master in corrupting the Scriptures, and blaspheming God, and libeling truth. Come again, my dear Romanist, and I will deck you with lilies and give you for a new year's present[58] to those who have sent you.
Do you not see, my good Roman Catholic, how envy and hatred have blinded you and your kind? Wouldn't it have been more appropriate for you to stay in your cell praying your prayers until you were called or urged into this matter? You don't understand what a type is or what it signifies, yet you brag about being a teacher and master of all the Holy Scriptures. Truly, a master in corrupting the Scriptures, blaspheming God, and slandering the truth. Come back, my dear Roman Catholic, and I will adorn you with lilies and give you as a new year's gift to those who have sent you.
I, too, desire to say one thing that is not in the Scriptures. In all estates which God has appointed there are always some who are saved, and no estate is without living saints on earth, as Christ says, Luke xvii, "Two men shall be in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other left," etc. [Luke 17:34] If the papacy were from God it would be impossible for a pope to be damned, because there is but one person at a time in that estate, and whoever became pope would thereby be assured of his salvation; which is contrary to all the Scriptures.
I also want to say something that isn’t in the Scriptures. In every role that God has assigned, there are always some people who are saved, and no role is without living saints on earth. As Christ says in Luke 17:34, “Two men will be in one bed; one will be taken, and the other left.” If the papacy were from God, it would be impossible for a pope to be damned because only one person can hold that position at a time, and anyone who becomes pope would then be guaranteed salvation, which goes against all the Scriptures.
[Sidenote: The Scriptural Foundation of Papal Power]
[Sidenote: The Scriptural Foundation of Papal Power]
Now let us see how these pious people treat the holy words of Christ in this case. Christ says to St. Peter, Matthew xvi: "Thou art, or art called, Peter; and on the Petram (i. e., on the rock) I will build My Church. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven." [Matt 16:18] From these words they have claimed the keys for St. Peter alone; but the same Matthew has barred such erroneous interpretation in the xviii. chapter, where Christ says to all in common, "Verily, I say unto you, whatsoever ye shall bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven." [Matt. 18:18] It is clear that Christ here interprets His own words, and in this xviii. chapter explains the former xvi.; namely, that the keys are given to St. Peter in the stead of the whole Church,[59] and not for his own person. Thus also John, in the last chapter, "He breathed on them and said, Receive ye the Holy Ghost; whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them, and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained." To maintain the sole authority of St. Peter, when there are two texts against one, many men have labored in vain. But the Gospel is too clear, and they have had to admit until now that in the first passage nothing special was given to St. Peter for his own person.
Now let’s look at how these devout people interpret the holy words of Christ in this situation. Christ tells St. Peter, Matthew 16: "You are, or are called, Peter; and on the Petram (that is, on the rock) I will build My Church. And I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." [Matt 16:18] From these words, they have claimed the keys solely for St. Peter; however, the same Matthew has contradicted this incorrect interpretation in chapter 18, where Christ says to all collectively, "Truly, I tell you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." [Matt. 18:18] It’s clear that Christ is clarifying His own words here, and in this chapter 18, He explains the earlier chapter 16; namely, that the keys are given to St. Peter in representation of the whole Church, and not for his own benefit. Similarly, John, in the last chapter, states, "He breathed on them and said, 'Receive the Holy Spirit; if you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.'" To uphold the exclusive authority of St. Peter, when there are two texts against one, many people have struggled without success. But the Gospel is too clear, and they have had to concede up to now that in the first passage nothing specific was given to St. Peter for his own personal use.
Thus it was also understood by many of the ancient Church fathers. It is likewise proved by the words of Christ just before He gave the keys to St. Peter, where He asks not Peter only, but all of them: "What think ye of Me?" [Matt. 16:15] Then Peter answers for them all, "Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God." [Matt. 16:18] Therefore the words in Matthew xvi. must be understood in accordance with the words in chapter xviii. [Matt. 18:16] and in John xx [John 20:22], and one passage must not be explained in a manner contrary to two strong ones, but the one be properly explained by the two. The proof is all the stronger where there are two instead of only one, and it is but fair that one should follow the two, and not two the one.
Thus, many of the early Church fathers also understood it. This is further supported by Christ's words just before He gave the keys to St. Peter, where He asks not just Peter, but all of them: "What do you think of Me?" [Matt. 16:15] Peter then speaks for them all, saying, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." [Matt. 16:18] Therefore, the words in Matthew 16 must be understood in light of the words in chapter 18 [Matt. 18:16] and in John 20 [John 20:22]. One passage should not be interpreted in a way that contradicts two strong ones; instead, it should be properly interpreted by the two. The evidence is even stronger when there are two passages instead of just one, and it's only fair that one should follow the two and not the other way around.
[Sidenote: Equality Among the Apostles]
[Sidenote: Equality Among the Apostles]
It is plain, therefore, that all the apostles were equal to Peter in all matters of authority. This is shown by their acts as well as by their words, for Peter never selected an apostle, nor made, confirmed, sent out, or ruled over one; although if he had been their superior by divine appointment this would have had to be, or all of them would have been heretics. Moreover, all of the apostles together could not make St. Matthias and St. Paul apostles, but this must needs be done from heaven, as it is written in Acts i. [Acts 1:23 ff.] and xiii. [Acts 13:2] How then could St. Peter alone be lord over them all? This little nut no one has been able to crack as yet, and I trust they will be so gracious, even against their will, to leave it uncracked a while longer.
It’s clear, then, that all the apostles had the same authority as Peter. This is evident from both their actions and their words, since Peter never appointed an apostle, nor did he confirm, send out, or oversee any of them; if he had been their superior by divine will, he would have needed to do so, or else they would all have been considered heretics. Furthermore, the apostles together couldn’t make St. Matthias and St. Paul into apostles; this had to be done from heaven, as mentioned in Acts 1:23 ff. and Acts 13:2. So how could St. Peter be the leader over all of them? This puzzling point remains unsolved, and I hope they will kindly leave it unresolved a little longer.
[Sidenote: Roman Authority never Universal]
[Side note: Roman Authority never Universal]
And just as this Romanist boasts that the papal chair survives in spite of repeated assaults on its authority,[60] so I, too, boast that the Roman See ofttimes, and to this very day, has striven in mad frenzy for such power, yet has never been able to attain it, and, God willing, shall never attain it. It is an utter farce when a man boasts that he has always kept what he has never had. Why does not our dear Romanist boast also that the city of Leipzig has never been taken away from him, in which he does not even have a house? It would be a boast of equal value with the other. So they chatter on incessantly; anything that comes to their tongues is blurted out. Therefore, I say, that though the Roman tyrants have striven hard against the Gospel, to take the common power of the Church and make it their own, yet the word of Christ still stands, "The powers of hell shall not prevail against it." [Matt. 16:18] Now if this power had been given to the pope by divine right, God would not have desisted; at some time it would have been fulfilled. For he says that "not a jot or letter shall remain unfulfilled." [Matt. 5:18] But in the extension of Roman power over all Christendom not one letter has ever been fulfilled.
And just as this Romanist claims that the papal chair has survived despite repeated attacks on its authority,[60] I, too, claim that the Roman See has often, and still today, fought desperately for such power but has never been able to achieve it, and, God willing, will never achieve it. It’s completely absurd when someone brags about keeping something they never had. Why doesn’t our dear Romanist also brag that the city of Leipzig has never been taken from him, even though he doesn’t own a house there? That would be just as valuable a boast as the other. They just keep talking endlessly; anything that pops into their heads is said. Therefore, I say that although the Roman tyrants have fought hard against the Gospel to seize the Church’s common power and make it their own, the word of Christ still stands, "The powers of hell shall not prevail against it." [Matt. 16:18] Now, if this power had been granted to the pope by divine right, God would not have held back; at some point it would have been fulfilled. For He says that "not a jot or letter shall remain unfulfilled." [Matt. 5:18] But in the expansion of Roman power over all of Christendom, not a single letter has ever been fulfilled.
And it does not help to say, it is not the fault of the Romans, but of the heretics, that it has not been fulfilled. Heretic here, heretic there! God's order and promise cannot be hindered or prevented by the gates of hell, much less by the heretics; surely He is strong enough to make true His own Word, without the help of heretics. And inasmuch as He has never done so, and leaves it unfulfilled to this day, regardless of all the zeal, diligence, toil and labor, and cunning and trickery besides, which the Romans have expended on it, I hope it is sufficiently established just what the pope's authority is, beyond that of other bishops and priests; namely, that it is of human and not of divine right. Christ's kingdom has been at all times in all the world, as is written in Psalms ii. [Ps. 2:8] and xix [Ps. 19:4], but never was it entirely under the pope, even for one hour, in spite of those who say otherwise.
And it doesn't help to say that it’s not the Romans’ fault, but the heretics', that it hasn't been fulfilled. Heretic here, heretic there! God's order and promise can't be stopped or blocked by the gates of hell, much less by the heretics; He is certainly powerful enough to keep His Word true, without the aid of heretics. And since He has never done so, and leaves it unfulfilled to this day, regardless of all the passion, effort, hard work, and cleverness that the Romans have applied to it, I hope it's clear what the pope's authority really is, beyond that of other bishops and priests; specifically, that it is human and not divine right. Christ's kingdom has always existed all over the world, as it says in Psalms ii. [Ps. 2:8] and xix [Ps. 19:4], but it has never been completely under the pope, even for one hour, despite what others might claim.
[Sidenote: Two Passages versus One]
[Sidenote: Two Passages vs. One]
Although all this is well-established truth, we shall nevertheless proceed to demolish their idle fairy-tales still more, and say: Even if it were not valid that the two sayings in Matthew [Matt. 18:18] and John [John 20:22], which make the power of the keys a common possession, should explain the one saying of Matthew, which sounds as if the keys were given to Peter alone; yet the case cannot proceed any further than to establish a doubt, whether the one passage shall interpret the two, or the two the one, and I hold as tenaciously to the two, as they to the one. Furthermore, that doubt gives certainty to us, so that it is entirely for us to say whether we will have the pope for a head or not. For where a matter is in doubt, no one is a heretic, whether he hold to one view or to another; this they themselves admit. And thus their argument again is brought to naught, and they can produce nothing but uncertainty and doubt. Therefore they must either give up all three passages as inadequate to establish their case, since their meaning is obscure; or else they must cite others, which explicitly indicate that the two must be interpreted by the one. This they cannot do; I defy them to try it.
Although all this is an established truth, we'll still go ahead and debunk their silly stories further and say: Even if it weren’t true that the two sayings in Matthew [Matt. 18:18] and John [John 20:22], which suggest the power of the keys is a shared gift, should clarify the one saying of Matthew, which seems to imply that the keys were given to Peter alone; the situation can’t go any further than establishing doubt about whether the one passage should interpret the two, or the two should interpret the one, and I hold onto the two just as firmly as they hold onto the one. Furthermore, that doubt offers us certainty, so it’s completely up to us whether we choose to have the pope as our head or not. In cases of uncertainty, no one is considered a heretic, regardless of whether they have one view or another; they themselves admit this. Thus, their argument falls apart, and they can only produce uncertainty and doubt. Therefore, they either have to dismiss all three passages as insufficient to support their case because their meanings are unclear; or they need to provide others that clearly indicate that the two should be interpreted by the one. This they cannot do; I challenge them to try.
But I will cite passages by which I shall prove that the one passage must follow the two.
But I will quote sections that will show that the one section must come after the two.
Thus saith the Law—and Christ quotes it in Matthew xviii—, "Every case shall be established through the mouth of two or three witnesses, but at the mouth of one witness shall no man be put to death." [Deut. 17:6] And once I have two witnesses against one, my case takes precedence, and the one passage must follow the two; namely, that Peter received the keys not as Peter, but in the stead of the Church,[61] as Matthew xviii. and John xx. clearly say, and not as Peter alone, as Matthew xvi. seems to say.
Thus says the Law—and Christ cites it in Matthew 18—, "Every matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses, but no one can be put to death based on the testimony of just one witness." [Deut. 17:6] And once I have two witnesses against one person, my case takes priority, and the one statement must follow the two; namely, that Peter received the keys not as Peter, but on behalf of the Church,[61] as clearly stated in Matthew 18 and John 20, and not just as Peter alone, as seems to be implied in Matthew 16.
Moreover, I am astounded at the great arrogance by which they would make the power of the keys a ruling power, which really fits together as well as winter and summer. For a ruling power means far more than the power of the keys. The power of the keys extends only to the Sacrament of Penance,[62] to bind and loose the sins, as Matthew xviii. [Matt. 18:18] and John xx. [John 20:22] clearly state; but a ruling power extends likewise to those who are pious and have naught to be bound or loosed; its scope includes preaching, exhorting, consoling, saying mass, giving the Sacrament, etc. Therefore, none of the three passages fits the power of the pope over all Christendom, except he were made the one confessor, or penitentiary,[63] or anathematizer, to rule only over the wicked and the sinners, which is not their desire at all. And if these words should establish the papal power over all Christians, I should very much like to know who could absolve the pope when he sins. He must certainly remain in his sins; neither will it do for him to transfer his power to another for his own absolution, for that would make him a heretic in acting contrary to divine command.
Moreover, I am astonished by the great arrogance with which they claim that the power of the keys is a ruling power, which really doesn’t fit together any better than winter and summer. A ruling power means much more than the power of the keys. The power of the keys is limited to the Sacrament of Penance,[62] to bind and loose sins, as stated clearly in Matthew 18:18 and John 20:22; but a ruling power also applies to the righteous, who have nothing to be bound or loosed; it includes preaching, encouraging, comforting, saying mass, giving the Sacrament, and so on. Therefore, none of the three passages supports the pope's authority over all Christians, unless he were made the sole confessor, or penitentiary,[63] or anathematizer, to rule only over the wicked and sinners, which is not what they want at all. If these words were meant to assert papal power over all Christians, I would really like to know who could absolve the pope when he sins. He must certainly remain in his sins; and it won’t work for him to pass his power to someone else for his own absolution, because that would make him a heretic by acting against divine command.
[Sidenote: Person and Office]
[Sidenote: Person and Office]
Some have invented the fiction that the pope's person and office are two different things;[64] that the person can be made subject to another, but not the office. That glitters for a moment, but is, in truth, like all such wares. For in their own laws, with great ado and show, they have forbidden any bishop of a lower rank to confirm a pope, although this confirmation is not the institution of the office, but the induction of the person into the office. And if in this case the person is not subject to any one, surely the same is true in absolution. But in all their doings and glosses and interpretations, their minds are in a whirl, and they say now this and now that; and in their twisting of God's Word they lose its true sense, forget where they are, go completely astray, and yet they would rule the whole world.
Some have created the idea that the pope's individual identity and his role are two separate things; that the individual can be subject to someone else, but not the role itself. That seems appealing at first, but is really like all such illusions. In their own laws, with a lot of fuss and show, they have prohibited any bishop of a lower rank from confirming a pope, even though this confirmation doesn’t establish the role, but it does officially induct the individual into it. And if in this case the individual isn’t subject to anyone, the same must apply to absolution. Yet in all their actions, interpretations, and justifications, they’re all mixed up, saying one thing and then the opposite; in twisting God's Word, they lose its true meaning, forget where they stand, go completely off course, and still think they can control the entire world.
[Sidenote: The Keys Given to the Whole Church]
[Sidenote: The Keys Given to the Whole Church]
Therefore let every Christian believe that in these passages Christ does not give either to St. Peter or to the other Apostles the power to rule, or to soar so high. What then does He give? I will tell you. These words of Christ are nothing but gracious promises, given to the whole Church,[65] as was said above,[66] in order that poor sinful consciences may find comfort when they are "loosed" or absolved by man; and the words apply only to sinful, timid, troubled consciences, and are intended to strength en them, if they but believe. When these comforting words of Christ, given for the benefit of all poor consciences in the whole Church,[65] are thus made to strengthen and establish papal power, I will tell you of what it reminds me.
Therefore, every Christian should understand that in these passages, Christ is not giving St. Peter or the other Apostles the authority to rule or to rise to such heights. So what does He give? I’ll explain. These words of Christ are simply gracious promises meant for the entire Church,[65] as noted earlier,[66] so that struggling, sinful consciences can find comfort when they are "loosed" or absolved by others; these words apply specifically to sinful, fearful, troubled consciences and are meant to strengthen them, if they choose to believe. When these comforting words of Christ, intended for the benefit of all troubled consciences in the whole Church,[65] are used to reinforce papal power, I can tell you what that makes me think of.
[Sidenote: A Parable]
[Sidenote: A Story]
It reminds me of a rich, kind prince who threw open his treasure-house, and gave complete freedom to all the poor to come and take what they needed. Among the needy there came a rogue, who made use of the permission all by himself and allowed none to come in who did not bow completely to his will, and arbitrarily explained the words of the prince to mean that the permission was given to him alone. Can you imagine what the kind prince would think of this rogue? If you cannot imagine it, hear what St. Matthew says of that selfsame servant: "If that evil servant shall say in his heart. My lord delayeth his coming, and shall begin to smite his fellow-servants, and to eat and drink with the drunken; the lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of, and shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." [Matt. 24:48 ff.]
It reminds me of a wealthy, generous prince who opened up his treasure house and allowed all the poor to come and take what they needed. Among the needy, there was a trickster who exploited this permission for himself and wouldn’t let anyone in unless they completely obeyed him, interpreting the prince's words to mean that he alone had the right to take. Can you imagine what the kind prince would think of this trickster? If you can't picture it, listen to what St. Matthew says about that same servant: "If that evil servant thinks in his heart, 'My lord is delayed in coming,' and starts to beat his fellow servants and eat and drink with the drunkards; the lord of that servant will come on a day when he’s not expected, and at an hour he doesn’t know, and will cut him in two, and assign him his place with the hypocrites: there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." [Matt. 24:48 ff.]
And now see: in the same manner as this servant interprets the intention of his lord, so the Romanists interpret the words of God, and this is the very best that can be said of their interpretation. For when they go stark mad, they act as if yon servant had not only made barter of his lord's kindness for his own profit, but as if he actually changed the goods, and gave chaff and stubble for com, copper for gold, lead for silver, and poison for wine. And therefore it is still a matter of grace, that they claim the keys for the pope at least in such a manner that we may buy them by giving money and everything that we possess. But it is an utter calamity when they preach their laws, authority, bans, indulgences and the like, in place of the Gospel. That is what the Lord calls the smiting of the fellow servants by the evil servant, who should rather feed them.
And now look: just like this servant interprets his master's intentions, the Roman Catholics interpret God's words, and that's the best thing that can be said about their interpretation. Because when they go completely off the rails, it's like that servant not only traded his master's kindness for his own gain but also actually swapped out the goods, handing over chaff and stubble for grain, copper for gold, lead for silver, and poison for wine. And so it’s still a matter of grace that they claim the keys for the pope at least in a way that requires us to buy them by giving money and everything we have. But it’s truly a disaster when they preach their laws, authority, bans, indulgences, and the like instead of the Gospel. That’s what the Lord refers to as the evil servant striking the fellow servants, who should be taking care of them instead.
[Sidenote: Herod and the Romanists]
[Sidenote: Herod and the Romans]
I will use a plain illustration, so that any one may see the difference between the true and the false interpretation of these words of Christ. The high-priest of the Old Testament wore, by divine appointment, an official robe. When King Herod elevated himself over the people of Israel, he took that robe, and although he did not use it himself, yet he usurped the authority to regulate its use, and the people were forced to pay for that to which God had given them the right. The same is true now. The keys have been given to the whole Church[65] as has been proved above.[66] But along come the Romanists, and although they never use them themselves nor exercise their office, yet they take to themselves authority over the use of the keys, and we are forced to buy with money what is in reality our own, given by Christ. And, not satisfied with this, they apply the words of Christ concerning the keys, not to the keys nor to their use, but to their usurped power and authority over the keys, so that the power of the keys, freely given by Christ, is now captive in the hands of the Romanists; and both the power of the keys and the power over the keys are supposed to come from the one word of Christ, just as if Herod had said that it was his power of which Moses was speaking, when he spake of the robe of the high-priest.
I’ll use a simple example so that anyone can understand the difference between the true and false interpretations of these words of Christ. The high priest in the Old Testament wore an official robe appointed by God. When King Herod elevated himself above the people of Israel, he took that robe. Although he didn’t wear it himself, he claimed the authority to control how it was used, and the people were forced to pay for what God had granted them the right to. The same situation exists today. The keys have been given to the whole Church, as proven above. However, the Romanists come along, and even though they don’t use them themselves or fulfill their role, they assume authority over the keys, forcing us to purchase with money what is rightfully ours, given by Christ. Moreover, they misapply Christ's words about the keys, directing them not to the keys or their use, but to their stolen power and authority over the keys. As a result, the power of the keys, freely given by Christ, is now trapped in the hands of the Romanists; both the power of the keys and the authority over the keys are believed to come from Christ's words, just as if Herod had claimed it was his power that Moses referred to when he spoke about the high priest's robe.
In like manner, a tyrant could obtain possession of a last testament, and explain the words, wherein the property is bequeathed to the heir, to mean that authority is given him over this testament, to decide whether he will allow its provisions to come to the heir gratuitously or for a price. So it is also with the power of the keys and the authority of the pope, understood as coming from one and the same word [of Scripture], whereas the two things are not only different, but the authority claimed is more than the power of the keys; and yet they make of it one and the same thing.
Similarly, a tyrant could take control of a last will and interpret the wording that bequeaths the property to the heir as granting him the authority to decide whether to let the heir have it for free or for a price. The same goes for the power of the keys and the authority of the pope, which are understood as stemming from the same biblical word, even though they are not only different but the authority being claimed is greater than the power of the keys; yet they treat it as if it were one and the same thing.
[Sidenote: What is Meant by the Rock]
[Sidenote: What is Meant by the Rock]
Their argument, that the external authority of the pope is conferred in the words of Christ, "On this rock I will build My Church," [Matt. 16:18] understanding the rock to mean St. Peter and his authority, I have refuted many times,[67] and now I will say only this: First, they must prove that the rock means authority. They will not do this, nor can they do it, so they just have voice to their own inventions, and all their drivel must be divine command. Secondly, the rock can mean neither St. Peter nor his authority, on account of the words of Christ which follow, "And the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." Now it is clear as day that no one is edified in the Church, nor withstands the gates of hell by the mere fact that he is under the external authority of the pope. For the majority of those who hold so strongly to the authority of the pope, and lean upon it, are themselves possessed by the powers of hell and are full of sins and rascality. Then, too, some of the popes were heretics themselves, and gave heretical laws; yet they remained in authority. Therefore, the rock does not signify authority, which can never withstand the gates of hell; but it signifies only Christ and the faith in Him, against which no power can ever prevail.
Their argument that the external authority of the pope comes from the words of Christ, "On this rock I will build My Church," [Matt. 16:18] with the rock understood to represent St. Peter and his authority, I have disproven many times,[67] and now I will only say this: First, they need to prove that the rock means authority. They won't do this, nor can they, so they just stick to their own made-up ideas, and all their nonsense must be seen as divine command. Secondly, the rock can't mean either St. Peter or his authority, because of the words of Christ that follow, "And the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." It's clear that no one is actually helped in the Church, nor can anyone withstand the gates of hell just because they are under the external authority of the pope. Most of those who cling so tightly to the authority of the pope and rely on it are themselves influenced by the forces of hell and are full of sins and wrongdoing. Furthermore, some of the popes were heretics themselves and issued heretical laws; yet they maintained their authority. Therefore, the rock does not represent authority, which can never withstand the gates of hell; it only represents Christ and faith in Him, against which no power can ever prevail.
[Sidenote: Prevailing Against the Gates of Hell]
[Sidenote: Prevailing Against the Gates of Hell]
That this authority continues to exist despite those who battle against it, does not mean that it has withstood the gates of hell. For so the Greek Church has continued, and all the other Christians in the world; the Moscovites[68] and Bohemians continue, yea, the kingdom of Persia has continued for more than two thousand years, and the Turk for well nigh a thousand years, in spite of various and repeated attacks against them. And to tell you some more things that really should bring astonishment to such an illustrious Romanist: The world in its wickedness has stood from the beginning, and shall stand until the Last Day, and forever, even if God Himself with all holy men and angels never cease to preach, write and work against it. If you think good of it, my dear Romanist, defy God and all the angels, because the world has stood even against all their words and work. Why did you not ascertain, you poor, blind Romanist, before rushing into print, what it means "to prevail against the gates of hell"? If every prevailing means just as much as prevailing against the gates of hell, then the devil's kingdom prevails with a larger following than God's kingdom. This is what it means to prevail against the gates of hell: Not to be in an external communion[69], authority, jurisdiction or assembly in a bodily manner, according to your way of babbling about the Roman communion[69] and its unity, but by a firm and true faith to be built upon Christ, the Rock which can never be suppressed by any power of the devil, even if he counts more followers and uses unceasing strife, cunning, and violence against it.
That this authority continues to exist despite those who fight against it doesn’t mean that it has withstood the forces of evil. Just like the Greek Church has persevered, so have all other Christians around the world; the Russians and Czechs continue, and even the Persian Empire has lasted for over two thousand years, while the Turks have existed for nearly a thousand years, despite various and repeated attacks against them. And to share more things that should truly astonish you as a notable Roman Catholic: The world in its wickedness has endured since the beginning and will last until the Last Day and beyond, even if God, along with all holy people and angels, never stops preaching, writing, and working against it. If you find it acceptable, my dear Roman Catholic, you can defy God and all the angels because the world has persisted even against all their words and actions. Why didn’t you find out, you misguided Romanist, before rushing to publish, what it truly means "to prevail against the gates of hell"? If every act of prevailing means the same as prevailing against the gates of hell, then the devil's kingdom has a larger following than God's. What it means to prevail against the gates of hell is this: not to hold a physical communion, authority, jurisdiction, or gathering in the way you speak of the Roman communion and its unity, but to have a strong and true faith built on Christ, the Rock that can never be overcome by any power of the devil, even if he has more followers and uses constant strife, deception, and violence against it.
[Sidenote: Evil Results of Roman Authority]
[Sidenote: Evil Results of Roman Authority]
Now the greater part of the Roman communion,[69] and even some of the popes themselves, have forsaken the faith wantonly and without struggle, and live under the power of Satan, as is plainly to be seen, and thus the papacy often has been under the dominion of the gates of hell. And should I speak quite openly, this same Roman authority, ever since the time it has presumed to soar over all Christendom, not only has never attained its purpose, but has become the cause of nearly all the apostasy, heresy, discord, sects, unbelief and misery in Christendom, and has never freed itself from the gates of hell. And if there were no other passage to prove that Roman authority was of human and not of divine right, this passage alone would be sufficient, where Christ says, the gates of hell shall not prevail against His building on the rock. Now the gates of hell ofttimes had the papacy in their power, at times the pope was not a pious man, and the office was occupied by a man without faith, without grace, without good works; which God would never have permitted if the papacy were meant in Christ's word concerning the rock. For then He would not be true to His promise, nor fulfil His own word; therefore the rock, and the building of Christ founded upon it, must be something entirely different from the papacy and its external Church.
Now the majority of the Roman Church, and even some of the popes themselves, have carelessly abandoned their faith without a fight and are living under Satan's influence, which is clearly evident. The papacy has often been dominated by the forces of evil. To put it bluntly, this Roman authority, ever since it has tried to elevate itself above all of Christendom, has not only failed to achieve its goals but has also caused nearly all the apostasy, heresy, discord, sects, disbelief, and suffering in the Christian world, and it has never freed itself from the grasp of evil. If there were no other proof that Roman authority is of human origin and not divine, this alone would suffice: where Christ says that the gates of hell will not overcome His church built on the rock. The papacy has often been under the power of evil, at times the pope was not a righteous person, and the position was held by someone lacking faith, grace, and good deeds; God would never have allowed this if the papacy were included in Christ's statement about the rock. For then He would not be true to His promise or fulfill His own word; therefore, the rock and the church that Christ built upon it must be something entirely different from the papacy and its institutional church.
Accordingly I say further, that the Roman bishop has often been deposed or appointed by other bishops. If, however, his authority were by divine appointment and promise, God would never have permitted this to happen, for it would be against His word and promise. And if God were found to be unfaithful in so much as even one word, then would perish faith, truth, the Scriptures, and God Himself. But if God's words stand firm, then my adversaries must prove to me that the pope was never subject, even once, to Satan or to man. I would much like to hear just what my good Romanists have to say to this. I trust they are slain with their own sword, like Goliath [1 Sam. 17:51]. For I can prove that the papacy has been subject not only to Satan, but to other bishops, yea, also to temporal powers, to the emperors. How did the rock prevail then against the gates of hell? I will leave the choice to them: either these words mean defeat for the papacy, or God is a liar. Let us see which they will choose.
So, I’ll say this: the Roman bishop has often been removed or appointed by other bishops. If his authority were truly from divine appointment and promise, God wouldn’t have allowed this to happen because it would contradict His word and promise. If God were found unfaithful in even one word, then faith, truth, the Scriptures, and God Himself would be lost. But if God’s words are solid, then my opponents need to show me that the pope was never subject to Satan or to any man, even once. I’d really like to hear what my fellow Roman Catholics have to say about this. I trust they’ll be defeated by their own arguments, just like Goliath [1 Sam. 17:51]. I can prove that the papacy has been under the authority of not only Satan but also other bishops and even secular leaders and emperors. So, how did the rock stand strong against the gates of hell then? I’ll let them decide: either these words spell defeat for the papacy, or God is a liar. Let’s see what they choose.
Nor is it enough that you try to squirm out of the dilemma by saying that even if the papacy has been under Satan now and then, yet there have always been pious Christians under it. I reply: Under the rule of the Turk there are Christians, and likewise there are Christians in all the world, as there were aforetime under Nero and other tyrants. How does that help you? The papacy and the pope himself must at no time have been under Satan if Christ's word refers to them when He speaks of "a rock set against the gates of hell." See, thus do the Romanists interpret the Scriptures in accordance with their mad folly. Faith they turn into authority, spiritual edification into outward show, and yet they are not heretics—they make all others to be the heretics. Such are the Romanists.
It's not enough for you to wiggle out of the situation by claiming that even if the papacy has occasionally been influenced by Satan, there have always been faithful Christians within it. I respond: There are Christians under the rule of the Turk, and there are Christians all over the world, just like there were back in the days of Nero and other tyrants. How does that help your case? The papacy and the pope himself should never have been under Satan if Christ's words apply to them when He talks about "a rock set against the gates of hell." Look, this is how the Romanists twist the Scriptures to suit their misguided beliefs. They turn faith into authority, spiritual growth into outward appearances, and yet they don't see themselves as heretics—they label everyone else as the heretics. That's the nature of the Romanists.
Another passage which they cite in support of their contention is that in which the Lord says three times to Peter, "Feed My sheep." [John 21:15] Here they reach real eminence as theologians when they say: Since Christ said to Peter in particular, "Feed My sheep," He thereby conferred on him authority above all others.
Another passage they point to in support of their argument is when the Lord tells Peter three times, "Feed My sheep." [John 21:15] Here they really shine as theologians when they argue: Since Christ specifically told Peter, "Feed My sheep," He granted him authority over everyone else.
[Sidenote: Feeding the Sheep and Roman Authority]
[Sidenote: Feeding the Sheep and Roman Authority]
Now we shall see to what labor and pains they are put to bring about that result. In the first place, we must know what they mean by "feeding." "Feeding," in the Roman sense, means to burden Christendom with many human and hurtful laws, to sell the bishoprics at the highest possible price, to extract the annates[70] from all benefices, to usurp authority over all foundations, to force into servitude all the bishops with terrible oaths, to sell indulgences, to rob the whole world by means of letters, bulls, seals and wax, to prohibit the preaching of the Gospel, to appoint knaves from Rome to all the places, to bring all litigation to Rome, to increase quarrels and disputes—in short, to allow no one to come freely to the truth and to have peace.
Now we’ll look at the work and effort they put in to achieve that outcome. First, we need to understand what they mean by "feeding." In the Roman context, "feeding" refers to burdening Christendom with numerous harmful human laws, selling bishoprics for the highest price, collecting annates from all benefices, taking control over all foundations, forcing bishops into servitude under harsh oaths, selling indulgences, exploiting the entire world through letters, bulls, seals, and wax, banning the preaching of the Gospel, appointing scoundrels from Rome to all positions, channeling all legal matters to Rome, and escalating conflicts and disputes—in short, ensuring that no one can access the truth freely and live in peace.
But if they say that by "feeding" they do not understand such abuse of authority, but the authority itself, it is simply not true. And I prove it in this wise: Where one protests very mildly against such abuse, and with all deference to the authority, they rail and threaten thunder and lightning, they clamor that it is heresy and high treason, that it is a rending of the seamless garment of Christ, and they would burn up the heretics, rebels, apostates and everybody in the whole world. By all of which it is clear that they hold "feeding" to mean naught else but such preying and flaying. In the meanwhile, however, we think that feeding does not mean preying on others. Let us endeavor to see what it means.
But if they claim that by "feeding" they don’t mean the abuse of power, but rather the authority itself, that’s simply not true. Here’s my proof: When someone gently protests against such abuse and shows respect for the authority, they react with anger and threats, proclaiming it to be heresy and treason, tearing apart the seamless garment of Christ, and calling for the burning of heretics, rebels, apostates, and everyone in the world. From all of this, it’s clear that they interpret "feeding" to mean nothing but predation and exploitation. Meanwhile, we believe that feeding doesn’t mean taking advantage of others. Let’s try to understand what it really means.
[Sidenote: Distinction of Person and Office]
[Sidenote: Distinction of Person and Office]
They have a high-sounding, keen and subtile speech—as they imagine—when they say that person and office are not one and the same, and that the office remains, and remains good, though the person be evil. From this they conclude, and it must, indeed, follow, that the word of Christ, "Feed My sheep," means an office of external power, which even an evil man may have, for the office makes no one holy. Very well. This is acceptable to us, and we will ask the Romanists a question. Whoever keeps and fulfils the word of Christ, he is truly obedient and pious, and shall be saved, for His words are spirit and life [John 6:63]. If, therefore, "feeding" means to sit in the highest place and to have an office—even if the incumbent be a knave—it follows that he feeds who sits in the highest seat and is pope; and whoever does this work of feeding is obedient to Christ; and whoever is obedient in one particular is obedient in all and is a saint Therefore it must be true that whoever is pope and sits in the chief room is obedient to Christ and is a saint, though he be a knave, or a rogue, or what not. Have thanks, my dearest Romanists! Now I know, for the first time, why the pope is addressed as "your holiness." Thus must the word of Christ be explained, so that knaves and rogues are made out to be holy and obedient servants of Christ, just as in the previous pages you have made Christ an arch-knave and a brothel-keeper.[71]
They have a grand, sharp, and subtle way of speaking—as they believe—when they say that a person and their position are not the same, and that the role remains intact and good, even if the person is evil. From this, they conclude, and it indeed must follow, that Christ's words, "Feed My sheep," refer to a position of external power, which even an evil person can hold, since the position does not make anyone holy. Sounds good to us, and we will pose a question to the Romanists. Whoever keeps and fulfills the word of Christ is genuinely obedient and faithful, and shall be saved, for His words are spirit and life [John 6:63]. If, therefore, “feeding” means to hold the highest position and have a role—even if the person in that role is untrustworthy—it follows that the one who occupies the highest seat as pope is the one who feeds; and whoever does this work of feeding is obedient to Christ; and obedience in one aspect means obedience in all, making them a saint. Thus, it must be true that whoever is pope and holds the highest position is obedient to Christ and is a saint, even if they are a rogue, a dishonest person, or whatever else. Thank you, my dear Romanists! Now I know, for the first time, why the pope is called "your holiness." This is how Christ's words are interpreted, so that dishonest people are portrayed as holy and obedient servants of Christ, just as earlier you depicted Christ as a major scoundrel and a brothel-keeper.[71]
[Sidenote: Being Fed in the Roman Sense]
[Sidenote: Being Fed in the Roman Sense]
Further, if "feeding" means to sit in the highest place, then "being fed" must mean to be subject, so that just as "feeding" means external governing, "being fed" must mean to be governed, and, as they say, to live in the Roman fellowship.[72] Then it must also be further true that all who are within the Roman fellowship,[72] be they good or evil, are saints, because they are obedient to Christ and are being fed. For none can be obedient to Christ in one thing, without being obedient in all, as St. James says [Jas. 2:10]. Now is that not a fine Church under the Roman authority, where there are no sinners at all and naught but saints! But what becomes of the poor indulgence, if no one needs it any more in the Roman fellowship?[72] What becomes of the father confessor? How shall the world be robbed, if penance disappears? Nay, what becomes of the keys if they are no longer needed? But if there are still sinners among them, they must go unfed and be disobedient to Christ.
Furthermore, if "feeding" means to occupy the highest position, then "being fed" must mean being subordinate. Just as "feeding" refers to external control, "being fed" must refer to being controlled, and, as they say, to live within the Roman community.[72] It must also be true that everyone within the Roman community,[72] whether good or evil, are considered saints because they are obedient to Christ and are being nourished. For no one can be obedient to Christ in one area without being obedient in all, as St. James says [Jas. 2:10]. Now, isn’t it a wonderful Church under Roman authority, where there are absolutely no sinners and only saints? But what happens to indulgences if no one needs them anymore in the Roman community?[72] What happens to the confessor? How will the world be deprived if penance vanishes? And what becomes of the keys if they’re no longer necessary? But if there are still sinners among them, they must remain unfed and disobedient to Christ.
What do you say to this, my good Romanists? Come now and pipe your lay. Do you not see that "feeding" must mean something else than having authority, and "being fed" something else than being externally subject to the Roman power, and how utterly senseless it is to cite the saying of Christ, "Feed My sheep," in order to strengthen Roman authority and its external unity or fellowship!
What do you think about this, my fellow Romanists? Come on and share your thoughts. Don't you realize that "feeding" must mean something different than having authority, and "being fed" means something different than being externally submissive to the Roman power? It’s completely ridiculous to quote Christ’s saying, "Feed My sheep," to support Roman authority and its external unity or fellowship!
[Sidenote: Feeding and Loving]
[Sidenote: Nurturing and Loving]
Christ also says, "He that loveth Me, keepeth My word; he that loveth Me not, keepeth not My words." Prick up your ears at this, my dear Romanists. Ye boast that the word of Christ, "Feed My sheep," [John 14:23] is a command and word of Christ. Let us ask, then, where are they who keep it? You say, even the knaves and rogues keep it. Christ says no one keepeth it, except he love and be a righteous man. Now come to some agreement with Christ in this matter, so that we may know if you or He is to be charged with lying. Therefore, the pope who loves not, and is not righteous, does not "feed the sheep," and does not keep Christ's word: neither is he a pope, nor has he authority, nor anything at all that is included in the term "feeding the sheep." For Christ stands immovable, and says, "He that loveth Me not, keepeth not My word"; nor does such a one perform any "feeding of sheep," i. e., he is no pope at all, as they explain it. Thus it comes that the same passages which are cited in its favor are against the papacy; a just retribution for those who treat the holy Word of God in sheer madness, as though it were fool's talk, and who would make out of it what they please.
Christ also says, "Whoever loves Me will follow My word; whoever does not love Me does not follow My words." Pay attention to this, my dear Roman Catholics. You claim that Christ's command to "Feed My sheep" is a directive from Him. So let's ask, where are the people who actually follow it? You say that even the dishonest people follow it. But Christ says that no one truly follows it unless they love and are righteous. Now, come to an understanding with Christ on this so we can figure out who's lying, you or Him. Therefore, the pope who does not love and is not righteous does not "feed the sheep" and does not follow Christ's word; he is neither a pope nor has any authority, nor anything at all related to "feeding the sheep." Because Christ remains unchanging, stating, "Whoever does not love Me does not keep My word"; and such a person does not perform any "feeding of sheep," meaning he is not a pope at all, as they claim. Thus, it turns out that the very scriptures cited in its support actually argue against the papacy; a fitting consequence for those who handle the holy Word of God with such madness, as if it were nonsense, trying to twist it to suit their agenda.
Perhaps you might reply, that a subject can be obedient to temporal authority even if that authority were not righteous; why should one not be obedient to the pope's authority? Therefore to "feed," or to "be fed," must not necessarily include the idea of obedience. Answer: The Scriptures do not call temporal authority "feeding," and in the New Testament there is no instance where God publicly appointed any one to temporal power, although no such power arises without His secret ordering. For this reason St. Peter calls such powers "ordinances of men," [1 Peter 2:13] because they rule not by God's word, but by God's governance, and it is not needful, therefore, that such rulers should be righteous. But inasmuch as we here have God's word, "Feed my sheep," neither the shepherd nor the sheep can fulfil this word except by obedience to God and righteousness of life. Therefore I let bishop, pope, priest be what they may; unless they love Christ and are righteous, this term, "feeding," is not for them, and they are something entirely different from the shepherds and feeders of sheep who alone are meant in this word. For this reason it cannot be tolerated that this word of Christ shall be made to cover external power, which has nothing to do with obedience or disobedience to Him; "feeding" can mean naught else but to be obedient.
You might argue that someone can follow a temporary authority even if that authority isn't just; so why shouldn't one follow the authority of the pope? Therefore, to "feed" or to "be fed" doesn't necessarily imply obedience. The answer is: The Scriptures don't refer to temporal authority as "feeding," and in the New Testament, there's no example of God publicly appointing anyone to temporal power, although such power doesn't come without His hidden arrangement. That's why St. Peter refers to these powers as "ordinances of men," [1 Peter 2:13] because they govern not by God's word but by His management, and it's not essential for these rulers to be righteous. However, since we have God's word here, "Feed my sheep," neither the shepherd nor the sheep can fulfill this command without obedience to God and a righteous life. So, whether a bishop, pope, or priest is what they may; unless they love Christ and are righteous, this term "feeding" doesn't apply to them, and they are something entirely different from the true shepherds and feeders of sheep meant by this word. Therefore, it cannot be accepted that this word of Christ is used to justify external power, which has nothing to do with obedience or disobedience to Him; "feeding" can only mean being obedient.
And this is what Christ desired. For before saying three times to Peter: "Feed My sheep," He asked him thrice if he loved Him, and Peter thrice answered that he loved Him. [John 21:15 ff.] It is evident, therefore, that there is no "feeding" where there is no love. Therefore, the papacy either must be love, or it cannot be a feeding of the sheep, and if the word "Feed My sheep" establishes the papal chair, it follows that all are popes who love Christ and feed the sheep. And this is perfectly true: for aforetime all bishops were called popes, which title is now restricted to the one at Rome.
And this is what Christ wanted. Before telling Peter three times to "Feed My sheep," He asked him three times if he loved Him, and Peter affirmed his love each time. [John 21:15 ff.] It's clear, then, that there’s no "feeding" without love. So, the papacy must be based on love, or else it can’t truly feed the sheep. If the phrase "Feed My sheep" defines the papal position, then anyone who loves Christ and cares for the sheep is a pope. This is completely true: in the past, all bishops were referred to as popes, a title that now only applies to the one in Rome.
[Sidenote: A Distinction in Love]
[Sidenote: A Difference in Love]
But here look you what our Romanists do when they cannot overcome these words of Christ, and must admit, though with great reluctance, that no one can feed except he love Christ, as the clearly expressed words of Christ declare. Gladly they would give Him the lie, or deny Him; but now that they are hit squarely between the eyes, so that their heads swim, hear what they say. They say that Christ indeed demands love in the office of the pope, but not that high love, which, they say, is meritorious unto eternal life; but the ordinary love is quite sufficient, such as a servant has toward his master.[73] Now see, this lying explanation[74] of love they bring forth entirety out of their own heads, without warrant of the Scriptures, and yet they would have it appear that they are dealing with me in the Scriptures. Tell me, my dear Romanists, all of you melted together into one heap, where is there so much as one letter in the Scriptures concerning this love of which you dream? If your vile brew of Leipzig[75] could speak, it would easily overcome such feather-brains, and speak better than you do of love.
But look at what our Romanists do when they can't refute these words of Christ and have to reluctantly acknowledge that no one can truly feed on Him unless they love Christ, as His words clearly state. They would love to lie about Him or deny Him; but now that they’re faced with the truth directly, just listen to what they say. They claim that Christ does indeed require love in the role of the pope, but not that high love, which they say earns eternal life; instead, they argue that ordinary love, like that of a servant toward their master, is sufficient. Now, see this deceptive explanation of love that they've completely invented on their own, without any support from the Scriptures, and yet they want to make it seem like they’re engaging with me based on Scripture. Tell me, my dear Romanists, all of you lumped together, where is even one letter in the Scriptures about this love you fantasize about? If your disgusting concoction from Leipzig could speak, it would easily outsmart such shallow thinkers and explain love better than you do.
But let us follow this matter further. If there must needs be some sort of love in the papacy, what becomes of it when a pope does not love Christ at all, and seeks in it only his own gain and honor? And there have been many such, yea, almost all since the beginning of the papacy. You have not escaped me yet—you must confess that the papacy has not always existed, it has often perished, because it was ofttimes without love. But if it had been established by divine right, in these words of Christ, it would not have perished. Twist and turn as you will, these words will not yield a papacy; or else the papacy must cease in Christendom whenever the pope is without love. Now you have said yourself that the person may be evil, but the office remains; again you admit, and must admit, that the office is nothing if the person be evil—or you must let "feeding the sheep" be something else than the papacy. And this is true; let us see what you can bring against it.
But let's explore this issue further. If there has to be some kind of love in the papacy, what happens when a pope doesn't love Christ at all and is only in it for his own benefit and glory? There have been many popes like that—almost all of them since the papacy began. You can’t deny that the papacy hasn’t always existed; it has often fallen apart because it was frequently devoid of love. However, if it were established by divine right, as Christ said, it wouldn’t have fallen apart. No matter how you try to argue, these words won't create a papacy; or else the papacy should vanish from Christendom whenever the pope is without love. Now, you’ve mentioned that a person might be evil, but the position remains; you also acknowledge, and must admit, that the position means nothing if the person is corrupt—or you must accept that "feeding the sheep" is something other than the papacy. And that's true; let's see what you can counter with.
[Sidenote: A Shepherd's Love]
[A Shepherd's Love]
But let every one beware of the poisoned tongues and devil-glosses which can invent a love of such description. Christ speaks of the highest, strongest, best love of which man is capable. He will not be loved with a false, divided love; here there must be whole-hearted and pure love, or none at all. And the meaning of Christ is that in St. Peter's person He is instructing all preachers how they must be equipped; as if He would say: "See, Peter, if you shall preach My word, and thereby feed My sheep, there shall rise against you the powers of hell, devil, world, and all that therein is, and you must be willing to venture body, life, goods, honor, friends, and everything which you have; and this you will not do if you do not love Me and cleave close to Me. And if you should begin to preach, and the sheep were being fed in the pastures, and the wolves would break in, and you would then flee as a hireling, and not venture your life, but leave the sheep without care, to the wolves [John 10:12 ff.], it would have been better that you had never begun to preach and feed the sheep." For if he falls, who preaches the Word and should stand at the head, offence is given to every one, the Word of God is brought to deepest disgrace, and more harm is done to the sheep than if they had no shepherd at all. Christ cares much for the feeding of the sheep; He cares nothing at all how many crowns the pope wears, and how in all his splendor he lifts himself far above the kings of the world.
But everyone should be careful of the deceitful words and manipulative flattery that can create a false sense of love. Christ speaks of the highest, strongest, and truest love that a person can give. He doesn’t want to be loved with a false or split affection; this love must be whole-hearted and pure, or it shouldn't exist at all. What Christ means is that through St. Peter, He’s teaching all preachers how they need to be prepared. It’s as if He says: "Look, Peter, if you are going to preach My word and take care of My flock, you will face the forces of hell, the devil, the world, and everything in it. You have to be ready to risk your body, life, possessions, honor, friends, and everything you have; and you won’t be able to do this if you don’t love Me and hold tightly to Me. If you start preaching, and the sheep are being fed in the meadows, and then wolves come in, and you run away like a hired hand—fleeing instead of risking your life and leaving the sheep unattended—it would be better if you had never started to preach and care for the sheep." Because if someone falls who is meant to preach the Word and lead, it causes offense to everyone, brings deep shame to the Word of God, and does more harm to the sheep than if they had no shepherd at all. Christ genuinely cares about feeding His sheep; He doesn’t care at all about how many crowns the pope wears or how he elevates himself far above the kings of the world in all his splendor.
Let any one tell if he can, whether the papacy has such love, or if Christ, in these words, has instituted such a worthless authority as the papacy is. Without doubt he is truly a pope who preaches with such love; but where can such a one be found? There is no passage that gives me as much sorrow in my preaching as this one does—of love I feel not much, of preaching I do more than enough. They accuse me of being rabid and revengeful; I fear that I have done too little. I should have pulled the wool[76] much harder for the ravening wolves, who never cease to rend the Scripture, to poison and pervert it to the great injury of the poor, forsaken sheep of Christ. If I had only loved them enough I should have dealt quite differently with the pope and his Romanists, who with their laws and their prattle, their letters of indulgence, and the rest of their foolery, bring to naught out faith and God's Word. They make for us what laws they will, only to capture us, and then sell them to us again for money;[77] with their mouths they weave snares for money, and yet boast that they are shepherds and keepers of sheep, whereas they are truly wolves, thieves, and murderers, as the Lord says in John x.
Let anyone say if they can whether the papacy has such love, or if Christ, in these words, has established such a worthless authority as the papacy is. Without a doubt, a true pope is someone who preaches with such love; but where can we find such a person? There is no part of my preaching that brings me as much sorrow as this—of love I feel very little, while I preach more than enough. They accuse me of being angry and vengeful; I fear I have done too little. I should have been much harsher on the ravenous wolves, who never stop tearing apart Scripture, poisoning and perverting it to the great harm of the poor, forsaken sheep of Christ. If I had truly loved them enough, I would have dealt very differently with the pope and his Roman followers, who, with their laws and their nonsense, their letters of indulgence, and all the rest of their foolishness, undermine our faith and God's Word. They create whatever laws they want, just to ensnare us, and then sell them back to us for money; with their words they trap us for profit, yet they boast that they are shepherds and caretakers of the sheep, when in fact they are truly wolves, thieves, and murderers, just as the Lord says in John 10.
I know right well that this little word, "love," scares the pope and his Romanists and makes them weak and weary, nor are they willing that it should be pressed, for it overturns the whole papacy. It made Dr. Eck weary at Leipzig;[78] and whom would it not make weary, since Christ directly commands Peter not to feed the sheep except there be love? He must have love or there can be no "feeding." I shall wait a while now to see how they will parry this thrust. If they prick me with "feeding," I will prick them much harder with "loving," and we shall see who prevails. This is the reason why some of the popes in their Canon laws so neatly pass in silence this word "love," and make so much ado about "feeding," thinking that thereby they have preached only to drunken Germans, who will not notice how the hot porridge burns their tongue. This is the reason, too, why the pope and the Romanists cannot bear any questioning and investigating of the foundation of papal power, and every one is accused of doing a scandalous, presumptuous and heretical thing, who is not satisfied with their mere assertions, but seeks for its real basis. But that one should ask if God is God, and seek in frivolous presumption to penetrate all His mysteries, they suffer with equanimity, and it does not concern them. Whence this perverted game? From this, that, as Christ says, John iii, "He that doeth evil, feareth the light." [John 3:20] Where is the thief or robber who courts investigation? Thus the evil conscience cannot bear the light; but truth loveth the light, and is an enemy to darkness, even as Christ says in the same chapter, "He that doeth truth, cometh to the light." [John 3:21]
I know very well that this little word, "love," frightens the pope and his followers and makes them weak and tired. They don't want it to be emphasized because it challenges the entire papacy. It exhausted Dr. Eck at Leipzig; and who wouldn't feel exhausted by it, since Christ directly tells Peter not to care for the sheep unless there's love? He must have love, or he can't "feed." I'll wait a bit to see how they'll counter this point. If they jab at me with "feeding," I’ll jab back much harder with "loving," and we’ll see who wins. This is why some popes in their Canon laws conveniently ignore the word "love" and focus so heavily on "feeding," thinking they’ve only preached to drunk Germans who won't notice how the hot porridge burns their tongues. This is also why the pope and his followers can’t stand any questioning or investigation into the foundation of papal power, and anyone who isn’t satisfied with their simple statements but seeks the real basis is accused of being scandalous, presumptuous, and heretical. Yet, if someone asks whether God is God, and foolishly tries to dive into all His mysteries, they tolerate that and it doesn’t bother them. Where does this twisted game come from? According to Christ in John 3, "He who does evil fears the light." [John 3:20] Where is the thief or robber who welcomes scrutiny? Thus, the guilty conscience cannot handle the light; but truth loves the light and opposes darkness, just as Christ says in the same chapter, "He who does truth comes to the light." [John 3:21]
Now we see that the two sayings of Christ, spoken to Peter, on which they build the papacy, are stronger against the papacy than all others, and the Romanists can produce nothing that does not make them a laughing-stock. I shall let the matter rest here, and pass by whatever else this miserable Romanist spues out in his book; since I have controverted it all many times before, and now also some others have effectually done so in Latin.[79] I find nothing in it, except that he soils the Holy Scriptures like a sniveling child; in no place does he show a mastery of his words or an understanding of his subject.
Now we see that the two statements of Christ made to Peter, which form the basis of the papacy, actually argue against the papacy more strongly than any other points. The Romanists have nothing to offer that doesn't make them look foolish. I’ll leave it at that and ignore whatever else this pathetic Romanist spits out in his book; I have already addressed all of it many times before, and others have effectively done so in Latin as well.[79] I find nothing in it, except that he tarnishes the Holy Scriptures like a whiny child; at no point does he demonstrate control over his words or a grasp of his topic.
[Sidenote: The Conclusion of the Matter]
[Sidenote: The Conclusion of the Matter]
On the subject of the papacy I have come to this conclusion: Since we observe that the pope has full authority over all our bishops, and has not attained it apart from the providence of God—although I do not believe that it is a gracious, but rather a wrathful providence which permits men, as a plague on the world, to exalt themselves and oppress others—therefore I do not desire that any one should resist the pope, but rather bow to the providence of God, honor this authority, and endure it with all patience, just as if the Turk ruled over us; in this wise it will do no harm.
On the topic of the papacy, I've come to this conclusion: Since we see that the pope has complete authority over all our bishops and that this authority has not come about without God's will—though I think it's a harsh and not a gracious will that allows people, like a plague on the world, to elevate themselves and oppress others—I believe no one should resist the pope. Instead, we should submit to God's will, respect this authority, and tolerate it with patience, just as if we were under the rule of the Turk; in this way, it won't cause any harm.
I contend for but two things. First: I will not suffer any man to establish new articles of faith, and to abuse all other Christians in the world, and slander and brand them as heretics, apostates and unbelievers, simply because they are not under the pope. It is enough that we let the pope be pope, and it is not needful that, for his sake, God and His saints on earth should be blasphemed. Second: All that the pope decrees and does I will receive, on this condition, that I first test it by the Holy Scriptures. He must remain under Christ, and submit to be judged by the Holy Scriptures.
I stand for just two things. First: I won't allow anyone to create new articles of faith and insult all other Christians in the world, labeling and accusing them of being heretics, apostates, and unbelievers, just because they're not under the pope. It's enough that we let the pope be pope, and there's no need for God and His saints on earth to be disrespected for his sake. Second: I will accept everything the pope decides and does only if I first test it against the Holy Scriptures. He must remain under Christ and be willing to be judged by the Holy Scriptures.
But these Roman knaves come along, place him above Christ, and make him a judge over the Scriptures; they say that he cannot err, and whatever is dreamed at Rome, nay, everything which they dare to come out with, they would prescribe for us as articles of faith. And as if that were not enough, they would introduce a new kind of faith, so that we are to believe what we can see with our bodily eyes; whereas faith, by its very nature, is of the things which no one sees or feels, as St. Paul says in Hebrews xi [Heb. 11:1]. Now the Roman authority and fellowship[80] is a bodily thing, and can be seen by any one. If the pope came to that—which may God forbid!—I would say right out that he is the real Antichrist, of whom all the Scriptures speak.
But these Roman tricksters come along, put him above Christ, and make him a judge over the Scriptures; they say that he can't make mistakes, and whatever they conjure up in Rome, no matter what they dare to claim, they want to impose on us as articles of faith. As if that weren't enough, they want to introduce a new kind of faith, where we’re supposed to believe only what we can see with our eyes; while faith, by its very nature, is about things that no one sees or feels, as St. Paul says in Hebrews xi [Heb. 11:1]. Now the Roman authority and fellowship is a physical thing, and anyone can see it. If the pope ever came to that—may God forbid!—I would outright say that he is the true Antichrist, whom all the Scriptures talk about.
If they grant me these two things, I will let the pope remain, nay, help to exalt him as him as they please; if not, he shall be to me neither pope nor Christian. He that must do it may make an idol of him; I will not worship him.
If they give me these two things, I will allow the pope to stay, and even help elevate him however they want; if not, he will be neither pope nor Christian to me. Whoever is in charge can treat him like an idol; I won’t worship him.
Moreover, I would be truly glad if kings, princes, and all the nobles would take hold, and turn the knaves from Rome out of the country, and keep the appointments to bishoprics and benefices out of their hands. How has Roman avarice come to usurp all the foundations, bishoprics and benefices of our fathers? Who has ever read or heard of such monstrous robbery? Do we not also have the people who need them, while out of our poverty we must enrich the ass-drivers and stable-boys, nay, the harlots and knaves at Rome, who look upon us as nothing else but arrant fools, and make us the objects of their vile mockery?
Moreover, I would be really happy if kings, princes, and all the nobles would take action, drive the scoundrels from Rome out of the country, and keep the positions of bishoprics and benefices out of their reach. How has Roman greed come to take over all the institutions, bishoprics, and benefices that belonged to our ancestors? Who has ever read or heard of such outrageous theft? Don’t we also have people who need these positions, while out of our poverty we have to support the donkey drivers and stable hands, and even the prostitutes and crooks in Rome, who see us as nothing more than complete fools and make us the targets of their disgusting mockery?
It is a notorious fact that the Russians desired to come into the Roman fellowship, but then the holy shepherds of Rome "fed" those sheep of Christ in such a manner that they would not receive them unless they first bound themselves to a perpetual tax of I know not how many hundred thousands of ducats. Such "food" they would not eat, and so they remain as they are, saying, if they must buy Christ, they would rather save their money until they come to Christ Himself, in heaven. Thus thou doest, thou scarlet whore of Babylon [Rev. 17:4], as St. John calls thee—makest of our faith a mockery for all the world, and yet wouldest have the name of making every one a Christian.
It’s well-known that the Russians wanted to join the Roman community, but the holy leaders of Rome "fed" those followers of Christ in such a way that they wouldn't accept them unless they first agreed to pay an endless tax of who knows how many hundreds of thousands of ducats. They wouldn't eat such "food," so they stay as they are, saying that if they have to buy Christ, they’d rather save their money until they meet Christ Himself in heaven. Thus you act, you scarlet whore of Babylon [Rev. 17:4], as St. John calls you—making a mockery of our faith for everyone to see, yet you still want to claim you’re making everyone a Christian.
Oh the pity, that kings and princes have so little reverence for Christ, and His honor concerns them so little that they allow such heinous abominations to gain the upper hand, and look on, while at Rome they think of nothing but to continue in their madness and to increase the abounding misery, until no hope is left on earth except in the temporal authorities. Of this I will say more anon,[81] if this Romanist comes again; let this suffice for a beginning. May God help us at length to open our eyes. Amen.
Oh the pity, that kings and princes have so little respect for Christ, and His honor matters to them so little that they let such terrible wrongs take control, and just watch, while in Rome they think of nothing but continuing their madness and adding to the overwhelming misery, until there's no hope left on earth except in the earthly rulers. I will say more about this later,[81] if this Romanist shows up again; let this be enough for now. May God help us finally to open our eyes. Amen.
As for the slanders and evil names with which my person is assailed, although numerous enough, I will let my dear Romanist off without reply. They do not trouble me. It has never been my intention to avenge myself on those who rail at my person, my life, my work, my doings. That I am not worthy of praise, I myself know full well. But I will let no man reproach me that in defending the Scriptures I am more pointed and impetuous than some seem to like, neither will I be silenced. Whoever will, let him freely scold, slander, condemn my person and my life; it is already forgiven him. But let no one expect from me either grace or patience who would make my Lord Christ, Whom I preach, and the Holy Ghost, to be liars. I am nothing at all, but for the Word of Christ I give answer with joyful heart and vigorous courage, and without respect of persons. To this end God has given me a glad and fearless spirit, which they shall not embitter, I trust, not in all eternity.
As for the insults and harmful names directed at me, even though there are many, I’ll let my dear Romanist go without a response. They don’t bother me. I never intended to take revenge on those who criticize me, my life, my work, or my actions. I know very well that I’m not deserving of praise. But I won’t let anyone blame me for being more direct and passionate in defending the Scriptures than some might prefer, and I won’t be silenced. Whoever wants to, let them freely insult, slander, or condemn me and my life; I’ve already forgiven them. But no one should expect me to show either grace or patience toward those who would call my Lord Christ, whom I preach, and the Holy Spirit, liars. I am nothing at all, yet for the Word of Christ, I respond with a joyful heart and strong courage, without favoritism. God has given me a joyful and fearless spirit for this purpose, which I trust they won’t embitter, not now or ever.
That I have mentioned Leipzig, no one should consider an affront to the honorable city and University. I was forced to it by the vaunted, arrogant, fictitious title of this Romanist, who boasts that he is a public teacher of ail the Holy Scriptures at Leipzig,[82] which titles have never before been used in Christendom, and by his dedication[83] to the city and its Council. If the jackanapes had not issued his book in German, in order to poison the defenceless laity, he would have been too small for me to bother with. For this clumsy ass cannot yet sing his hee-haw, and quite uncalled, he meddles in things which the Roman chair itself, together with all the bishops and scholars, has not been able to establish in a thousand years.
That I've mentioned Leipzig should not be seen as an insult to the respected city and University. I was compelled to do so by the boastful, arrogant, and false title of this Romanist, who claims to be a public teacher of all the Holy Scriptures at Leipzig,[82] a title that has never been used in Christendom before, along with his dedication[83] to the city and its Council. If this fool hadn't released his book in German to mislead the defenseless laypeople, he would have been too insignificant for me to engage with. This clumsy fool still can’t get his facts straight and, without any reason, interferes in matters that the Roman chair itself, along with all the bishops and scholars, has not been able to settle in a thousand years.
I should have thought, too, that Leipzig ought to have been too precious in his eyes, for him to smear his drivel and snivel on so honorable and famous a city; but in his own imagination he is no ordinary man. I perceive that if I permit the petulance of all these thick-heads, even the bath-maids will finally write against me.
I should have realized that Leipzig should have been too valuable in his eyes for him to vent his nonsense and complaints about such a respectable and well-known city; but in his mind, he thinks he’s no ordinary guy. I can see that if I allow the irritation of all these stubborn people to get to me, even the bathmaids will eventually speak out against me.
But I pray that whoever would come at me arm himself with the
Scriptures. What helpeth it, that a poor frog puffeth himself up?
Even if he should burst, he is no ox.
But I hope that anyone who comes at me is armed with the
Scriptures. What good does it do for a poor frog to puff himself up?
Even if he bursts, he’s still not an ox.
I would gladly be out of this business, and they force themselves into it. May God grant both of us our prayers,—help me out of it, and let them stick in it Amen.
I would happily be out of this business, while they push themselves into it. May God grant both of us our wishes—help me escape it, and let them stay in it. Amen.
All glory be to God on high
And praise to all eternity. Amen.
All glory be to God in the highest
And praise forever. Amen.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Augustin Alveld, so named from the town of his birth, Alveld in Saxony, a Franciscan monk, Lector of his order at Leipzig. It is said of him that what he lacked in learning he made up for in scurrility, so that he himself complains that his own brother-monks wanted to forbid his writing. John Lonicerus, a friend of Luther, published a small book, Biblia nova Alveldensis, Wittenberg, 1520, in which he gathered a long list of Alveld's terms of reproach used against Luther. To him has been attributed the origin of the undignified style adopted by so many since 1520 on both sides of the controversy about Luther's teachings. Vid. H. A. Erhard, in Ersch und Gruber, Encyclopaedia, iii, 277; Algemeine Deutsche Biographi, I, 375.
[1] Augustin Alveld, named after his birthplace, Alveld in Saxony, was a Franciscan monk and a Lector of his order at Leipzig. It's said that what he lacked in education, he made up for in insults, to the point where he himself complained that his fellow monks wanted to stop him from writing. John Lonicerus, a friend of Luther, published a small book, Biblia nova Alveldensis, in Wittenberg in 1520, where he collected a long list of Alveld's derogatory terms used against Luther. He is credited with starting the crude style that many adopted on both sides of the debate over Luther's teachings after 1520. See H. A. Erhard, in Ersch und Gruber, Encyclopaedia, iii, 277; Algemeine Deutsche Biographi, I, 375.
[2] Cf., Augustine's Confessions, III, vii: "Just as if in armor, a man being ignorant what piece were appointed for what part, should clap a greave upon his head and draw a headpiece upon his leg…"
[2] Cf., Augustine's Confessions, III, vii: "It's like a guy in armor who doesn't know which piece goes where, putting a shin guard on his head and a helmet on his leg..."
[3] The four chief literary opponents of Luther in the earlier years of the Reformation—Sylvester Mazolini, usually called Prierias, after the city of his birth, a papal official (Magister sacri palatii) who had published three books against Luther prior to 1520; Thomas of Gaëtano, Cardinal, and papal legate at the Diet of Augsburg, 1518; John Eck, professor in the University of Ingolstadt, who had been Luther's opponent at the Leipzig Disputation in 1519; Jerome Emser, also active at the Leipzig Disputation, whom Luther was to make the laughing-stock of Germany under the name of "the Leipzig goat," an appellation suggested by his coat-of-arms.
[3] The four main literary opponents of Luther during the early years of the Reformation were Sylvester Mazolini, known as Prierias after his birthplace, a papal official (Magister sacri palatii) who published three books against Luther before 1520; Thomas of Gaëtano, a Cardinal and papal legate at the Diet of Augsburg in 1518; John Eck, a professor at the University of Ingolstadt, who confronted Luther at the Leipzig Disputation in 1519; and Jerome Emser, who also participated in the Leipzig Disputation and whom Luther would mock as "the Leipzig goat," a name inspired by his coat-of-arms.
[4] The Theological Faculties of Cologne and Louvaine officially condemned Luther's writings; the former August 30th, the latter November 7th, 1519. The text of their resolutions was reprinted by Luther with a reply, Responsio ad condemnationem donctrinalem, etc. (1520); Weimar Ed., VI, 174 ff; Erl. Ed., op. var. arg., IV, 172 ff.
[4] The Theological Faculties of Cologne and Louvaine officially condemned Luther's writings; the former on August 30th and the latter on November 7th, 1519. Luther reprinted the text of their resolutions along with his reply, Responsio ad condemnationem donctrinalem, etc. (1520); Weimar Ed., VI, 174 ff; Erl. Ed., op. var. arg., IV, 172 ff.
[5] Neidhart.
Neidhart
[6] The views which Luther expounds in this treatise had already been expressed in a Latin work, Resolutiones super Propositione XIII. de protestate Papae, 1519 (Erl. Ed., op. var. arg., III, 293 ff; Weimar Ed., II, 180 ff). The present work is written in German "for the laity."
[6] The ideas that Luther discusses in this treatise had already been presented in a Latin work, Resolutiones super Propositione XIII. de protestate Papae, 1519 (Erl. Ed., op. var. arg., III, 293 ff; Weimar Ed., II, 180 ff). This current work is written in German "for the general public."
[7] Christenheit. Luther carefully avoids the use of the word "Church" (Kirche). The reason will appear in the argument which follows. In many places, however, the word "Christendom" would not Luther's meaning, and there is, for the modern reader, no such technical restriction to the term "Church" as obtained among Luther's readers. Where the word Christenheit is rendered otherwise than "Christendom" it is so indicated in a foot-note.
[7] Christendom. Luther intentionally avoids using the word "Church" (Kirche). The reason will become clear in the following discussion. However, in many cases, the term "Christendom" does not capture Luther's meaning, and for modern readers, there is no technical limitation on the term "Church" as there was for Luther's audience. When Christenheit is translated in a way other than "Christendom," it will be noted in a footnote.
[8] The chief point argued at the Leipzig Disputation, whether the power of the pope is jure divino or jure humano.
[8] The main issue debated at the Leipzig Disputation was whether the pope's authority is jure divino or jure humano.
[9] Das feine barfüssische Büchlein—i. e., a book written by a bare-footed friar. See below, p. 345.
[9] The fine barefooted little book—i.e., a book written by a barefoot friar. See below, p. 345.
[10] A comment explanatory of a passage of Scripture or of the Canon Law.
[10] An explanation of a part of Scripture or the Canon Law.
[11] Pallium, a scarf made of sheep's wool, which the pope is privileged to wear at all times, and others only on specified occasions; conferred by the pope on persons of the rank of archbishops; on its bestowal depended the assumption of the title and functions of the office. The granting of pallis became a rich source of revenue for the pope since each new incumbent of a prelacy had to apply for his own pallium in person, or by special representative, and to pay for the privilege of receiving it. At the appointment of Uriel as bishop of Mainz in 1508, even the emperor urged a reduction of one-half the usual fees, especially since the previous incumbent had paid the full price but four years previous. The request was denied. See Art Mainz in PRE 1, 2.
[11] The pallium, a scarf made of sheep's wool, is something the pope is allowed to wear at all times, while others can only wear it on specific occasions. It is given by the pope to those of the rank of archbishops; receiving it is tied to taking on the title and responsibilities of the office. The issuance of pallia became a significant source of income for the pope because each new appointee had to apply for their own pallium in person, or through a special representative, and pay for the privilege of receiving it. When Uriel was appointed as bishop of Mainz in 1508, even the emperor requested that the usual fees be cut in half, particularly since the previous bishop had paid the full price just four years earlier. The request was denied. See Art Mainz in PRE 1, 2.
[12] Zur Halfte, so nicht mehr, geistlich. See below, page 356, No. 2.
[12] To the half, not more, spiritually. See below, page 356, No. 2.
[13] Is this an allusion to the papal title, servus servorum Dei, "the servant of the servants of God"?
[13] Is this a reference to the papal title, servus servorum Dei, "the servant of the servants of God"?
[14] Alveld's German treatise described itself in the title as a "fruitful, useful little book."
[14] Alveld's German treatise referred to itself in the title as a "fruitful, useful little book."
[15] Alveld's Latin treatise especially abounds in these appellations.
[15] Alveld's Latin work is especially rich in these names.
[16] Alveld belonged to the branch of the Franciscan Order known as the "Observants" (fratres reglaris observatiae), from their strict observance of the Franciscan Rule. See the title of the Latin treatise in Weimar Ed., VI, 277.
[16] Alveld was part of the branch of the Franciscan Order called the "Observants" (fratres reglaris observatiae) because they strictly followed the Franciscan Rule. See the title of the Latin treatise in Weimar Ed., VI, 277.
[17] Christenheit.
Christianity
[18] Gemeinde—the German equivalent for the Latin communio, communitas, or congregatio. In Luther's use of the term it means sometimes "community," sometimes "congregation," sometimes even "the Church" (Gemeinde der Heiligen). In this case it translates Alveld's civilitas (Weimar Ed., VI, 278).
[18] Gemeinde—the German word that corresponds to the Latin communio, communitas, or congregatio. In Luther's context, it can mean "community," "congregation," or even "the Church" (Gemeinde der Heiligen). In this instance, it translates Alveld's civilitas (Weimar Ed., VI, 278).
[19] Christenheit.
Christianity.
[20] Luther quotes, in German, the reading of the Latin Vulgate.
[20] Luther quotes, in German, the text from the Latin Vulgate.
[21] Christenheit.
Christianity
[22] Gemeinde. A play on the word. On the second use of the term, compare the similar employment of the English word "parish."
[22] Community. A play on the word. In the second use of the term, compare it to the similar use of the English word "parish."
[23] Christenheit.
Christianity
[24] From Veni Sancte Spiritus, an antiphon for Whitsuntide dating from the eleventh century.
[24] From Veni Sancte Spiritus, an antiphon for Pentecost dating from the eleventh century.
[25] Christenheit.
Christianity.
[26] Es ist erlogen und erstunken.
It’s a lie and deceit.
[27] Gemeinde.
[27] Community.
[28] Christenheit.
Christianity
[29] Versammlung.
[29] Meeting.
[30] Gemeinde.
[30] Community.
[31] Versammlung.
Meeting.
[32] Einigkeit oder Gemeinde.
Unity or Community
[33] A quaint interpretation of the passage: "The disciples were called Christians first in Antioch."
[33] A charming take on the passage: "The disciples were first called Christians in Antioch."
[34] Christenheit.
Christianity.
[35] Nun bitten wir den heiligen Geist, a popular pre-Reformation hymn, of one stanza, for Whitsuntide, dating from the middle of the thirteenth century; quoted in a sermon by Berthold, the Franciscan, a celebrated German preacher in the Middle Ages, who died in Regesburg in 1272. Published by Luther, with three stanzas of his own added, in his hymn-book of 1524. Vid. Wackernage, Kirchenlied, ii, 44; Koca, Geachicte des Kirchenlieds, i, 185; Julian, Dict. of Hymnology, 821. Also Miss Winkworth's Christian Singers, 38.
[35] Now we ask the Holy Spirit, a well-known pre-Reformation hymn, consisting of one stanza, for Pentecost, originating from the mid-thirteenth century; cited in a sermon by Berthold, the Franciscan, a famous German preacher in the Middle Ages, who died in Regensburg in 1272. Published by Luther, with three stanzas of his own added, in his hymn book of 1524. See Wackernagel, Church Song, ii, 44; Koca, History of Church Song, i, 185; Julian, Dictionary of Hymnology, 821. Also Miss Winkworth's Christian Singers, 38.
[36] Christenheit.
Christianity.
[37] Gemeinde.
Community.
[38] Christenheit.
Christianity.
[39] Christenheit.
Christianity.
[40] All sources from which the Church or the clergy derived an income were called in the broader sense, "spiritual" possessions. A further distinction was drawn between two kinds of ecclesiastical income—the spiritualia in this sense being the fees, tithes, etc., and the temporalia the income from endowments of land and the like.
[40] All sources from which the Church or the clergy received income were broadly referred to as "spiritual" possessions. A further distinction was made between two types of ecclesiastical income—the spiritualia in this context being fees, tithes, and so on, while the temporalia referred to income from land endowments and similar assets.
[41] The followers of John Huss.
[41] The supporters of John Huss.
[42] Zwölfbote, a popular appellation for the apostles, meaning one of the twelve messengers.
[42] Zwölfbote, a common name for the apostles, meaning one of the twelve messengers.
[43] See page 351.
See page 351.
[44] Christenheit.
Christianity
[45] Literally, "Rastrume better than malvoisie." "Rastrum" was a Leipzig beer reported to be extraordinarily bad; "malvoisie," a highly prized, imported wine, known in England as "malmsey."
[45] Literally, "Rastrum is better than malvoisie." "Rastrum" was a Leipzig beer said to be extremely bad; "malvoisie" was a highly valued, imported wine, known in England as "malmsey."
[46] In the German treatise Alveld says: "It is not enough to have Christ for a shepherd or a head; if that were sufficient, all the heathen, all the Jews, all the errorists, all the heretics would be true Christians. Christ is a lord, a guardian, a shepherd, a head of the whole world, whether we want him or not." (Weimar Ed., VI, 301) In the Latin he says: "No community or assembly (civilitars seu pluralitas) of men can be rightly administered except in the unity of the head, under the Head Jesus Christ." This proposition he develops in detail, saying that "No brothel (contubernium meretricum), no band of thieves, plunderers and robbers, no company of soldiers can be ruled or held together, or long exist without a governor, chief and lord, that is to say, without one head." (Weimar Ed., VI, 278).
[46] In the German treatise, Alveld says: "It's not enough to have Christ as a shepherd or a leader; if that were enough, all the non-believers, all the Jews, all the misguided, and all the heretics would be true Christians. Christ is a lord, a protector, a shepherd, the head of the entire world, whether we accept that or not." (Weimar Ed., VI, 301) In Latin, he states: "No community or assembly (civilitars seu pluralitas) of people can be properly governed except in unity under the head, Jesus Christ." He elaborates on this idea, stating that "No brothel (contubernium meretricum), no gang of thieves, plunderers, or robbers, and no group of soldiers can be governed, held together, or survive for long without a leader, chief, and lord; that is to say, without one head." (Weimar Ed., VI, 278).
[47] See above, p. 358.
See above, p. 358.
[48] Jerome Emser, De disputatione Lipsicense and A venatione Luteriana aegocerotia assertio.
[48] Jerome Emser, On the Leipzig Disputation and An Assertion on the Lutheran Goats.
[49] Augustine, In Joannia Ev., 12, 3, 11. (Migne Ed., 35 149 ff.)
[49] Augustine, In Joannia Ev., 12, 3, 11. (Migne Ed., 35 149 ff.)
[50] Cf. Augustine, De unitate ecclesiae, 5, 8. (Migne Ed., 43, 396 f.)
[50] Cf. Augustine, On the Unity of the Church, 5, 8. (Migne Ed., 43, 396 f.)
[51] In his Sermon von Sacrament des Leichnams Christi of 1519 (Weimar Ed., II, 742 ff.) Luther had made a plea for the restoration of the cup to the laity. At the request of Duke George of Saxony, the bishop of Meissen (Jan. 20th, 1520) forbade the circulation of this tract in his diocese (Weimar Ed., VI, 76; Hauerbath, Luther, I, 316). The controversy, to which Luther contributed is Verklärung etlicher Artikel, etc. (Weimar Ed., VI, 78 ff.), was bitterest in the Leipzig circle to which Alved belonged.
[51] In his Sermon on the Sacrament of Christ's Body from 1519 (Weimar Ed., II, 742 ff.), Luther called for the return of the cup to the laity. At the request of Duke George of Saxony, the bishop of Meissen (Jan. 20th, 1520) prohibited the distribution of this tract in his diocese (Weimar Ed., VI, 76; Hauerbath, Luther, I, 316). The controversy, to which Luther contributed, is Verklärung etlicher Artikel, etc. (Weimar Ed., VI, 78 ff.), and was most intense in the Leipzig circle to which Alved belonged.
[52] See pp. 373 and 380.
[52] See pp. 373 and 380.
[53] A reference to Emser's De disputatione Lipsicense, and A ventione Luteriana aegocerotis assertio, see above, p. 363.
[53] A reference to Emser's De disputatione Lipsicense, and A ventione Luteriana aegocerotis assertio, see above, p. 363.
[54] Luther's greeting to a forthcoming and much heralded work of Eck's, which appeared under the title De primatu Petri.
[54] Luther's greeting to an upcoming and highly anticipated work by Eck, titled De primatu Petri.
[55] This statement cannot be substantiated. But see commentaries on Acts 26:10 f.
[55] This statement can't be backed up. But check out the commentaries on Acts 26:10 f.
[56] The memory of the warlike and avaricious pope Julius II. was still fresh in the mind of Luther and his contemporaries.
[56] The memory of the aggressive and greedy Pope Julius II was still fresh in the minds of Luther and his contemporaries.
[57] Alveld so announced himself in the title of his Latin treatise. In order go gain the necessary leisure for its composition he had obtained a dispensation from all the capel services of his monastery. See Weimar Ed., VI, 277.
[57] Alveld introduced himself in the title of his Latin treatise. To gain the necessary time for writing it, he obtained an exemption from all the chapel duties of his monastery. See Weimar Ed., VI, 277.
[58] In a similar vein of satire Shakespeare uses this very phrase in "Merry Wives of Windsor," III, 5.
[58] In a similar way of making fun, Shakespeare uses this exact phrase in "Merry Wives of Windsor," III, 5.
[59] Gemeinde.
Community.
[60] Alveld had stated that the attempt had been made "more than 23 times"; and again, "The assembly has existed more than 1486 under the chair of St. Peter which Christ has established." See Weimar Ed., VI.
[60] Alveld had stated that the attempt had been made "more than 23 times"; and again, "The assembly has existed more than 1486 under the chair of St. Peter which Christ has established." See Weimar Ed., VI.
[61] Gemeinde.
[61] Community.
[62] Still the old terminology.
Still the old terms.
[63] Equivalent to father-confessor. The pope's own confessor is so called.
[63] Equivalent to father-confessor. The pope's own confessor is called that.
[64] Alveld makes this distinction in both of his treatises.
[64] Alveld makes this distinction in both of his writings.
[65] Gemeinde.
[65] Community.
[66] See page 373.
[66] See p. 373.
[67] See especially the Resolutiones super Propositione XIII.
[67] See especially the Resolutiones super Propositione XIII.
[68] i. e., The Russians, who were in ecclesiastical fellowship with the Orthodox Greek Church. The metropolitan see of Moscow represented the opposition to union with Rome, which had been proposed in 1439; the second metropolitan see of Russia, that of Kief, was until 1519 favorable to the union. See A. Palmieri and W. J. Shipman, in The Catholic Encyclopedia, X, 594 ff; XIII, 255 f., and Adeney, Greek and Eastern Churches, 385 ff.
[68] i. e., The Russians, who were in religious partnership with the Orthodox Greek Church. The metropolitan see of Moscow opposed the union with Rome, which had been suggested in 1439; the second metropolitan see of Russia, that of Kief, favored the union until 1519. See A. Palmieri and W. J. Shipman, in The Catholic Encyclopedia, X, 594 ff; XIII, 255 f., and Adeney, Greek and Eastern Churches, 385 ff.
[69] Gemeinde.
[69] Community.
[70] Annates (annatae, annalia), originally the income which a bishop received from the vacant benefices in his diocese, usually amounting to a year's income of the benefice. By a decree of John XXII, 1317 (Extrav. Jn. XXII, Lib. I, C. 2), the annates are fixed at one-half of one year's income of the benefice reckoned on the basis of the tithes, and payable on accession of the new incumbent. Two years later (1319) the same Pope set an important precedent by claiming for himself the annates from all benefices falling vacant in the next two years (Extrav. Comm. 3, 2, C. II). The right to receive annates subsequently became a regular claim of the popes. The term was extended after 1418 to include, beside the annates proper, the so-called servitia, payments made to the curia by bishops and abbots at the time of their accession. Luther discusses the subject at greater length in the Address to the Christian Nobility. (See Vol. II)
[70] Annates (annatae, annalia) were originally the income that a bishop received from the vacant church positions in his diocese, typically equal to a year's worth of income from that position. A decree from Pope John XXII in 1317 (Extrav. Jn. XXII, Lib. I, C. 2) established that the annates would be set at half of one year's income based on tithes, and would be payable when a new incumbent was appointed. Two years later (1319), the same Pope established a significant precedent by claiming the annates from all vacant benefices for the next two years (Extrav. Comm. 3, 2, C. II). The right to receive annates later became a regular claim by the popes. After 1418, this term was broadened to include, along with the actual annates, the so-called servitia, which were payments made to the curia by bishops and abbots at the time they took office. Luther discusses this topic in more detail in the Address to the Christian Nobility. (See Vol. II)
[71] See above, p. 362.
[71] See above, p. 362.
[72] Römische Einigkeit.
Roman Unity
[73] This is Alveld's explanation in his German treatise.
[73] This is Alveld's explanation in his German book.
[74] Comment, equivalent to "lie" or "invention."
[74] Comment, meaning "lie" or "made-up story."
[75] Rastrum, see above, note on p. 362.
[75] Rastrum, refer to the note above on p. 362.
[76] The sheeps' clothing in which they come.
[76] The sheep's clothing they wear.
[77] A reference to the sale of dispensations, more fully discussed in the Address to the Christian Nobility.
[77] A reference to the sale of dispensations, more fully discussed in the Address to the Christian Nobility.
[78] At the well-known disputation in the previous year.
[78] At the well-known debate last year.
[79] John Lonicer in Contra romanistam fratrem, etc., and John Bernhardi in Confutatio inepti et impii libelli, etc.; both replies to Alveld's Latin treatise which appeared shortly before this treatise of Luther's.
[79] John Lonicer in Against the Romanist Brother, etc., and John Bernhardi in Refutation of the Foolish and Wicked Pamphlet, etc.; both respond to Alveld's Latin work that was published shortly before Luther's treatise.
[80] Gemeinde.
[80] Community.
[81] A promise fulfilled in his Address to the Christian Nobility.
[81] A promise kept in his Address to the Christian Nobility.
[82] In the title to his Latin treatise.
[82] In the title of his Latin essay.
[83] Of the German treatise.
Of the German essay.
INDEX
SCRIPTURE REFERENCES
INDEX
Aaron
Abraham
Abraham's bosom
Absolution
Abuses, in the Mass
Achatius
Adam
Address to the Christian Nobility
Adlolf of Merseberg
Adversity, blessings of
the greatest
Aegidius, St.
Agatha, St.
Agricola
Albrecht of Mainz
Altar-cloths
Alveld
Ambrose
Anapatist
Annates
Anthony, St.
Antichrist
Antilogistae
Apology
Apostate
Apostle
Apostles
Aristotle
Articles of faith
Assurance of salvation
Attrition
Augsburg Confession
Diet of
Augustine
Augustine's Confessions
Auxiliatores
Ave Maria
Aven amal
Aaron
Abraham
Abraham's bosom
Absolution
Abuses in the Mass
Achatius
Adam
Address to the Christian Nobility
Adlolf of Merseberg
Blessings of adversity
the greatest
St. Aegidius
St. Agatha
Agricola
Albrecht of Mainz
Altar cloths
Alveld
Ambrose
Anapatist
Annates
St. Anthony
Antichrist
Antilogistae
Apology
Apostate
Apostle
Apostles
Aristotle
Articles of faith
Assurance of salvation
Attrition
Augsburg Confession
Diet of
Augustine
Augustine's Confessions
Auxiliatores
Ave Maria
Aven amal
Babylon, king of
Babylonian captivity
Baptism
three parts of
the sign of
a flood of grace
a covenant
and penance
significance of
makes guiltless
comfort of
always to be remembered
false confidence in
Baptismal collect
vows
Barbara, St.
Barbara's, St., Day
Begangniss
Beggars
Bendedictite
Benevolence
Bernard of Clairvaux
Bernhardi, John
Bertholdt
Bible, Translation of
Bishop, qualifications of
Bishops all equal
Blasius, St
Blessings
within us
before us
behind us
beneath us
on left hand
on right hand
above us
Bohemians
bon Christian
Boniface VIII.
Books, heathen, are dangerous
Both kinds, communion in
Brandenburg, Bishop of
Breviary
Bridget, St.
Babylon, king of
Babylonian captivity
Baptism
three parts of
the sign of
a flood of grace
a covenant
and penance
significance of
makes guiltless
comfort of
always to be remembered
false confidence in
Baptismal collect
vows
Barbara, St.
Barbara's, St., Day
Beginnings
Beggars
Benedictine
Benevolence
Bernard of Clairvaux
Bernhardi, John
Bertholdt
Bible, Translation of
Bishop, qualifications of
Bishops all equal
Blasius, St
Blessings
within us
before us
behind us
beneath us
on left hand
on right hand
above us
Bohemians
good Christian
Boniface VIII.
Books, pagan, are dangerous
Both kinds, communion in
Brandenburg, Bishop of
Breviary
Bridget, St.
Cajetan
Canon of the Mass
Law
Canonical Hours
Canonisation
Carthusians
Castigation
Casuistry
Catherine, St.
Celia, St.
Ceremonies
one instituted by Christ
Charity
Charles V.
Chastity
vows of
Children, training of
Chimera
Christ, our example
our greatest blessing
our Priest
righteousness of
Christ, the Rock
Christenheit
Christian, the name
Church membership does not make
lord of all
Christopher, St.
Church
authority of
corruption of
House of Prayer
spiritual mother
worldliness of
not bound to Rome
a spiritual community
three uses of the term
marks of
Cicero
Clergy
Collects
Cologne
Commandments, Ten
First
Second
Third
First three
Fourth
First four
Fifth
Sixth
Seventh
Eighth
Ninth and Tenth
of God
a guide in confession
in prayer
of the Church
Comment
Commissaries
Communion without confession
of saints
Community, government of
Compostella
Confession
Roman Catholic conception of
Lutheran conception of
why we confess
insincere
when not to make
justifies
of sin
Sacrament
Confessionalia
Confessional Letters
Conscience
troubled
evil
Considerateness
Constitutions
Contrition
Corporal
Councils
Courtesans
Covenant
Covetousness
Cranach
Cranmer
Creed
Cross of Christ
Cup, why withheld
Curse, a fount of blessing
Custom, value of
Cypriacus, St.
Cyprian
Cajetan
Canon of the Mass
Law
Canonical Hours
Canonization
Carthusians
Punishment
Casuistry
St. Catherine
St. Celia
Ceremonies
one established by Christ
Charity
Charles V.
Chastity
vows of
Children, training of
Chimera
Christ, our example
our greatest blessing
our Priest
righteousness of
Christ, the Rock
Christendom
Christian, the name
being a church member doesn’t make
lord of all
St. Christopher
Church
authority of
corruption of
House of Prayer
spiritual mother
worldliness of
not bound to Rome
a spiritual community
three uses of the term
marks of
Cicero
Clergy
Collects
Cologne
Ten Commandments
First
Second
Third
First three
Fourth
First four
Fifth
Sixth
Seventh
Eighth
Ninth and Tenth
of God
a guide in confession
in prayer
of the Church
Comment
Commissaries
Communion without confession
of saints
Community, government of
Compostella
Confession
Roman Catholic view of
Lutheran view of
why we confess
insincere
when not to confess
justifies
of sin
Sacrament
Confessionalia
Confessional Letters
Conscience
troubled
evil
Considerateness
Constitutions
Contrition
Corporal
Councils
Courtesans
Covenant
Covetousness
Cranach
Cranmer
Creed
Cross of Christ
Cup, why withheld
Curse, a source of blessing
Tradition, value of
St. Cypriacus
Cyprian
Damned, the
David
Day and night
Death and dumb, Mass for
Death
a blessing
bitterness of, due to si
a door to life
a penance and satisfaction
Decrees, papal
Decretals
Defensores
Devil
Dietenberger, John
Dionysus
Dionysus, St.
Diseases, number known
Dishonesty
Disobedience
Dispensation from vows
Disputation
Doctors
Damned, the
David
Day and night
Deaf and mute, Mass for
Death
a blessing
bitterness of, due to sin
a door to life
a penance and satisfaction
Decrees, papal
Decretals
Defenders
Devil
Dietenberger, John
Dionysus
St. Dionysus
Diseases, number known
Dishonesty
Disobedience
Dispensation from vows
Disputation
Doctors
Easter Day
Eck
Elevation of the host
Elmser
Endowments
Enemies, duties toward
Epicureans
Erasmus, Disider
Erasmus, St.
Estates, why instituted
Esther, Queen
Eternal punishment
Eucharistia
Eustachiua, St.
Evils, within us
never fully known
before us
behind us
beneath us
on our left hand
on our right hand
above us
to be loved
Excommunication
Exodus, a type
Extreme Unction
Easter Day
Eck
Elevation of the host
Elmser
Endowments
Enemies, duties toward
Epicureans
Erasmus, Disider
Erasmus, St.
Estates, why they were established
Esther, Queen
Eternal punishment
Eucharistia
Eustachiua, St.
Evils, within us
never fully known
in front of us
behind us
beneath us
on our left
on our right
above us
to be loved
Excommunication
Exodus, a symbol
Extreme Unction
Faith
the highest good work
Faith makes works good
the test of good works
makes all works equal
in the Mass
true priestly office
stages of
work of the First Commandment
includes all good works
and daily sin
and prayer
infirmity of
baptismal
Fasting
Fathers, Church
Fear
Feeding, meaning of
Feiertag
Fides, Informis, formata, informata
Flattery
Flesh, the
Flood, a type of baptism
Forgiveness of sin
Fourteen defenders
Frederick the Wise
Fuggers, the
Faith
the highest good work
Faith makes works good
the test of good works
makes all works equal
in the Mass
true priestly office
stages of
work of the First Commandment
includes all good works
and daily sin
and prayer
infirmity of
baptismal
Fasting
Fathers, Church
Fear
Feeding, meaning of
Feiertag
Fides, Informis, formata, informata
Flattery
Flesh, the
Flood, a type of baptism
Forgiveness of sin
Fourteen defenders
Frederick the Wise
Fuggers, the
Gelübde
Gemeinde
General Councils
George of Saxony
George the Martyr
German Books
Mass
Germans, characterised
Gerson
Gideon
Glosses
Gluttony
God, Name
God, praise of
to have a god
wants our help
Goliath
a type of sin
Good name, danger of
need of
works
none pure
defined
how rejected
how they differ
Treatise.
outline
importance
Gospel
Gottesdienst
Graces of pardon
Gratia infusa
Gratias
Greed
Greek Church
Gregory
Guilt of sin
remission of
Gulden
Gelübde
Community
General Councils
George of Saxony
George the Martyr
German Books
Mass
Germans, characterized
Gerson
Gideon
Glosses
Gluttony
God, Name
God, praise of
to have a god
wants our help
Goliath
a type of sin
Good name, danger of
need of
works
none pure
defined
how rejected
how they differ
Treatise.
outline
importance
Gospel
Worship
Graces of pardon
Infused grace
Thanks
Greed
Greek Church
Gregory
Guilt of sin
remission of
Gulden
Habitus
Head and lord
of Christendom
Heathen
Heaven
Heinse, Simon
Hell
full of God
Heresy
Heretic
Herod
Highpriest, a type of Christ
History, value of
Holidays
Holiness and prayer
as title of the pope
Holy Spirit
Home, a Church
Honor as a motive to good works
Hope
Husband and wife, duties of
Hymns quoted
Hypocrites
Habitus
Head and leader
of Christianity
Non-believer
Heaven
Heinse, Simon
Hell
filled with God
Heresy
Heretic
Herod
High priest, a figure of Christ
History, importance of
Holidays
Holiness and prayer
as a title of the pope
Holy Spirit
Home, a Church
Honor as a motivation for good deeds
Hope
Husband and wife, responsibilities of
Hymns referenced
Hypocrites
Idolatry
Imitatio Christi
Immersion
Indulgence Letters
fairs
Indulgences
Inner man
Instruction to indulgence sellers
Intercession of the Church
Israel, a type
Idolatry
Imitation of Christ
Immersion
Indulgence Letters
fairs
Indulgences
Inner self
Guidelines for indulgence sellers
Intercession of the Church
Israel, a representation
Jahrmarket
James, St.
Jeduthun
Jerome
Jesus, Name of
Jews
the three
Job
Job's wife
John XXII.
John of Saxony
John Baptist, St., Day of
Joseph's wagons
Jubilee Indulgence
Judas
Julius II.
Justice of God
Justification
by faith
Jahrmarket
James, St.
Jeduthun
Jerome
Jesus, Name of
Jews
the three
Job
Job's wife
John XXII.
John of Saxony
John the Baptist, St., Day of
Joseph's wagons
Jubilee Indulgence
Judas
Julius II.
Justice of God
Justification
by faith
Keys of the Church
power of
Koestlin
Keys of the Church
power of
Koestlin
Laity
Last Day
Law of Moses, abolished
Lawrence, St.
Laws
and works
produce sects
purpose of
Legends of saints
Leipzig
Disputation at
Leo X.
Letter to
Letters of pardon
Liberality
Liberty of a Christian
Life, a spiritual baptism
repentance
beginning of death
Lonicer
Lord's Day
Lord's Prayer
Supper
Louvaine
Love of God
required in a bishop
Low Mass
Luther's coarse language
inconsistency
indifference to slander
lack of love
love of peace
pride
submission to pope
zeal for Christ
Luther's zeal for the pope
writings
self-abasement
sense of duty
master of theology
called a heretic
Luxury
Laity
Last Day
Law of Moses, abolished
Lawrence, St.
Laws
and actions
create sects
purpose of
Legends of saints
Leipzig
Disputation at
Leo X.
Letter to
Letters of pardon
Generosity
Freedom of a Christian
Life, a spiritual rebirth
repentance
beginning of death
Lonicer
Lord's Day
Lord's Prayer
Supper
Louvaine
Love of God
required in a bishop
Low Mass
Luther's rough language
inconsistency
indifference to slander
lack of love
love of peace
pride
submission to the pope
zeal for Christ
Luther's zeal for the pope
writings
self-humiliation
sense of obligation
master of theology
called a heretic
Luxury
Mainz, Boshopric
Malvoisie
Man, two natures
three parts of
Manasseh, Payer of
king
Margaret, St.
Mass
a memorial
not a good work
not a sacrifice
fruit of
anniversary
golden
mortuary
requiem
yearly
of the Holy Cross
of our Lady
for the dead
Masters, duties of
Mathesius
Matthias, St.
Meekness
limits of
Meissen, bishop of
Melanchthon
Men, four classes of
Mersio
Metanoia
Micaiah
Mildigkeith
Miltitz
Modus confitendi
Monastic houses
Monica, St.
Monks
Monstrance
Mortal sin
when to be confessed
Muscovites
Moses
Mother of God
Mainz, Bishopric
Malvoisie
Man, two natures
three parts of
Manasseh, Payer of
king
Margaret, St.
Mass
a memorial
not a good work
not a sacrifice
fruit of
anniversary
golden
mortuary
requiem
yearly
of the Holy Cross
of our Lady
for the dead
Masters, duties of
Mathesius
Matthias, St.
Meekness
limits of
Meissen, bishop of
Melanchthon
Men, four classes of
Mersio
Metanoia
Micaiah
Mildigkeith
Miltitz
Modus confitendi
Monastic houses
Monica, St.
Monks
Monstrance
Mortal sin
when to be confessed
Muscovites
Moses
Mother of God
Naaman
New Testament
Treatise on
Year's Present
Noah
Nobility, German
Address to
Naaman
New Testament
Treatise on
Year's Present
Noah
Nobility, German
Address to
Oaths
Obedience
to Church
to masters
to parents
to state
Octavianus
Oelgoetzen
Offering, in the Mass
Offertory
Officiales
Officium
Old Testament
Opus operatum
operati
operantis
Orders, monastic
Original sin
Our Lady
Outward man
Ovid
Oaths
Obedience
to Church
to masters
to parents
to state
Octavianus
Oelgoetzen
Offering, in the Mass
Offertory
Officiales
Officium
Old Testament
Opus operatum
operati
operantis
Orders, monastic
Original sin
Our Lady
Outward man
Ovid
Pallium
Pantaleon, St.
Papacy, corruption of
Papacy, Luther's conclusion of
Treatise on
Papal bulls
pardons
power
of human right
Pardon
Parents, duties of
toward
Paschal, St.
Paschal Lamb
Passion of Christ
Passover
Pastor
Pater noster
Paul, St.
the hermit
Paul of Bourgos
peccata aliena
Penalty of sin
remission of
Penance
mistaken
Penitence
Penitential Canons
Persecution
Persia
Person and office
Personal faith
Peter, St.
Peter's, St., at Rome
Petros, Petra
Pfennig
Pharisee and Publican
Pharisees
Pilgrimages
Plagues
Pledge of Baptism
Plenary indulgence
Poentitentia
Pope
power over purgatory
powers of
the devil's vicar
Popes, some heretics
Power of the Church
of the keys
Praise of men, to be avoided
Prayer
as a good work
without ceasing
outward and inward
and holiness
common
power of
House of
in pulpit
thoughtless
what is to be prayed for
for the dead
in the mass
Preaching
Preceptorium, Luther's
Precepts of the Church
Preparation for the mass
Preparatotia
"Prevail against the gates of hell,"
Prierias
Priest
vicar of God
arrogance of
Priesthood of believers
reforms suggested to
Private confession
Princes, duties of
Promises of God
Prostitution
Protests against Indulgences
Proverbs quoted
Providence
Purgatory
Purpose of better life
Pallium
Saint Pantaleon
Corruption of the Papacy
Luther's conclusions about the Papacy
Treatise on
Papal bulls
pardons
power
of human rights
Pardon
Duties of parents
toward
Saint Paschal
Paschal Lamb
Passion of Christ
Passover
Pastor
Our Father
Saint Paul
the hermit
Paul of Bourgos
alien sins
Penalty of sin
remission of
Penance
misunderstood
Penitence
Penitential Canons
Persecution
Persia
Person and office
Personal faith
Saint Peter
Saint Peter's in Rome
Petros, Petra
Pfennig
Pharisee and Publican
Pharisees
Pilgrimages
Plagues
Baptismal pledge
Plenary indulgence
Poenitentia
Pope
power over purgatory
powers of
the devil's representative
Some Popes, heretics
Power of the Church
of the keys
Avoid seeking praise from men
Prayer
as a good deed
without stopping
outward and inward
and holiness
communal
power of
House of
from the pulpit
thoughtless
what to pray for
for the dead
in the mass
Preaching
Luther's Preceptorium
Church Precepts
Preparation for the mass
Preparatotia
"Prevail against the gates of hell,"
Prierias
Priest
vicar of God
arrogance of
Priesthood of believers
reforms suggested for
Private confession
Duties of princes
Promises of God
Prostitution
Protests against indulgences
Quoted proverbs
Providence
Purgatory
Purpose of a better life
Quæstiones
Questions
Rastrum
Real Presence
Reason of man, perilous
Reformation
Reforms, suggested to princes
Relics
Rent-charges
Repentance
Roman Catholic doctrine
Requiems
Reservatio culpæ
poenæ
Reserved cases
Resolutiones
super prop. XIII.
Rest, bodily
spiritual
Reuchlin
Riches not sin
Rietschl
Right hand and left band
Righteous man defined
Rock, a type of Christ
does not signify authority
Roman Church
See
Rome
corruption in
Rosary
Russians
Rastrum
Real Presence
Human reason, dangerous
Reformation
Reforms, proposed to rulers
Relics
Rent-charges
Repentance
Roman Catholic teaching
Requiems
Reservatio culpæ
poenæ
Reserved cases
Resolutiones
on prop. XIII.
Rest, physical
spiritual
Reuchlin
Wealth is not a sin
Rietschl
Right hand and left hand
Righteous person defined
Rock, a symbol of Christ
does not mean authority
Roman Church
See
Rome
corruption in
Rosary
Russians
Sabbath
Sacrament
Sacrament of the Altar
Sacramental sign
efficacy
Sacramentarians
Sacraments, number of
Sacrifice, of the Haas
spiritual
Sadducees
Saints
worship of
days
Sanctification
Sanctus
Sanftmüthigkeit
Satisfaction
sacramental
Scriptures
estimate of
Roman usage of
Sebastian's, St., Day
Sects
Sentences, of Peter Lombard
Sermo
Sermon, the
v. Sacrament des Leichnams
Serpent, a type of Christ
Servants, duties of
Severinus
Shame
mother of glory
motive to avoid evil
Seal, the sacrament a
Sheba, Queen of
Signs, given by God
of the sacrament
Silence, when a sin
Sin
after baptism
daily, and faith
distinctions of
fictitious
mortal
secret
venial
the nature of the body
the three armies of
Sinful inclinations, do not condemn
are truly sin
Sinnlichkeit
Sixtus IV.
Solicitude
Solomon, a type
Sorgfältigkeit
Spalatin
Spenlein, Georg
"Spiritual"
authority
birth
contrasted with temporal
when to be resisted
estate
finery
wickedness
Spirituales
Spiritualia
Staupitz
Still Mass
Suffering
sanctified by Christ
second step of faith
Sunday
Superstition in the Mast
Sylvester, v. Prierias
Sabbath
Sacrament
Sacrament of the Altar
Sacramental sign
efficacy
Sacramentarians
Sacraments, number of
Sacrifice, of the Haas
spiritual
Sadducees
Saints
worship of
days
Sanctification
Sanctus
Sanftmüthigkeit
Satisfaction
sacramental
Scriptures
estimate of
Roman usage of
Sebastian's, St., Day
Sects
Sentences, of Peter Lombard
Sermo
Sermon, the
v. Sacrament des Leichnams
Serpent, a type of Christ
Servants, duties of
Severinus
Shame
mother of glory
motive to avoid evil
Seal, the sacrament a
Sheba, Queen of
Signs, given by God
of the sacrament
Silence, when a sin
Sin
after baptism
daily, and faith
distinctions of
fictitious
mortal
secret
venial
the nature of the body
the three armies of
Sinful inclinations, do not condemn
are truly sin
Sinnlichkeit
Sixtus IV.
Solicitude
Solomon, a type
Sorgfältigkeit
Spalatin
Spenlein, Georg
"Spiritual"
authority
birth
contrasted with temporal
when to be resisted
estate
finery
wickedness
Spirituales
Spiritualia
Staupitz
Still Mass
Suffering
sanctified by Christ
second step of faith
Sunday
Superstition in the Mast
Sylvester, v. Prierias
Taufe
Temporalis
Temporal authority
contrasted with spiritual
Temptation
sent by God
Terence
Tessaradecas
Testament, defined
of the Mass
parts of
Tetzel
Thanksgiving, in the Mass
Theses, XCV.
text of
Thief on the Cross
Torgau
Transubstantiation
Treasure of the Church
Trent, Decrees of
Trust, in God
Truth loveth light
witnessing to
Truthfulness
Turk
Romans the true Turks
Type and fulfilment
Taufe
Temporalis
Temporal authority
compared to spiritual
Temptation
sent by God
Terence
Tessaradecas
Testament, defined
of the Mass
parts of
Tetzel
Thanksgiving, in the Mass
Theses, XCV.
text of
Thief on the Cross
Torgau
Transubstantiation
Treasure of the Church
Trent, Decrees of
Trust, in God
Truth loves light
witnessing to
Truthfulness
Turk
Romans the real Turks
Type and fulfillment
Unbelief
Unity of the Church
Unbelief Unity of the Church
Veni sancte Spiritus
Venial sin
Verklärung etlicher Artikel
Vicar, the pope no
Vierzehnheiligenkirche
Vitus, St
Votum saciamenti
satisfactionis
Vow, of baptism
Vows
commutation of
dispensation of
Veni sancte Spiritus
Minor sin
Clarification of several articles
Vicar, not the pope
Fourteen Holy Helpers Church
St. Vitus
Sacrament promise
of satisfaction
Baptism promise
Promises
conversion of
exemption from
Wahrheit sagen
War
Wicked, prosperity of
Will of man, perilous
Witness to truth
Wittenberg, castle church
Woman
Word of God
the
Words of the Sacrament
of baptism
Works and faith
Work-righteous saints
Works of mercy
Worldly
Worry
Worship
Writings of men
Wrong, to be resisted
Waking Truth
War
Evil, abundance of
Human will, dangerous
Testimony to truth
Wittenberg, castle church
Woman
God's Word
the
Words of the Sacrament
of baptism
Actions and faith
Works-righteous saints
Acts of kindness
Earthly
Concern
Worship
Writings of people
Wrong, to be opposed
Young, training of the
Young, training of the
Zarephath, widow of
Zedekiah
Zwölfbote
Zarephath, widow of Zedekiah Zwölfbote
SCRIPTURE REFERENCES
OLD TESTAMENT
Genesis— 1:31 1:51 2:3 2:17 3:15 3:19 6:2f. 6:15 8:21 9:9f. 12:1,3 12:6 15:6 17:11 18:18 22:18 45:28ff. Exodus— 3:6ff. 12:7 12:11 12:13 13:9 13:18ff. 13:21 15:23ff. 15:27 16:4f. 18:17ff. 32:11 32:28 32:32 34:26 Leviticus— 11:4 21:5 21:14 Numbers— 14:15ff. 15:19ff. 21:7 21:8 25:1ff. Deuteronomy— 6:16 12:8,32 17:6 28:14 28:65ff. 29:5ff. 32:10ff. 32:13 32:15 Joshua— 7:19 23:6 Judges 3:1ff. 6:37ff. I. Samuel— 1:17f. 2:6 10:6 17:51 21:9 II. Samuel— 12:13 19:6 24:13f. I. Kings— 10:19 19:4 22:24 II. Kings— 4:40 5:20 6:16f. 7:19 21:6 Esther 6:1f. Job— 1:10f. 2:9f. 5:7 6:3 7:1 9:28 31:24 38:10f. Psalm— 1:2 1:3 2:8 2:12 4:7 4:9 6 6:1 15:4 18:3 19:4 19:6 19:9 19:12 23 23:4 23:5 24:1 25:11 26:3 28:5 29:10 30:6 32:1 32:5 32:7 33:5 33:18 34:1 34:18 34:22 37:5 37:25 39 39:6 40:18 45:14f. 50:15 51:5 51:10 54:7 57:7 57:11 62:8 62:10 68:6 73:1 73:12 73:15 73:28 77:11 78:5 80:6 82:2ff. 82:3f. 84:4 89:23 90:10 91:7 91:14 91:15 92:5 102:22 104:15 104:24 104:25 104:33 106:23 106:24 110:4 111:3 111:4f. 115:1 116:11 116:13 119:35,37 119:52 120:4 125:2 128:1-4 132:9 137:9 138:4 139:2f. 139:5 139:12 139:13 142:2 143:2 143:5 145:18 146:12 147:11 Proverbs— 1:20 11:3 16:19 18:10 18:17 21:1 22:15 24:16 27:21 29:7 Ecclesiastes— 1:2,14 5:18 6:2 9:7ff. 10:15 Song of Songs— 2:9 4:6 8:6 Isaiah— 1:22 3:2 6:3 7:9 9:6 9:13 10:32 11:5 28:21 31:9 43:24 46:8 48:1 54:3 56:7 57:5 57:20 60:23 64:7 65:3 65:13ff. 66:17 Jeremiah— 1:6 2:28 7:21 7:31 10:23 12:1 18:4f. 18:8 27:6f. 29:7 32:35 49:12 Lamentations— 3:22f. 3:32f. Ezekiel— 13:10 14:13ff. 20:44 22:30 Daniel 2:48 Hosea— 2:5 8:11f. Amos— 4:11 7:10 Micah 3:2 Zechariah— 2:8 3:2 Malachi— 1:10 3:17
Genesis— 1:31 1:51 2:3 2:17 3:15 3:19 6:2f. 6:15 8:21 9:9f. 12:1,3 12:6 15:6 17:11 18:18 22:18 45:28ff. Exodus— 3:6ff. 12:7 12:11 12:13 13:9 13:18ff. 13:21 15:23ff. 15:27 16:4f. 18:17ff. 32:11 32:28 32:32 34:26 Leviticus— 11:4 21:5 21:14 Numbers— 14:15ff. 15:19ff. 21:7 21:8 25:1ff. Deuteronomy— 6:16 12:8,32 17:6 28:14 28:65ff. 29:5ff. 32:10ff. 32:13 32:15 Joshua— 7:19 23:6 Judges 3:1ff. 6:37ff. I. Samuel— 1:17f. 2:6 10:6 17:51 21:9 II. Samuel— 12:13 19:6 24:13f. I. Kings— 10:19 19:4 22:24 II. Kings— 4:40 5:20 6:16f. 7:19 21:6 Esther 6:1f. Job— 1:10f. 2:9f. 5:7 6:3 7:1 9:28 31:24 38:10f. Psalm— 1:2 1:3 2:8 2:12 4:7 4:9 6 6:1 15:4 18:3 19:4 19:6 19:9 19:12 23 23:4 23:5 24:1 25:11 26:3 28:5 29:10 30:6 32:1 32:5 32:7 33:5 33:18 34:1 34:18 34:22 37:5 37:25 39 39:6 40:18 45:14f. 50:15 51:5 51:10 54:7 57:7 57:11 62:8 62:10 68:6 73:1 73:12 73:15 73:28 77:11 78:5 80:6 82:2ff. 82:3f. 84:4 89:23 90:10 91:7 91:14 91:15 92:5 102:22 104:15 104:24 104:25 104:33 106:23 106:24 110:4 111:3 111:4f. 115:1 116:11 116:13 119:35,37 119:52 120:4 125:2 128:1-4 132:9 137:9 138:4 139:2f. 139:5 139:12 139:13 142:2 143:2 143:5 145:18 146:12 147:11 Proverbs— 1:20 11:3 16:19 18:10 18:17 21:1 22:15 24:16 27:21 29:7 Ecclesiastes— 1:2,14 5:18 6:2 9:7ff. 10:15 Song of Songs— 2:9 4:6 8:6 Isaiah— 1:22 3:2 6:3 7:9 9:6 9:13 10:32 11:5 28:21 31:9 43:24 46:8 48:1 54:3 56:7 57:5 57:20 60:23 64:7 65:3 65:13ff. 66:17 Jeremiah— 1:6 2:28 7:21 7:31 10:23 12:1 18:4f. 18:8 27:6f. 29:7 32:35 49:12 Lamentations— 3:22f. 3:32f. Ezekiel— 13:10 14:13ff. 20:44 22:30 Daniel 2:48 Hosea— 2:5 8:11f. Amos— 4:11 7:10 Micah 3:2 Zechariah— 2:8 3:2 Malachi— 1:10 3:17
APOCRYPHA
Esther 14:10
Wisdom of Solomon—
2:24
3:2f.
4:7
4:10-14
5:6f.
7:16
8:1
15:2
Ecclesiasticus, or Wisdom of Sirach—
2:5
5:8
7:40
11:26
18:30
21:1
31:8f.
45:4
Baruch—
1:11f.
2:21f.
3:17
Prayer of Manasseh—
7
Esther 14:10
Wisdom of Solomon—
2:24
3:2f.
4:7
4:10-14
5:6f.
7:16
8:1
15:2
Ecclesiasticus, or Wisdom of Sirach—
2:5
5:8
7:40
11:26
18:30
21:1
31:8f.
45:4
Baruch—
1:11f.
2:21f.
3:17
Prayer of Manasseh—
7
NEW TESTAMENT
Matthew— 4:17 5:16 5:18 5:22 5:44 6:2 6:7 6:10 6:26ff. 6:31f. 7:3 7:12 7:14 7:15 7:16f. 9:24 10:8 10:22 11:9 11:11 11:21ff. 11:30 13:25 14:3-11 14:30ff. 15:14 16:15 16:18 16:19 16:23 17:25 18:7 18:16 18:18 18:19f. 19:17ff. 21:9 21:13 22:35 22:44 23:4 23:24 24:9f. 24:23 24:24ff. 24:31 24:48ff. 25:34ff. 25:35 25:40 25:41 26:26ff. 26:27 26:28 28:19 Mark— 10:13ff. 11:24 14:22ff. Luke— 2:14 6:27f. 6:32f. 6:36 10:6 10:37 11:9ff. 12:18 12:21ff. 12:32 12:50 13:1ff. 16:22f. 16:25 17:5 17:20 17:21 17:34 18:1 18:10f. 21:11 21:25 22:15 22:17 22:19ff. 22:20 22:32 23:14 23:28 23:35 23:39 24:46f. 24:47 John— 3:5 3:14 3:20f. 3:25 3:30 4:14f. 4:21f. 4:24 5:43 6:28f. 6:29 6:63 7:38 8:28 8:51 9:4 10:12f. 14:6 14:15,21 14:23 15:10 16:2 18:22 18:36 20:22 20:23 21:15 Acts— 1:3 1:23ff. 4:34 5:29 11:26 13:2 14:22 Romans— 1:17 1:24 2:3 2:4 2:6 3:8 3:25 5:3 5:4 5:8f. 6:4 6:8 6:12 7:7 7:14-19 7:18 7:19 7:22 7:24f. 8:1 8:2 8:26 8:28 8:32 8:34 8:36 9:3 9:5 10:9ff. 10:14 11:20 12:4 12:8 12:14f. 13:1 13:3f. 13:4 13:12f. 14:1 14:6 14:8f. 14:23 15:4 I. Corinthians— 1:30 2:16 3:1 3:5 3:23 5:7 10:3 10:4 10:6 10:12 10:13 10:17 10:30f. 10:31 11:21f. 11:23ff. 11:25 11:26 12 12:6 12:22ff. 12:26 13:3 15:55ff. II. Corinthians— 3:7 3:17 4:2 5:20 10:30f. 12:7 Galatians— 2:20 3:2 3:28 5:6 5:13 5:17 5:24 6:2 6:10 Ephesians— 3:20 4:5 4:15f. 5:15 5:22ff. 6:5 6:7 6:17 Philippians— 1:21 2:4ff. 2:12 Colossians— 2:16 3:3 3:5 3:17 3:18ff. 3:22 4:1 II. Thessalonians 2:3f. I. Timothy— 1:2ff. 1:9 4:1ff. 6:1 6:17 II. Timothy 3:1ff. Titus— 1:14 2:8f. 2:1-10 3:1 3:5 Hebrews— 5:6,10 8:13 9:6ff. 9:16f. 9:24 11:1 11:6 11:24ff. 12:1 12:3 12:4ff. 12:6 13:15 James— 1:6 1:12 2:10 4:3 5:16 I. Peter— 2:7 2:9 2:11 2:13 2:14f. 2:16 2:18f. 2:19ff. 3:3 3:6ff. 3:20f. 4:1 4:12 4:18 4:19 5:7 5:9 II. Peter— 1:10 2:8 I. John— 1:9 2:1 f. 2:27 3:9 3:19ff. Revelation— 1:6 5:10 13:17 17:4
Matthew— 4:17 5:16 5:18 5:22 5:44 6:2 6:7 6:10 6:26ff. 6:31f. 7:3 7:12 7:14 7:15 7:16f. 9:24 10:8 10:22 11:9 11:11 11:21ff. 11:30 13:25 14:3-11 14:30ff. 15:14 16:15 16:18 16:19 16:23 17:25 18:7 18:16 18:18 18:19f. 19:17ff. 21:9 21:13 22:35 22:44 23:4 23:24 24:9f. 24:23 24:24ff. 24:31 24:48ff. 25:34ff. 25:35 25:40 25:41 26:26ff. 26:27 26:28 28:19 Mark— 10:13ff. 11:24 14:22ff. Luke— 2:14 6:27f. 6:32f. 6:36 10:6 10:37 11:9ff. 12:18 12:21ff. 12:32 12:50 13:1ff. 16:22f. 16:25 17:5 17:20 17:21 17:34 18:1 18:10f. 21:11 21:25 22:15 22:17 22:19ff. 22:20 22:32 23:14 23:28 23:35 23:39 24:46f. 24:47 John— 3:5 3:14 3:20f. 3:25 3:30 4:14f. 4:21f. 4:24 5:43 6:28f. 6:29 6:63 7:38 8:28 8:51 9:4 10:12f. 14:6 14:15,21 14:23 15:10 16:2 18:22 18:36 20:22 20:23 21:15 Acts— 1:3 1:23ff. 4:34 5:29 11:26 13:2 14:22 Romans— 1:17 1:24 2:3 2:4 2:6 3:8 3:25 5:3 5:4 5:8f. 6:4 6:8 6:12 7:7 7:14-19 7:18 7:19 7:22 7:24f. 8:1 8:2 8:26 8:28 8:32 8:34 8:36 9:3 9:5 10:9ff. 10:14 11:20 12:4 12:8 12:14f. 13:1 13:3f. 13:4 13:12f. 14:1 14:6 14:8f. 14:23 15:4 I. Corinthians— 1:30 2:16 3:1 3:5 3:23 5:7 10:3 10:4 10:6 10:12 10:13 10:17 10:30f. 10:31 11:21f. 11:23ff. 11:25 11:26 12 12:6 12:22ff. 12:26 13:3 15:55ff. II. Corinthians— 3:7 3:17 4:2 5:20 10:30f. 12:7 Galatians— 2:20 3:2 3:28 5:6 5:13 5:17 5:24 6:2 6:10 Ephesians— 3:20 4:5 4:15f. 5:15 5:22ff. 6:5 6:7 6:17 Philippians— 1:21 2:4ff. 2:12 Colossians— 2:16 3:3 3:5 3:17 3:18ff. 3:22 4:1 II. Thessalonians 2:3f. I. Timothy— 1:2ff. 1:9 4:1ff. 6:1 6:17 II. Timothy 3:1ff. Titus— 1:14 2:8f. 2:1-10 3:1 3:5 Hebrews— 5:6,10 8:13 9:6ff. 9:16f. 9:24 11:1 11:6 11:24ff. 12:1 12:3 12:4ff. 12:6 13:15 James— 1:6 1:12 2:10 4:3 5:16 I. Peter— 2:7 2:9 2:11 2:13 2:14f. 2:16 2:18f. 2:19ff. 3:3 3:6ff. 3:20f. 4:1 4:12 4:18 4:19 5:7 5:9 II. Peter— 1:10 2:8 I. John— 1:9 2:1 f. 2:27 3:9 3:19ff. Revelation— 1:6 5:10 13:17 17:4
Download ePUB
If you like this ebook, consider a donation!