Selected Sermons and Reformation Treatises

Source

Source: Project Gutenberg #31604/#34904/#1722 Source URL: https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/31604 ; https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/34904 ; https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/1722 Translator: C. M. Jacobs, A. T. W. Steinhaeuser, W. A. Lambert, and others (Philadelphia edition); F. Bente and W. H. T. Dau (Large Catechism) (1915) Public domain basis: Public-domain US translations published before 1931: Works of Martin Luther, with Introductions and Notes, vols. 1-2 (Philadelphia: A. J. Holman, 1915-1916); the Large Catechism as translated by F. Bente and W. H. T. Dau in Triglot Concordia (St. Louis: Concordia, 1921). Coverage: Partial: Philadelphia edition vol. 1 (the Ninety-Five Theses, Treatise on Baptism, Discussion of Confession, The Fourteen of Consolation, Treatise on Good Works, Treatise on the New Testament, The Papacy at Rome) and vol. 2 (Treatise on the Blessed Sacrament, Treatise concerning the Ban, Open Letter to the Christian Nobility, Babylonian Captivity of the Church, Treatise on Christian Liberty, Brief Explanation of the Ten Commandments, Creed, and Lord's Prayer, and the Eight Wittenberg Sermons of 1522), with the editors' introductions; plus the complete Large Catechism. Luther's postils (Lenker's Church and Epistle Sermons) are not included.

Works of Martin Luther, vol. 1 (Philadelphia edition, 1915)

# Works of Martin Luther, vol. 1 (Philadelphia edition, 1915)

Produced by Michael McDermott, from scans obtained from the Internet Archive

WORKS OF MARTIN LUTHER WITH INTRODUCTIONS AND NOTES VOLUME I

PHILADELPHIA A. J. HOLMAN COMPANY 1915

Copyright, 1915, by A. J. HOLMAN COMPANY

Contents Introduction Translator'S Note

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Henry Eyster Jacobs. Luther Theological Seminary, Mt. Airy, Philadelphia.

Translators' Note

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Works Of Martin Luther

WORKS OF MARTIN LUTHER

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Footnotes

FOOTNOTES

[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.

[3] "There is moderation in all things."

[4] "I shall not be better than my fathers." 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

[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).

[3] i. e. Frivolous mockers at holy things.

[4] See 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.

The Disputation Of Doctor Martin Luther On The Power And Efficacy Of Indulgences

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

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."

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]

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?"

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."

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?

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.

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.

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]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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]

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.

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]

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.

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.

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

(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.

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 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 the financial aspects of the indulgence-traffic, Schulte, _Die Fugger in Rom_, 2 vols., Leipzig, 1904.

Charles M. Jacobs

CHARLES M. JACOBS. Allentown, PA.

FOOTNOTES

[1] _Disputato pro declaratione virutis indulgentiarum_.

[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.

[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.

[5] Luther had preached a sermon warning against the danger of indulgences on the Eve of All Saints (1516). See below.

[6] See below, Letter to Leo X.

[7] _Weimar Ed._, I, 230.

[8] The Address to the Christian Nobility and the Babylonian Captivity of the Church.

[9] Introduction to the Complete Works (1545); above p.10.

[10] See Letter to Staupitz, below.

[11] See Letter to Leo X, below.

[12] Cf. Gottlob, _Kreuzablass und Almosenblass_, p. I.

[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.

[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.

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.

[16] See Thesis 12.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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_.

[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.

[24] See Theses 26.

[25] i. e. A plenary indulgence similar to those granted for pilgrimage to Rome in Jubilee-years. See above, p.18.

[26] See Theses 53-55.

[27] See Thesis 75.

[28] See Thesis 35.

[29] See Thesis 27.

[30] _Weimar Ed._, I, 63 ff.; _Erl. Ed._, I, 101 ff.

[31] _Weimar Ed._, I, 94 ff,; _Erl. Ed._, I, 171 ff., 177 ff.

[32] See Thesis 1.

[33] See Thesis 4.

[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.

[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.

[36] _Weimar Ed._, I, pp. 525 ff.

I Letter To The Archbishop Albrecht Of Mainz

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.

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.

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]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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.

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.

May the Lord Jesus have your Most Reverend Fatherhood eternally in His keeping. Amen.

From Wittenberg on the Vigil of All Saints, MDXVII.

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.

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).

[2] See Theses 18-24, 32, 52.

[3] See Thesis 27.

[4] See Thesis 75.

[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.

[7] See Thesis 5.

[8] See Theses 41-47.

[9] See Theses 52-55.

[10] See Thesis 80.

[11] See above, Introduction, p. 22 f.

[12] See Theses 21, 33.

[13] See Thesis 55, and Introduction, p.22.

[15] viz., The Instruction to the Commissaries.

Ii Disputation Of Doctor Martin Luther On The Power And Efficacy Of Indulgences

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.

In the Name 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]

2. This word cannot be understood to mean sacramental penance, i. e., confession and satisfaction, which is administered 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.

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.

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]

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.

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.

8. The penitential canons are imposed only on the living, and, according to them, nothing should be imposed on the 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]

10. Ignorant and wicked are the doings of those priests who, in the case of the dying, reserve 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]

13. In former times the canonical penalties were imposed not after, but before absolution, as tests of true contrition.

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.

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.

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.

16. Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to differ as do despair, almost-despair, and the assurance of safety.

17. With souls in purgatory it seems necessary that horror would grow less and love increase.

18. It seems unproved, either by reason or Scripture, that they are outside the state of merit, that is to say, of increasing 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.

20. Therefore by "full remission of all penalties" the pope means not actually "of all," but only of those imposed by himself.

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;

22. Whereas he remits to souls in purgatory no penalty which, according to the canons, they would have had to pay 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.

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.

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.

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.

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]

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.

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]

30. No one is sure that his own contrition is sincere; much less that he has attained full remission.

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.

32. They will be condemned eternally, together with their teachers, who believe themselves sure of their salvation because they have letters of pardon.[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;

34. For these "graces of pardon" concern only the penalties of sacramental satisfaction, and these are appointed by man.[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]

36. Every truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of penalty and guilt, even without letters of pardon.

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.

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.

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.

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].

41. Apostolic[13] pardons are to be preached with caution, lest the people may falsely think them preferable to other good works 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.

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;

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.

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.

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.

47. Christians are to be taught that the buying of pardons is a matter of free will, and not of commandment.

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.

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]

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.

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.

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. 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.

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]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

60. Without rashness 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.

62. The true treasure of the Church is the Most Holy Gospel of the glory and the grace of God.

63. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be last.

64. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is naturally most acceptable, for it makes the last to be first.

65. Therefore the treasures of the Gospel are nets with which they formerly were wont to fish for men of riches.

66. The treasures of the indulgences are nets with which they now fish for the riches of men.

67. The indulgences which the preachers cry as the "greatest graces" are known to be truly such, in so far as they promote gain.

68. Yet they are in truth the very smallest graces compared with the grace of God and the piety of the Cross.

69. Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of apostolic pardons, with all reverence.

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.

71. He who speaks against the truth of apostolic pardons, let him be anathema and accursed!

73. But he who guards against the lust and license of the pardon-preachers, let him be blessed!

73. The pope justly thunders[18] against those who, by any art, contrive the injury of the traffic in pardons.

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.

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]

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]

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.

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.

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.

80. The bishops, curates and theologians who allow such talk to be spread among the people, will have an account to render.

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.

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."

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?"

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?"

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?"

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?"

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?"

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?"

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]

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.

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.

92. Away, then, with all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, "Peace, peace," and 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]

94. Christians are to be exhorted that they be diligent in following Christ, their Head, through penalties, deaths, and hell;

95. And thus be confident of altering into heaven rather through many tribulations, than through the assurance of peace. [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."

[2] The Roman theology distinguishes 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.

[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.

[6] i. e., Merely human doctrine.

[7] An alleged statement of indulgence-vendors. 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."

[9] Luther uses the terms "pardon" and "indulgence" interchangeably.

[10] For 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.

[12] See above, Thesis 6.

[13] i. e., "Papal."

[14] Cf. Thesis 32.

[15] The commissioner who sold the letters of indulgence.

[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).

[17] See Introduction, p. 20, note 2.

[18] i. e., Threatens with "thunder-bolt" 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.

[20] Cf. Thesis 6.

[21] Cf. Thesis 5 and note.

[22] Cf. Theses 36, 37.

[23] The letter of indulgence entitled its possessor to absolution "once in life and in the article of death."

[24] During the time when the Jubilee-indulgences were preached, other Indulgences were suspended.

[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).

III

LETTER TO JOHN STAUPITZ ACCOMPANYING THE "RESOLUTIONS" TO THE XCV THESES

1518

To his Reverend and Dear Father

John Staupitz,

JOHN STAUPITZ,

Professor of Sacred Theology, Vicar of the Augustinian Order,

Brother Martin Luther,

his pupil,

sendeth greeting.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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_.

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.

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]

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.

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.

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.

The Lord Jesus keep thee eternally, my gracious Father!

Wittenberg, Day of the Holy Trinity, MDXVIII

FOOTNOTES

[1] "Penitence," "repentance," "penance," are all translations of 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.

[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.

[5] Lat. _transmutatio_, "the act or process of changing," not simply "a change" (_mutatio_).

[6] _Transitus mentis_.

[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.

[8] _Burgenesis_, i. e. Paul of Bourgos (1353-1435).

[9] Another bit of Mediæval philology.

[10] See Introduction, p. 19.

[11] Cf. Thesis 1, and foot-note.

[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.

[13] The Ninety-five Theses.

[14] Tetzel's reply to the Theses (_Disputatio II, Jo. Tetzelli_), 1517. Loescher, I, pp. 517 ff.

[15] A Latin adage, _chorcorus inter olern_.

IV

LETTER TO POPE LEO X, ACCOMPANYING THE "RESOLUTIONS" TO THE XCV THESES 1518

To the

Most Blessed Father,

LEO X.

Martin Luther,

Augustinian Friar,

wisheth everlasting welfare.

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]

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.

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.

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!

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]

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.

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.

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.

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]

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.

May He have you too forever in His keeping. Amen.

Anno Mdxviii. Footnotes

ANNO MDXVIII.

FOOTNOTES

[1] See Introduction, pp. 18, 21.

[2] i. e. The papal laws regulating the methods of collectors of church-funds.

[3] The Ninety-five Theses.

[4] See Tetzel's _II. Disputation_, Theses 47, 48. Loescher, I, p. 522.

A Treatise On The Holy Sacrament Of Baptism

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.

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.

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]

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]

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.

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.

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]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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

HENRY E. JACOBS.

Mount Airy, Philadelphia.

FOOTNOTES

[1] _Erl. Ed., op. var. arg._, III, 394-410.

[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.

[4] For formulas, see Höfling, _Das Sacrament der Taufe_, II. 40.

[5] Riechschel, _Lehrbuch der Liturgik_, 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.

[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.

[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."

[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."

[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.

[12] i. e. The theory of the Roman Church that even without the faith of a recipient, the blessing of the sacrament is bestowed.

[13] _Erl. Ed._, XXVI, 268.

[14] _Ibid._, 269.

[15] _Erl. Ed._, XXVI, 292.

[16] _Ibid_., 275.

[17] _Ibid_., 275.

[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.

A Treatise On Baptism

A TREATISE ON BAPTISM

[Sidenote: Meaning 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.

[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.

[Sidenote: The Thing Signified]

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.

[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.

[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]

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.

[Sidenote: The Continuance of 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.

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.

[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.

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.

[Sidenote: Baptism 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.

[Sidenote: 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.

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.

[Sidenote: God's Pledge]

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.

[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."

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.

[Sidenote: 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.]

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."

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.

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.

[Sidenote: 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.

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.

[Sidenote: 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.

[Sidenote: Forgiveness and Sanctification]

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.

[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]

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.

[Sidenote: Baptism and Good Works]

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.

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.

[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?

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.

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.

[Sidenote: 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.

[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."

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]

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]

FOOTNOTES

[1] Literally, "lifted or raised out of baptism"; in common usage simply "baptised." Cf. "_aus der Taufe beben_," "to stand sponsor."

[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.

[4] See above, p. 58.

[5] See above, p. 57.

[6] See above, p. 57.

[7] Good works prescribed as "penances" upon confession to the priest.

[8] Literally, "lifted up out of it." See above, p. 57, note 1.

[9] 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.

[11] The power to forgive and retain sin, belonging, according to Roman teaching, to the priest, and normally exercised in the sacrament of penance.

[12] Cf. _Fourteen of Consolation_, Part II, ch. II; below, pp. 146 ff.

[13] See above, p. 59.

[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.

A Discussion Of Confession

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.

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 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 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.

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]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Henry E. Jacobs. Mount Airy, Philadelphia.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

[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_."

[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.

[4] _Erl. Ed., op. ex. lat._, XIX, 1-154.

[5] _Erl. Ed._ (2d ed.), XI, 173.

[6] See the opening paragraph of this treatise.

[7] _Erl. Ed._, XI, 166, XXIX, 352-359. Cf. with this, the still fuller treatment by Chemnitz, _Examin Concilii Tridentini_ (Preuss edition), 441-453.

[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.

[10] _Sermon vom Sacrament der Busse_, Erl. Ed., XX, 190. For definition of "mortal and venial," see Introduction to XCV Theses, above, p. 19.

[11] See Vol. II. of this edition.

[12] Deninger, _Enchridion Symbolorum_, soc. 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.

[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."

A DISCUSSION OF CONFESSION

(CONFITENDI RATIO)

1520

FIRST

[Sidenote: Need of 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].

SECOND

[Sidenote: 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.

THIRD

[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.

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.

[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]

FIFTH

[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.

SIXTH

[Sidenote: Hidden Sins--Are They to 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]

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]

SEVENTH

[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]

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.

EIGHT

[Sidenote: Mortal and Venial 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.

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.

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.

[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]

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.

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.

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.

NINTH

[Sidenote: Distinction 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 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.

[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.

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]

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.

TENTH

[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.

Let me give you some illustrations:

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.

[Sidenote: They Tyranny of Ordinances]

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.

Of the laity, one confesses that he has tasted sweets, another that he has listened to jests, smelted perfumes, touched 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.

Eleventh

ELEVENTH

[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 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.

TWELFTH

[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.

LAST

[Sidenote: 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.

[Sidenote: Their Abuse]

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.

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.

[Sidenote: Vows Made 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.

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.

[Sidenote: Commutation 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.

[Sidenote: Abuses of Penance]

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.

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.

_Here follows, in the original, 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.

[2] Vulgate, _Justus prior est accusator_.

[3] The apocryphal Prayer of Manasseh was included by Luther as an appendix to this treatise.

[4] _Augustine Conf._, X, 29.

[5] i. e., Forced to confess hidden sins.

[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.

[7] Cf. _Small Catechism_, "Of Confession," Ques. "What sins ought we to 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_.

[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.

[10] i. e., By thinking of the nature 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."

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[17] i. e., Of 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.

[19] An Italian saint, d. 482, noted for the strictness and severity of his ascetic practices.

[20] Professor of the University of Paris; one of the most popular and famous of the later Scholastics. He died 1429.

[21] Vulgate, "_Cor ejus paratus est_."

[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.

[24] The power to "bind and loose" (Matt. 16:19), i. e., to forgive and to retain 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.

[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_.

[27] In Spain. The shrine of St. James at that place was a famous resort for pilgrims. Cf. below, p. 191, and note.

[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.

[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.

The Fourteen Of Consolation For Such As Labor And Are Heavy Laden

THE FOURTEEN OF CONSOLATION

FOR SUCH AS LABOR AND ARE HEAVY LADEN

(TESSARADECAS CONSOLATORIA)

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.

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."

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.

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."

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.

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.

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]

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.

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]

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.

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."

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.

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.

[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.

[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.

[4] 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_)."

[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.

The Fourteen Of Consolation

THE FOURTEEN OF CONSOLATION

(TESSARADECAS CONSOLATORIA)

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.

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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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.

Your Lordship's humble servant,

Martin Luther, Doctor.

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.

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]

Chapter I

CHAPTER I

The First Image The Evil Within Us

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]

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.

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]

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.

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.

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]

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]

Chapter Ii

CHAPTER II

The Second Image The Future Evil, Or The Evil Before Us

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!

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 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, 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]

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."

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]

Chapter Iii

CHAPTER III

The Third Image The Past Evil, Or The Evil Behind Us

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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

Chapter Iv

CHAPTER IV

The Fourth Image The Infernal Evil, Or The Evil Beneath Us

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.

The first, then, of the evils beneath us is death, and the other 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]

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.

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]

Chapter V

CHAPTER V

The Fifth Image The Evil On Our Left Hand

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.

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.

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]

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.

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.

Chapter Vi

CHAPTER VI

The Sixth Image The Evil On Our Right Hand

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,

What torments all the Saints endured, That they might win the martyr's palm!

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.

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.

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]

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.

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.

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]

Chapter Vii

CHAPTER VII

The Seventh Image The Supernal Evil, Or The Evil Above Us

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.

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?

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.

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]

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.

Part Ii

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.

CHAPTER I

The First Image The Blessing Within Us

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.

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 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.

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]

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]

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.

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.

CHAPTER II

The Second Image The Future Blessing, Or The Blessing Before Us

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.]

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.

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]

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.]

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]

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.

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]

By his own art the artist perisheth.

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]

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!

CHAPTER III

The Third Image The Past Blessing, Or The Blessing Behind Us

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.

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.

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.

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]

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.

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.

CHAPTER IV

The Fourth Image The Infernal Blessing, Or The Blessing Beneath Us

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

Happy are they who caution gain From that that which caused another'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.

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.

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.

CHAPTER V

The Fifth Image The Blessing On Our Left Hand

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]

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!

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."

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.

CHAPTER VI

The Sixth Image The Blessing On Our Right Hand

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 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]

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?

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]

CHAPTER VII

The Seventh Image The Supernal Blessing, Or The Blessing Above Us

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.

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.

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]

Epilogue

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.

Your Most Illustrious Lordship's Intercessor, Brother Martin Luther, _Augustinian at Wittenberg._

FOOTNOTES

[1] Written by Luther for the last edition of 1535.

[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.

[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.

[5] Omitted, through on 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.

[7] _Tessaradecas_.

[8] See Introduction, pp. 106 f.

[9] In the body of the work Luther places (6) between (3) and (4).

[10] A reminiscence of Luther's childhood?

[11] Luther has particular reference to the Elector's high rank.

[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.

[13] Job calls it a "warfare" (militia).

[14] Luther harks back to his discussion of this point in the Preface, p. 113.

[15] Particular reference to the Elector.

[16] See pp. 147 ff.

[17] _Cypr. de mortal_. c. V.

[18] Vulgate reading.

[19] See pp. 149 f.

[20] 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.

[22] Luther no longer held this view of "satisfaction" in 1535. See also pp. 150 and 161.

[23] Luther is thinking here specifically of the Elector.

[24] He means the communion of saints. See next chapter.

[25] According to the Vulgate (Douay Version).

[26] August 29th. See Introduction, p. 105.

[27] Cf. _A Discussion of Confession_, above, p. 82.

[28] Luther might have considerably revised this whole paragraph.

[29] This seems to refer to the writers 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.

[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.

[32] Cf. Letter to George Leiffer, 15 April, 1516. See M. A. Cueriz, _The Letters of M. Luther_, p. 7.

[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."

[35] See p. 134.

[36] In this passage "Wisdom" is the subject.

[37] In the _Sanctus_.

[38] See p. 118.

[39] Luther quotes a verse from Ps. 106, which sums up the contents of Ps. 78.

[40] Luther uses _sensualitas_ the first time, and _sensus_ the second.

[41] See p.115.

[42] _The Confessions of St. Augustine_, Book IX, chapter 1.

[43] Luther is probably thinking of the sin of suicide.

[44] From the Vulgate (Douay Version).

[45] Namely, the hope of the passing evil and the coming of good things. See above.

[46] The last two passages read thus in the Vulgate.

[47] See p. 122.

[48] Cf. p. 127, note.

[49] Thus the Vulgate.

[50] _Ovid, Ars amat._, I, 656.

[51] Cf. _Treatise on Baptism_, above, p. 66.

[52] See pp. 123 ff.

[53] _The Confessions of St. Augustine_, Book I, chap. vi.

[54] Thus the Vulgate.

[55] _Comm. in Ps. xxxix, No. 27_.

[56] Book VIII, chap. xi.

[57] See p. 152.

[58] See pp. 126 ff.

[59] See pp. 126 ff.

[60] _Gregor. dialogorum libri iv_, containing number of examples of the terrible end of the wicked.

[61] One of the passages Luther did not care to correct. Compare p. 127, note.

[62] Luther here unites 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.

[64] See pp. 133 ff.

[65] Luther has mistaken 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_."

[67] See _A Discussion of Confession_, above, p. 88.

[68] Changed to "Christian" in the Catechisms (1529), although the Latin translations retain _catholocism_.

[69] The Apostle does not 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)._

[71] Thus the Vulgate.

[72] See pp. 137 ff.

[73] Vulgate.

[74] Namely, after His resurrection.

[75] Compare the different form of this verse on p. 112.

[76] He means the sin of Adam.

[77] The germ of _The Liberty of a Christian Man_ (1520).

[78] Cf. Terence's _surdo narrare fabulam. Heauton.,_ 222.

A Treatise On Good Works, Together With The Letter Of Dedication

A TREATISE ON GOOD WORKS,

TOGETHER WITH THE LETTER OF DEDICATION

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]

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.

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.

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."

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]

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.

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.

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."

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 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 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.

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.

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.

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."

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

M. Reu.

Wartburg Seminary, Dubuque, Iowa.

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.

[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.)

[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."

A Treatise On Good Works

A TREATISE ON GOOD WORKS

1520

Dedication

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.

Illustrious, High-born Prince, gracious Lord! My humble duty and my feeble prayer for your Grace always remembered!

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.

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]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

I humbly commend myself herewith to your princely Grace,

Your Princely Grace's Humble Chaplain, Dr. Martin Luther.

From Wittenberg, March 39th, A.D. 1520.

The Treatise

THE TREATISE

[Sidenote: 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.

[Sidenote: Faith 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.

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.

[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.

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 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.

[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.

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]

[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.

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.

[Sidenote: 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.

[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.]

[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]

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.

[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.

[Sidenote: 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]

[Sidenote: The First Commandment]

[Sidenote: 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.

[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.

[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.

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.

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.

[Sidenote: Works and Faith Contrasted]

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.]

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.

[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.

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]

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.

[Sidenote: Why Laws are Given]

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.

[Sidenote: Four Kinds 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.

[Sidenote: Charity Endures Unnecessary Works]

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]

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]

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.

[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.

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.

[Sidenote: The Source 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."

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]

[Sidenote: 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.

[Sidenote: 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.

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.

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."

[Sidenote: Its Positive Works]

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.

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]

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.

[Sidenote: The Praise of 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.

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.

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.

[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.

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."

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.

[Sidenote: The Seeking of Honor as a Motive 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.

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.

[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.

[Sidenote: The Profitableness 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.

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]

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]

[Sidenote: Calling on God's Name]

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]

[Sidenote: In Prosperity]

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]

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.

[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.

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.

[Sidenote: Motives for Calling on 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.

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.

[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.

[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.

[Sidenote: 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.

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.

[Sidenote: 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.

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.

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.

[Sidenote: 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.

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.

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.

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!

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]

[Sidenote: 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.

[Sidenote: 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.

[Sidenote: 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]

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.

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.

[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.

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.

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.

[Sidenote: 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."

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.

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.]

[Sidenote: Mistaken 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.

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.

[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.

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].

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, 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.

[Sidenote: Prayer Without Ceasing]

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.

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.

[Sidenote: Prayer is 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.

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.

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.

[Sidenote: What Men Shall 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.

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.

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]

[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.

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.

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.

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.

[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.

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.]

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?

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.

[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?

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.

[Sidenote: Proof 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?

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.

[Sidenote: Thoughtless 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.

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.

[Sidenote: Earnest 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.

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]

[Sidenote: The Indifference of Man]

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.

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.

[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]

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.

[Sidenote: 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.

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.

[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.

[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.

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.

[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.

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]

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.

[Sidenote: 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.

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.

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.

[Sidenote: The Limitation of Fasting]

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.

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.

[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.

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.

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.

[Sidenote: Suffering]

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.

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.

[Sidenote: The Holiness of Adversity]

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]

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]

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.

[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.

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]

[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.

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.

[Sidenote: Second Table]

_The Second Table follows._

[Sidenote: The Fourth Commandment]

_"Thou shalt honor thy father and thy 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.

[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.

[Sidenote: Despising of 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.

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.

[Sidenote: 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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

[Sidenote: The Folly 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.

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.

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.

[Sidenote: Training Children a Good Work]

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.

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.

[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.

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.

[Sidenote: Obedience to 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.

[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.

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.

[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.

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.

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]

[Sidenote: Abuses in the Church]

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.

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.

[Sidenote: The Duty of Resisting 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?

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.

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.

[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]

[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]

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.

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.

[Sidenote: Why Temporal Authority Dare not, though 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.

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.

[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.

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.

[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.

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.

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.

[Sidenote: Good Works for Rulers]

[Sidenote: Economic Reforms: Gluttony]

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?

[Sidenote: Luxury]

[Sidenote: 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.

[Sidenote: Exections 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.

[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?

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.

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.

[Sidenote: Obedience to Masters]

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.]

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.

[Sidenote: 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.

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.

[Sidenote: 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.

[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."

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]

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.

[Sidenote: The Limits of Obedience]

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.

[Sidenote: The Fifth 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.

[Sidenote: The Duty of Meekness]

[Sidenote: False Meekness]

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.

[Sidenote: True Meekness]

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.]

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]

[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?

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.

[Sidenote: The Limits of Meekness]

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.

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.

_Thou shalt not commit adultery._

[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.

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]

[Sidenote: Helps Against Unchastity]

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.

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.

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.

[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]

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.

_Thou shalt not steal._

[Sidenote: The Seventh Commandment: The Duty of Benevolence]

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.

[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.

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.]

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!

[Sidenote: Faith the Source of Benevolence]

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.

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.

[Sidenote: 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]

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 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]

_Thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor._

[Sidenote: The Eight Commandment: The Duty of Truthfulness]

[Sidenote: In Worldly Matters]

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.

[Sidenote: 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.]

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.

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.

[Sidenote: Witnessing to the Truth Demands 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.]

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.

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?

[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.

FOOTNOTES

[1] Col. 3:17. See above p. 25, note 1.

[2] The _Tessaradecas consolatoria_, printed in the present volume, pp. 109-171.

[3] Sexternlein.

[4] Questions debated in the schools.

[5] Here "the Faith" means the Creed, as a statement of faith.

[6] I.e., In faith.

[7] A quality, state or condition, independent of works.

[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."

[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.

[10] I.e., by us men.

[11] This translation indicates the imperfection of the German form of Bible quotation throughout this treatise.

[12] Page 190.

[13] Page 190.

[14] A _Jarmarkt_; the reference here being to the bargaining common at such fairs.

[15] The theme developed in the treatise _De Libertate_, 1520.

[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.

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.

[18] _Grosse Hansen_.

[19] Men who exercised a delegated authority and acted as the representatives of pope and bishop in matters of church law.

[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.

[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.

[23] _Gottesdienst_.

[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."

[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.

[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.

[28] Cf. _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.

[30] Cf. Introduction to _The Fourteen of Consolation_, p. 106.

[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.

[33] _Sinnlichkeit_.

[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.

[35] Cf. The _Fourteen of Consolation_, above, p. 162.

[36] Page 194 f.

[37] I. e., by fear without love.

[38] The patron saint of music, of whose life and martyrdom little that is definite is known.

[39] Canonisations, giving a dead man the rank of a saint, who may be or shall be worshiped.

[40] I.e., 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).

[42] A name for the dependents of the papal court at Rome.

[43] At Constance, 1414-1443; at Rome, the Lateran council, 1512-1517.

[44] Or, "Who is said to rule the councils."

[45] This program of reform is further elaborated 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.

[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).

[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.

[50] A most strict monastic order; the phrase here is equivalent to "becomes a monk."

[51] _Sanftmüthlgkeit_.

[52] Luther discusses these tricks in detail in his _Sermon von Kaufhandlung und Wucher_ (1524) _Weimar Ed._, XV, pp. 279 ff.

[53] _Sermon von dem Wucher, Weimar Ed._, VI, 36 ff. Cf. also _Address to the German Nobility_.

[54] Cf. _The Fourteen of Consolation_ above, p. 149.

A Treatise On The New Testament That Is The Holy Mass

A TREATISE ON THE NEW TESTAMENT

THAT IS THE HOLY MASS

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 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.

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.

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.

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]

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 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).

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.

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.

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.

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.

J. L. Neve

J. L. NEVE.

Wittenberg Theological Seminary,

Springfield, O.

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.

[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."

[3] Page 224.

[4] De Weite, _Luther's Briefe_, 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.

[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.)

[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.

[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.

[10] Cf. Koëstlin-Hay, op. cit., I, 340.

[11] Ibid., p. 350.

[12] _Erl. Ed._, XVI, 33, 92 ff.

[13] So also with much emphasis in the _Sermon v. d. hochw. Sac._, 1519.

[14] He means the _Serm. v. d. hochw. Sac._, 1519.

[15] _Weimar Ed._, VI, 502.

[16] De Weite, _Briefe_, I, 378

[17] Koëstlin-Hay, op. cit., I, 355.

A TREATISE ON THE NEW TESTAMENT,

THAT IS THE HOLY MASS

1519

JESUS[1]

[Sidenote: The Multiplying 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]

[Sidenote: Sects 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.

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.

[Sidenote: The Mass 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.

[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.

[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.

[Sidenote: 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.

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.

[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.

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.

[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.

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.

[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.

[Sidenote: Promises and Signs]

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.

[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.

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.

[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.

[Sidenote: Faith in the word the True 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.

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.

[Sidenote: Who is 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.

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]

[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.

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]

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?

[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.

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.

[Sidenote: The Testament 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.

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.

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.

[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.

[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.

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."

[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.

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]

[Sidenote: The Collect and Offeratory]

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.

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.

[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.

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.

[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?

[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.

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.

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]

[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.

[Sidenote: All Christians 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.

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]

[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.

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.

[Sidenote: 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]

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.

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!

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]

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.

[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]

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.

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.

[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]

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.

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.

[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.

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.

[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.

[Sidenote: Distinction 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]

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.

[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]

[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.

[Sidenote: The Mass a Remedy against 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]

[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?

[Sidenote: 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]

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.

FOOTNOTES

[1] See above, p. 25, note 1.

[2] Luther's customary 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.

[4] Luther quotes from the Vulgate, St. Jerome's Latin version of the Bible.

[5] The bread of the Lord's Supper.

[6] The _Sanctus_ in the mass.

[7] Luther says "feathers."

[8] _Darinnen die Messe steht und geht_.

[9] _Gelübde_, literally "vow."

[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

Part IV.

[11] _Tropffrüchtlein_.

[12] "Not a benefit received, but a benefit conferred."

[13] See p. 309.

[14] i. e., Blessing and Thanksgiving at Table; cf. Appendix II. of the _Small Catechism_.

[15] Called the "still" mass because said without music.

[16] See p. 302.

[17] Luther at this period still acknowledges seven sacraments. But see the _Babylonian Captivity_, written in October 1520.

[18] The receptacle in which the consecrated host is shown to the people.

[19] The corporal-cloth spread over the altar during the communion service.

[20] See p. 306.

[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.

[23] See p. 316.

[24] See p. 313.

[25] Cf. XCV Theses, pp. 19, 41.

[26] _Lasst uns des gewissen spielen_.

[27] See p. 316.

[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.

[30] See p. 313.

[31] Paul of Thebes, an Egyptian hermit of the III. Century, whose life was written 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.

[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.

[34] The masses which are observed every day throughout the year.

[35] See p. 313 f.

[36] Bishop of Carthage, died 258.

[37] See above, pp. 187 ff.

The Papacy At Rome An Answer To The Celebrated Romanist At Leipzig

THE PAPACY AT ROME

AN ANSWER TO THE CELEBRATED ROMANIST AT LEIPZIG

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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."

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_.

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]

_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?"

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 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]

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."

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."

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]

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]

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."

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.

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.

Theodore E. Smauk.

_Lebanon, Pennsylvania._

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.

[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.

[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.

[4] He alluded to the subject in his Sermon on the Ban.

[5] Köstlin, _Theology of Luther_, translated by Hay, I, 363.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[11] Luther's famulus. "Ich werde meinem Bruder Famulus anstellen."--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._"

[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."

[14] He requested the Nuncio Milits to secure authority for him to write.

[15] Cf. Luther in the Tractate: "They cling 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."

See Cyprian, _Urkunden_, 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."

[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.

[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.

[20] "I welcome the opportunity to explain something of the nature of Christianity for the laity."

[21] "I must first of all 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?"

"No hope is left on earth except in the temporal."

[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."

"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."

"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."

In this and the following notes, for brevity's sake, various quotations are summarized and connected.

[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."

[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?"

[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."

[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.'"

"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?"

[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."

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."

[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."

[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."

[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.

To The Papacy At Rome

TO THE PAPACY AT ROME

AN ANSWER TO THE CELEBRATED ROMANIST AT LEIPZIG[1]

1520

[Sidenote: A New Adversary]

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.

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.

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 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.

The Statement Of The Case

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.

[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.

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 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.

[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.

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.

[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 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.

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.

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 find three strong arguments by which this fruitful and noble little book[14] of the Romanist at Leipzig attacks me.

[Sidenote: The Arguments of the Romanists--1. Luther 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.

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.

[Sidenote: The Argument from Reason]

The second argument, to express it tersely, is that of 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.

B. Inasmuch as all Christendom is one community on earth, it must have a head, which is the pope.

[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.

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]

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.

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.

[Sidenote: 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.

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.

[Sidenote: What is the Church?]

[Sidenote: The Communion of Saints]

[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]

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.

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.

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.

[Sidenote: What Makes 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.

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.

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.

[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]

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.

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.

[Sidenote: The Church a Spiritual Thing]

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:

We beseech Thee, Holy Spirit[35], Let true faith our portion be.

It is in this wise, and never in any other, that the Holy Scriptures speak of the Holy Church and of Christendom.

[Sidneote: The External 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.

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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

[Sidenote: The Equality of Bishops]

But then you ask: If the prelates are neither heads nor regents 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.

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?

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?

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.

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.

[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.

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]

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.

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.

[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.

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]

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.

[Sidenote: 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.

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.

[Sidenote: The High-Priest 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.

[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.

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]

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.

[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.

[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]

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.

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.]

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]

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].

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.

[Sidenote: Types of the 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.

[Sidenote: Wherein the Pope is Untrue 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?

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.]

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?

[Sidenote: The Tonsure]

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?

[Sidenote: Worldly 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?

[Sidenote: Holy Men 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?

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.

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.

[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.

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.

[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.

[Sidenote: 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 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.

[Sidenote: Two Passages versus 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.

But I will cite passages by which I shall prove that the one passage must follow 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.

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.

[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.

[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.

[Sidenote: A Parable]

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.]

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.

[Sidenote: Herod and the Romanists]

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.

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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

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.

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.

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.

[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.

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.

[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]

[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.

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!

[Sidenote: Feeding 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.

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.

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.

[Sidenote: A Distinction 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 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.

[Sidenote: 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.

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.

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]

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.

[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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

All glory be to God on high And praise to all eternity. 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.

[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..."

[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.

[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.

[5] _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."

[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.

[8] The chief point argued at the Leipzig Disputation, whether the power of the pope 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.

[10] A comment explanatory of a passage of Scripture or of 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.

[12] _Zur Halfte, so nicht mehr, geistlich_. 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"?

[14] Alveld's German treatise described itself in the title as a "fruitful, useful little book."

[15] Alveld's Latin treatise especially abounds in these appellations.

[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.

[17] _Christenheit_.

[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).

[19] _Christenheit_.

[20] Luther quotes, in German, the reading of the Latin Vulgate.

[21] _Christenheit_.

[22] _Gemeinde_. A play on the word. On the second use of the term, compare the similar employment of the English word "parish."

[23] _Christenheit_.

[24] From _Veni Sancte Spiritus_, an antiphon for Whitsuntide dating from the eleventh century.

[25] _Christenheit_.

[26] _Es ist erlogen und erstunken_.

[27] _Gemeinde_.

[28] _Christenheit_.

[29] _Versammlung_.

[30] _Gemeinde_.

[31] _Versammlung_.

[32] _Einigkeit oder Gemeinde_.

[33] A quaint interpretation of the passage: "The disciples were called Christians first in Antioch."

[34] _Christenheit_.

[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.

[36] _Christenheit_.

[37] _Gemeinde_.

[38] _Christenheit_.

[39] _Christenheit_.

[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.

[41] The followers of John Huss.

[42] _Zwölfbote_, a popular appellation for the apostles, meaning one of the twelve messengers.

[43] See page 351.

[44] _Christenheit_.

[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."

[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).

[47] See above, p. 358.

[48] Jerome Emser, _De disputatione Lipsicense_ and _A venatione Luteriana aegocerotia assertio_.

[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.)

[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.

[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.

[54] Luther's greeting to a forthcoming and much heralded work of Eck's, which appeared under the title _De primatu Petri_.

[55] This statement cannot be substantiated. But see 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.

[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.

[58] In a similar vein of satire Shakespeare uses this very phrase in "Merry Wives of Windsor," III, 5.

[59] _Gemeinde_.

[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_.

[62] Still the old terminology.

[63] Equivalent to father-confessor. The pope's own confessor is so called.

[64] Alveld makes this distinction in both of his treatises.

[65] _Gemeinde_.

[66] See page 373.

[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.

[69] _Gemeinde_.

[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)

[71] See above, p. 362.

[72] _Römische Einigkeit_.

[73] This is Alveld's explanation in his German treatise.

[74] _Comment_, equivalent to "lie" or "invention."

[75] _Rastrum_, see above, note on p. 362.

[76] The sheeps' clothing in which they come.

[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.

[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.

[80] _Gemeinde_.

[81] A promise fulfilled in his _Address to the Christian Nobility_.

[82] In the title to his Latin treatise.

[83] Of the German treatise.

Index Scripture References Index

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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

Idolatry Imitatio Christi Immersion Indulgence Letters fairs Indulgences Inner man Instruction to indulgence sellers Intercession of the Church Israel, a type

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

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

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

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

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

Quæstiones

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

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

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

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

Young, training of the

Zarephath, widow of Zedekiah Zwölfbote

Scripture References Old Testament

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

Apocrypha

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

New Testament

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

Works of Martin Luther, vol. 2 (Philadelphia edition, 1916)

# Works of Martin Luther, vol. 2 (Philadelphia edition, 1916)

Produced by Michael McDermott, from scans obtained at the Internet Archive

Works Of Martin Luther With Introductions And Notes Volume Ii Philadelphia

WORKS OF MARTIN LUTHER

WITH INTRODUCTIONS AND NOTES

VOLUME II

PHILADELPHIA A. J. HOLMAN Company 1916

Copyright, 1915, by A. J. HOLMAN Company

Works Of Martin Luther Contents A Treatise Concerning The Blessed Sacrament

WORKS OF MARTIN LUTHER

CONTENTS

A TREATISE CONCERNING THE BLESSED SACRAMENT AND CONCERNING THE BROTHERHOODS (1519). Introduction (J. J. Schindel) Translation (J. J. Schindel) A TREATISE CONCERNING THE BAN (1520). Introduction (J. J. Schindel) Translation (J. J. Schindel) AN OPEN LETTER TO THE CHRISTIAN NOBILITY (1520). Introduction (C. M. Jacobs) Translation (C. M. Jacobs) THE BABYLONIAN CAPTIVITY OF THE CHURCH (1520). Introduction (A. T. W. Steinhaeuser) Translation (A. T. W. Steinhaeuser) A TREATISE ON CHRISTIAN LIBERTY (1520). Introduction (W. A. Lambert) Translation (W. A. Lambert)

A Brief Explanation Of The Ten Commandments,

A BRIEF EXPLANATION OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS, THE CREED, AND THE LORD'S PRAYER (1520). Introduction (C. M. Jacobs) Translation (C. M. Jacobs) THE EIGHT WITTENBERG SERMONS (1522). Introduction (A. Steimle) Translation (A. Steimle) THAT DOCTRINES OF MEN ARE TO BE REJECTED (1522). Introduction (W. A. Lambert) Translation (W. A. Lambert)

A TREATISE CONCERNING THE BLESSED SACRAMENT OF THE HOLY AND TRUE BODY OF CHRIST AND CONCERNING THE BROTHERHOODS

1519

INTRODUCTION

This treatise belongs to a series of four which appeared in the latter half of the year 1519, the others treating of the Ban, Penance, and Baptism. The latter two with our treatise form a trilogy which Luther dedicates to the Duchess Margaret of Braunschweig and Luneburg.

He undertakes the work, as he says, "because there are so many troubled and distressed ones--and I myself have had the experience--who do not know what the holy sacraments, full of all grace, are, nor how to use them, but, alas! presume upon quieting their consciences with their works, instead of seeking peace in God's grace through the holy sacrament; so completely are the holy sacraments obscured and withdrawn from us by the teaching of men."[1]

In a letter to Spalatin[2] of December 18, 1519, he says that no one need expect treatises from him on the other sacraments, since he cannot acknowledge them as such.

A copy from the press of John Grunenberg of Wittenberg reached Duke George of Saxony by December 24, 1519, who on December 27th already entered his protest against it with the Elector Frederick and the Bishops of Meissen and Merseburg[3]. Duke George took exception particularly to Luther's advocacy of the two kinds in the Communion[4]. This statement of Luther, however, was but incidental to his broad and rich treatment of the subject of the treatise.

It was Luther's first extended statement of his view of the Lord's Supper. As such it is very significant, not only because of what he says, but also because of what he does not say. There is no reference at all to that which was then distinctive of the Church's doctrine, the sacrifice of the mass. Luther has already abandoned this position, but is either too loyal a church-man to attack it or has not as yet found an evangelical interpretation of the idea of sacrifice in the mass, such as he gives us in the later treatise on the New Testament[5]. However, already in this treatise he gives us the antidote for the false doctrine of sacrifice in the emphasis laid upon faith, on which all depends[6]. The object of this faith, however, is not yet stated to be the promise of the forgiveness of sins contained in the Words of Institution, which are a new and eternal testament[7].

The treatise shows the influence of the German mystics[8] on Luther's thought, but much more of the Scriptures which furnish him with argument and illustration for his mystical conceptions. Christ's natural body is made of less importance than the spiritual body[9], the communion of saints; just as in the later treatise on the New Testament the stress is placed on the Words of Institution with their promise of the forgiveness of sins. Luther does not try to explain philosophically what is inexplicable, but is content to accept on faith the act of the presence of Christ in the sacrament, "how and where,--we leave to Him."[10]

Of interest is the emphasis on the spiritual body, the communion of saints. Luther knows that although excommunication is exclusion from external communion, it is not necessarily exclusion from real spiritual communion with Christ and His saints[11]. No wonder, then, that he can later treat the papal bull with so much indifference; it cannot exclude him from the communion of saints.

The treatise consists of three main divisions: sections 1 to 3 treating of the outward sign of the sacrament; sections 4 to 16, of the inner significance; sections 17 to 22, of faith. Added to this is the appendix on the subject of the brotherhoods or sodalities, associations of laymen or charitable and devotional purposes. Of these there were many at this time, Wittenberg alone being reported as having twenty-one. Luther objects not only to their immoral conduct, but also to the spiritual pride which they engendered. He finds in the communion of saints the fundamental brotherhood instituted in the holy sacrament, the common brotherhood of all saints.

The modern world needs to have these truths driven home anew, and, barring a few scholastic phrases here and there, cannot find them better expressed than in the remarkably elevated and devotional language of Luther in this treatise.

The text of the treatise is found in the following editions: Weimar Ed., vol. ii, 742; Erlangen Ed., vol. xxvii, 28; Walch Ed., Vol. xix, 522; St. Louis Ed., xix, 426; Clemen, vol. i, 196; Berlin Ed., vol. iii, 259.

Literature besides that mentioned:

Tschackert, _Enstehung der lutherischen und reformierten Kirchenlehre_, 1910, pp. 174-176.

K. Thieme, _Entwicklung und Bedeutung der Sakramentslehre Luthers_, Neueu Kirchl. Zeitschrift, XII (1901), Nos. 10 and 11.

F. Graebke, _Die Konstruktion der Abendmahlslehre Luthers in ihre Entwicklung dargestellt_, Leipzig 1908.

J. J. Schindel

J. J. SCHINDEL.

Allentown, PA.

FOOTNOTES

[1] See Clemen, 1, p. 175.

[2] Enders, II, no. 254. Smith, _Luther's Correspondence_, I, no. 206.

[3] Gess, _Akten und Briefe zur Kirchenpolitik Herzog Georgs von Sachsen_, Leipzig, 1905.

[4] See below, p. 9.

[5] In this edition, Vol. I, pp. 294-336. See especially pp. 312 ff.

[6] See below, pp. 19, 25.

[7] _Treatise on the New Testament_, Vol. I, pp. 297 ff.

[8] See Kostlin, _Luther's Theologie_, I, 292 f.; also Hering, _Die Mystik Luthers_, Leipzig, 1879, pp. 171-174.

[9] See below, p. 23.

[10] See below, p.20.

[11] See _Treatise concerning the Ban_, below, p. 37.

A TREATISE CONCERNING THE BLESSED SACRAMENT OF THE HOLY AND TRUE BODY OF CHRIST AND CONCERNING THE BROTHERHOODS

1519

1. Like the sacrament of holy baptism[1] the holy sacrament of the altar, or of the holy and true body of Christ, has three parts which it is necessary or us to know. The first is the sacrament, or sign, the second is the significance of this sacrament, the third is the faith required by both of these; the three parts which must be found in every sacrament. The sacrament must be external and visible, and have some material form; the significance must be internal and spiritual, within the spirit of man; faith must apply and use both these.

[Sidenote: The First Part of the Sacrament: the Sign]

2. The sacrament, or outward sign, is in the form of bread and wine, just as baptism has as its sign water; although the sign is not simply the form of bread and wine, but the use of the bread and wine in eating and drinking, just as the water of baptism is used by immersion or by pouring. For the sacrament, or sign, must be received, or must at least be desired, if it is to work a blessing. Although at present the two kinds are not given the people daily, as of old,--nor is this necessary,--yet the priesthood partakes of it daily in the sight of the people, and it is enough that the people desire it daily and receive one kind at the proper time, as the Christian Church ordains and offers[2].

3. I deem it well, however, that the Church in a general council should again decree[3] that all persons, as well as the priests, be given both kinds. Not that one kind were insufficient, since indeed the simple desire of faith suffices, as St. Augustine says: "Why preparest thou stomach and teeth? Only believe and thou hast already partaken of the sacrament";[4] but because it would be meet and right that the form, or sign, of the sacrament be given not in part only, but in its entirety, just as I have said of baptism[5] that it were more fitting to immerse than to pour the water, for the sake of the completeness and perfection of the sign. For this sacrament signifies the complete union and the undivided fellowship of the saints, as we shall see, and this is poorly and unfittingly indicated by only one part of the sacrament. Nor is there as great a danger in the use of the cup as is supposed, since the people seldom go to this sacrament, and Christ was well aware of all future dangers[6], and yet saw it to institute both kinds or the use of all His Christians.

[Sidenote: The Second Part of the Sacrament: the Significance]

4. The significance or purpose of this sacrament is the fellowship of all saints, whence it derives its common name _synaxis_ or _communio_, that is, fellowship; and _communicare_ means to take part in this fellowship, or as we say, to go to the sacrament, because Christ and all saints are one spiritual body, just as the inhabitants of a city are one community and body, each citizen being a member of the other and a member of the entire city. All the saints, therefore, are members of Christ and of the Church, which is a spiritual and eternal city of God, and whoever is taken into this city is said to be received into the community of saints, and to be incorporated into Christ's spiritual body and made a member of Him. On the other hand, _excommunicare_ means to put out of the community and to sever a member from this body, and that is called in our language "putting one under the ban"; yet there is a difference, as I shall show in the following treatise, concerning the ban[4].

To receive the bread and wine of this sacrament, then, is nothing else than to receive a sure sign of this fellowship and incorporation with Christ and all saints. As though a citizen were given a sign, a document, or some other token as a proof that he is a citizen of the city, a member of the community. Even so St. Paul says: "We are all one bread and one body, for we are all partakers of one bread and of one cup." [1 Cor. 10:17]

5. This fellowship is of such a nature that all the spiritual possessions of Christ and His saints[8] are imparted and communicated to him who receives this sacrament; again, all his sufferings and sins are communicated to them, and thus love engenders love and unites all. To carry out our homely figure: it is like a city where every citizen shares with all the others the name, honor, freedom, trade, customs, usages, help, support, protection and the like, of that city, and on the other hand shares all the danger of fire and flood, enemies and death, losses, imposts and the like. For he who would have part in the common profits must also share in the losses, and ever recompense love with love. Here we see that whoever wrongs a citizen wrongs the entire city and all the citizens; whoever benefits one deserves favor and thanks from all the others. So, too, in our natural body, as St. Paul says in i Corinthians xii, where this sacrament is given a spiritual explanation: the members have a care one or another; whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; whether one member be honored, all the members rejoice with it. [1 Cor. 12:25 f.] It is apparent then that if any one's foot hurts him, nay, even the smallest toe, the eye at once looks toward it, the fingers grasp it, the face frowns, the whole body bends to it, and all are concerned with this small member; on the other hand, if it is cared for, all the other members rejoice. This figure must be well weighed if one wishes to understand this sacrament; for the Scriptures employ it or the sake of the unlearned.

6. In this sacrament, therefore, God Himself gives through the priest a sure sign to man, to show that, in like manner, he shall be united with Christ and His saints and have all things in common with them; that Christ's sufferings and life shall be his own, together with the lives and sufferings of all the saints, so that whoever does him an injury does injury to Christ and all the saints, as He says by the prophet, "He that toucheth you toucheth the apple of My eye" [Zech. 2:8]; on the other hand, whoever does him a kindness does it to Christ and all His saints, as He says, "What ye have done unto one of the least of My brethren, that ye have done unto Me." [Matt. 25:40] Again, he must be willing to share all the burdens and misfortunes of Christ and His saints, their sorrow and joy. These two sides of the fellowship we shall consider more fully.

7. Now, adversity assails us in more than one form. There is, in the first place, the sin remaining in our flesh after baptism, the inclination to anger, hatred, pride and unchastity, and so forth, which assails us as long as we live. Against this we not only need the help of the congregation and of Christ, in order that they may fight with us against it, but it is also necessary that Christ and His saints intercede or us before God, that sin may not be accounted to us according to God's strict judgment. Therefore, in order to give us strength and courage against these sins, God gives us this sacrament, as though He said: "Behold, many kinds of sin assail thee; take this sign by which I give thee My pledge that sin assails not only thee but My Son Christ, and all His saints in heaven and on earth. Therefore, be bold and confident; thou fightest not alone; great help and support are round about thee." King David, also, says of this bread: "The bread strengtheneth man's heart" [Ps. 104:15]; and the Scriptures in other places characterize this sacrament as a strengthening. So in Acts ix it is written of St. Paul that he was baptised and when he had received meat, he was strengthened. [Acts 9:19] In the second place, the evil spirit assails us unceasingly with many sins and afflictions. In the third place, the world is full of wickedness and entices and persecutes us and is altogether bad. Finally, our own guilty conscience assails us with our past sins, with the fear of death, and with the pains of hell. All of these afflictions make us weary and weaken us, unless we seek and find strength in this fellowship.

8. If any one be in despair, if he be distressed by his sinful conscience or terrified by death, or have any other burden on his heart, and desire to be rid of them all, let him go joyfully to the sacrament of the altar and lay down his grief in the midst of the congregation and seek help from the entire company of the spiritual body; just as when a citizen whose property has suffered injury or misfortune at the hands of his enemies makes complaint to his town council and fellow citizens and asks them for help. Therefore, the immeasurable grace and mercy of God are given us in this sacrament, that we may there lay down all misery and tribulation and put it on the congregation, and especially on Christ, and may joyfully strengthen and comfort ourselves and say: "Though I am a sinner and have fallen, though this or that misfortune has befallen me, I will go to the sacrament to receive a sign from God that I have on my side Christ's righteousness, He and sufferings, with all holy angels and all the blessed in heaven, and all pious men on earth. If I die, I am not alone in death; if I suffer, they suffer with me. I have shared all my misfortune with Christ and the saints, since I have a sure sign of their love toward me." Lo, this is the benefit to be derived from this sacrament, this is the use we should make of it; then the heart cannot but rejoice and be comforted.

9. When you have partaken of this sacrament, therefore, or desire to partake of it, you must in turn also share the misfortunes of the congregation, as was said[9]. But what are these? Christ in heaven and the angels together with all the saints have no misfortunes of their own, save when injury is done to the truth and to God's Word; yea, as we said, every bane and blessing of all the saints on earth affects them. There your heart must go out in love and devotion and learn that this sacrament is a sacrament of love, and that love and service are given you and you again must render love and service to Christ and His needy ones. You must feel with sorrow all the dishonor done to Christ in His holy Word, all the misery of Christendom, all the unjust suffering of the innocent, with which the world is everywhere filled to overflowing: you must fight, work, pray, and, if you cannot do more, have heartfelt sympathy. That is bearing in your turn the misfortune and adversity of Christ and His saints. Here the saying of Paul applies. "Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ." [Gal. 6:2] Lo, thus you uphold them all, thus they all again in turn uphold you, and all things are in common, both good and evil. Then all things become easy, and the evil spirit cannot prevail against such a community. When Christ instituted the sacrament He said: "This is My body which is given for you, this is My blood which is shed for you; as oft as ye do this, remember Me." [Luke 22:19 f.] As though He said: "I am the Head, I will first give Myself for you, will make your suffering and misfortune Mine own and bear it for you, that you in your turn may do the same or Me and for one another, have all things in common in Me and with Me, and let this sacrament be unto you a sure token of this all, that you may not forget Me, but daily call to mind and admonish one another by what I have done or you and still am doing, that you may be strengthened thereby, and also bear with one another."

10. This is also a reason, indeed the chief reason, why this sacrament is received many times, while baptism is administered but once. Baptism is the beginning and entrance to a new life, in the course of which boundless adversities assail us through sins and suffering, our own and those of others. The devil, the world and our own flesh and conscience, as was said[10] never cease to pursue us and oppress us. Therefore we need the strength, support and help of Christ and of His saints, which are pledged us in this sacrament as by a sure token, by which we are made one with them and are incorporated with them, and all our suffering is laid down in the midst of the congregation. Therefore, this holy sacrament is of little or no benefit to those who have no misfortune or anxiety or do not feel their adversity. For it is given only to those who need strength and comfort, who have timid hearts and terrified consciences, and who are assailed by sin, or have even fallen into sin. What could it do or untroubled and falsely secure spirits, which neither need nor desire it? For the Mother of God[11] says, "He filleth only the hungry, and comforteth them that are distressed." [Luke 1:53]

11. That the disciples, therefore, might by all means be worthy and well prepared for this sacrament He first made them sorrowful, held before them His departure and death, by which they were exceeding troubled. And then He greatly terrified them when He said that one of them should betray Him. [Matt. 25:21 ff.] When they were thus full of sorrow and anxiety and were concerned about the sorrow and sin of betrayal, then they were worthy, and He gave them His holy Body to strengthen them. By which He teaches us that this sacrament is strength and comfort for those whom sin and evil trouble and distress; as St. Augustine also says[12], "This food demands only hungry souls and is shunned by none so greatly as by a sated soul which does not need it." Just as the Jews were required to eat the Passover with bitter herbs, standing and in haste, which also signifies that this sacrament demands souls that are desirous, needy and sorrowful. Now if one will make the afflictions of Christ and of all Christians his own, will defend the truth, oppose unrighteousness, help bear the need of the innocent and the sufferings of all Christians, he will find affliction and adversity enough, besides that which his evil nature, the world, the devil and sin daily inflict upon him. And it is God's will and purpose to set so many hounds upon us and drive us, and everywhere provide us bitter herbs, that we may long for this strength and take delight in the holy sacrament, and thus be worthy of it, that is, desire it.

12. It is His will, then, that we partake of it frequently, in order that we may remember Him and exercise ourselves in this fellowship according to His example. For if His example were no longer kept before us, the fellowship also would soon be forgotten. So we at present see to our sorrow that many masses are held and yet the Christian fellowship which should be preached, practiced and kept before us by Christ's example has quite perished; so that we hardly know what purpose this sacrament serves, or how it should be used, nay, with our masses we frequently destroy this fellowship and pervert everything. This is the fault of the preachers who do not preach the Gospel nor the sacraments, but their humanly devised fables concerning the many works[13] to be done and the ways to live aright.

But in times past this sacrament was so properly used, and the people were taught to understand this fellowship so well, that they even gathered material food and goods[14] in the church and there distributed them among those who were in need, as St. Paul writes [1 Cor. 11:21]. Of this we have a relic in the word "collect,"[15] which still remains in the mass, and means a general collection, just as a common fund is gathered to be given to the poor. That was the time when so many became martyrs and saints. There were fewer masses, but much strength and blessing resulted from the masses; Christians cared for one another, assisted one another, sympathized with one another, bore one another's burden and affliction. This has all disappeared, and there remain only the many masses and the many who receive this sacrament without in the least understanding or practicing what it signifies.

13. There are those, indeed, who would share the benefits but not the cost, that is, who gladly hear in this sacrament that the help, fellowship and assistance of all the saints are promised and given to them, but who, because they fear the world, are unwilling in their turn to contribute to this fellowship, to help the poor, to endure sins, to care for the sick, to suffer with the suffering, to intercede for others, to defend the truth, to seek the reformation of the Church and of all Christians at the risk of life, property and honor. They are unwilling to suffer disfavor, harm, shame or death, although it is God's will that they be driven, for the sake of the truth and their neighbors, to desire the great grace and strength of this sacrament. They are self-seeking persons, whom this sacrament does not benefit. Just as we could not endure a citizen who wanted to be helped, protected and made free by the community, and yet in his turn would do nothing for it nor serve it. No, we on our part must make others' evil our own, if we desire Christ and His saints to make our evil their own; then will the fellowship be complete and justice be done to the sacrament. For the sacrament has no blessing and significance unless love grows daily and so changes a man that he is made one with all others.

14. To symbolize this fellowship, God has appointed such signs of the sacrament as in every way serve this purpose and by their very form incite and move us to this fellowship. Just as the bread is made out of many grains which have been ground and mixed together, and out of the many bodies of grain there comes the one body of the bread, in which each grain loses its form and body and acquires the common body of the bread, and as the drops of wine losing their own form become the body of one wine: so should it be with us, and is, indeed, if we use this sacrament aright. Christ with all saints, by His love, takes upon Himself our form, fights with us against sin, death and all evil [Phil. 2:7]; this enkindles in us such love that we take His form, rely upon His righteousness, life and blessedness, and through the interchange of His blessings and our misfortunes are one loaf, one bread, one body, one drink, and have all things in common. This is a great sacrament,[Eph. 5:32][16] says Paul, that Christ and the Church are one flesh and bone [Eph. 5:31]. Again, through this same love are to be changed and to make the infirmities of all other Christians our own, take upon ourselves their form and their necessity and make theirs all the good that is within our power, that they may enjoy it [Judg. 9:2]. That is a real fellowship, and that is the true significance of this sacrament. In this way we are changed into one another and are brought into fellowship with one another by love, without which there can be no such change.

15. He appointed this twofold form, bread and wine, rather than any other, as a further indication of the union and fellowship in this sacrament. For there is no more intimate, deep and inseparable union than the union of the food with him who partakes of it, since the food enters into and is assimilated with his very nature and becomes one with his being. Other unions, effected by means of nails, glue, cords and the like, do not make one indivisible substance of the objects joined together. In the sacrament we become united with Christ, and are made one body with all the saints, so that He concerns Himself for us, acts in our behalf, as though He were what we are--what concerns us concerns Him as much as us, and even more than us; and, on the other hand, that we also concern ourselves or Him, as though we were what He is, as indeed we shall finally be, when we are conformed to His likeness, as St. John says, "We know that when He shall appear we shall be like Him" [1 John 3:2]; so complete is the fellowship of Christ and all the saints with us. Our sins assail Him, His righteousness protects us; for the union makes all things common, until at last He completely destroys sin in us and makes us like unto Himself, at the last day. In like manner, by the same love we are to be united with our neighbors, we in them and they in us.

16. In addition to this, He did not appoint this twofold form by itself, but gave His true natural flesh, in the bread, and His natural and true blood, in the wine, that He might give us a really perfect sacrament or sign. For just as the bread is changed[17] into His true natural body and the wine into His true natural blood, so truly are we also drawn and changed into the spiritual body, that is, into the fellowship of Christ and all saints, and put by this sacrament in possession of all the virtues and mercies of Christ and His saints; as was said above[18] of a citizen who is taken and incorporated into the city and the protection and freedom of the entire community. Therefore He instituted not simply the one form, but the two separate forms, His flesh under the bread, His blood under the wine, to indicate that not only His life and good works, which are represented by His flesh and which He accomplished in His flesh, but also His passion and martyrdom, which are represented by His blood and in which He shed His blood, are all our own, and by being drawn into this fellowship we may use and enjoy them.

17. All this makes it clear that this holy sacrament is naught else than a divine sign, in which Christ and all saints are pledged, granted and imparted, with all their works, sufferings, merits, mercies and possessions, or the comfort and strengthening of all who are in anxiety and sorrow, and are persecuted by the devil, sin, the world, the flesh and every evil; and that to receive the sacrament is nothing else than to desire all this and firmly to believe that it shall be done.

[Sidenote: The Third part of the Sacrament: Faith]

There follows the third part of the sacrament, that is faith, on which all depends. For it is not enough to know what the sacrament is and signifies. It is not enough that you know it is a fellowship and a gracious exchange or blending of our sin and suffering with the righteousness of Christ and His saints; you must also desire it and firmly believe that you have received it. Here the devil and our own nature wage their fiercest fight, that faith may by no means stand firm. There are those who practice their arts and subtleties to such an extent that they ask where the bread remains when it is changed into Christ's flesh, and the wine when it is changed into His blood; also in what manner the whole Christ, His flesh and His blood, can be comprehended in so small a portion of bread and wine. What does it matter? It is enough to know that it is a divine sign, in which Christ's flesh and blood are truly present--how and where, we leave to Him.[19]

18. See to it that you exercise and strengthen your faith, so that when you are sorrowful or your sins afflict you and you go to the sacrament or hear mass, you do so with a hearty desire for this sacrament and for what it means, and doubt not that you have what the sacrament signifies, that is, that you are certain Christ and all His saints come to you bringing all their virtues, sufferings and mercies, to live, work, suffer and die with you, and be wholly yours, to have all things in common with you. If you will exercise and strengthen this faith, you will experience what a rich and joyous wedding-supper and festival your God has prepared upon the altar or you. Then you will understand what the great feast of King Ahasuerus signifies [Esth. 1:5], you will see what that wedding is for which God has slain His oxen and fatlings, as it is written in the Gospel [Matt. 22:2 ff.], and your heart will grow right free and confident, strong and courageous, against all enemies. For who will fear any calamity if he is sure that Christ and all His saints are with Him and share all things, evil or good, in common with him? So we read that the disciples of Christ broke this bread and ate with great gladness of heart. Since, then, this work is so great that our insignificant souls dare not desire it, to say nothing of hoping for or expecting it, it is necessary and profitable to go often to the sacrament, or at least in the daily mass to exercise and strengthen this faith, on which all depends and or the sake of which it was instituted. For if you doubt[20] you do God the greatest dishonor and regard Him as unfaithful and a liar. If you cannot believe, pray for faith, as was said above in the other treatise[21].

19. See to it also that you make yourself a fellow of every man and by no means exclude any one in hatred or anger; for this sacrament of fellowship, love and unity cannot tolerate discord and dissension. You must let the infirmities and needs of others burden your heart, as though they were your own, and offer them your strength, as though it were their own, as Christ does for you in the sacrament. That is what we mean by being changed into one another through love, out of many particles becoming one bread and drink, giving up one's own form and taking one that belongs to all.[22]

For this reason slanderers and those who wickedly judge and despise others cannot but receive death in the sacrament, as St. Paul writes [1 Cor. 11:29]. For they do not unto their neighbor what they seek from Christ and what the sacrament indicates; they wish them no good, have no sympathy with them, do not receive them as they desire to be received by Christ, and then all into such blindness that they do not know what else to do in this sacrament except to fear and honor Christ in the sacrament with their prayers and devotion. When they have done this they think they have done their whole duty, although Christ has given His body for this purpose, that the significance of the sacrament, that is, fellowship and mutual love, may be put into practice, and His own natural body be less regarded than His spiritual body,[23] which is the fellowship of His saints. What concerns Him most, especially in this sacrament, is that faith in the fellowship with Him and with His saints may be rightly exercised and become strong in us, and that we, in accordance with it, may rightly exercise our fellowship with one another. This purpose of Christ they do not perceive and, in their devoutness, they daily say and hear mass, and remain every day the same; nay, become worse daily, and mark it not.

Therefore take heed; it is more needful that you discern the spiritual than that you discern the natural body of Christ, and faith in the spiritual is more needful than faith in the natural. For the natural without the spiritual profiteth us nothing in this sacrament; a change[24] must occur and manifest itself through love.

20. There are many who, regardless of this change of love and faith, rely upon the fact that the mass or the sacrament is, as they say, _opus gratum opere operato_, that is, a work which of itself pleases God, even though they who perform it do not please Him. From this they conclude that, however unworthily masses are said, it is none the less a good thing to have many masses, since the harm comes to those who say or use them unworthily. I grant every one his opinion, but such fables please me not. For, if you desire to speak thus, there is no creature nor work that does not of itself please God, as is written, "God saw all His works and they pleased Him." [Gen. 1:31] What good can result therefrom, if one misuse bread, wine, gold, and every good creature, though of themselves they are pleasing to God? Nay, condemnation is the result. So too, here: the more precious the sacrament, the greater the harm which comes upon the whole congregation from its misuse. For it was not instituted or its own sake, that it might please God, but for our sake, that we might use it rightly, exercise our faith by it, and by it become pleasing to God. If it is merely an _opus operatum_[25], it works only harm; it must become an _opus operantis_[26]. Just as bread and wine work only harm if they are not used, no matter how much they please God of themselves; so it is not enough that the sacrament be prepared (that is, _opus operatum_), it must also be used in faith (that is, _opus operantis_). And we must take heed lest with such dangerous glosses our minds be turned away from the sacrament's power and virtue, and faith perish entirely through such false security in the outwardly completed sacrament. All this results because they give heed in this sacrament to Christ's natural body more than to the fellowship, the spiritual body. Christ on the cross was also a completed work[27], which was well-pleasing to God; but the Jews unto this day have found it a stumbling block, for the reason that they did not make of it a work that must be used in faith[28]. See to it, then, that the sacrament be or you an _opus operantis_, that is, a work that is made use of, and that it be well-pleasing to God, not because of what it is in itself, but because of your faith and your right use of it. The Word of God is also of itself pleasing to God, but it is harmful to me when it does not please God also within me. In short, such expressions as _opus operatum_ and _opus operantis_ are nothing but useless words of men, more of a hindrance than a help. And who could tell all the abominable abuses and misbeliefs which daily multiply about this blessed sacrament, although some of them are so spiritual and holy that they might almost lead an angel astray? Briefly, whoever would understand the abuses need only keep before him the aforesaid use and faith of this sacrament; namely, that there must be a sorrowing, hungry soul, desiring heartily the love, help, and support of the entire communion of Christ and of all saints, doubting not that in faith it obtains them, and then, on the other hand, making itself one with everyone. Whoever does not thus direct and order the hearing or reading of masses and the reception of the sacrament, errs and does not use this sacrament to his salvation. For this reason also the world is overwhelmed with pestilences, wars and other horrible plagues[29], since with our many masses we only call upon us the more disfavor.

21. We see now how necessary this sacrament is for those who must face death, or other dangers of body and soul, since they are not let alone in them, but are strengthened in the communion of Christ and all saints. Therefore also Christ instituted it and gave it to His disciples in their extreme need and danger. Since we are all daily surrounded by all kinds of danger, and must at last die, we should humbly and heartily and with all our powers thank the God of all mercy for giving us a gracious sign, by which, if we hold fast thereto by faith. He leads and draws us through death and every danger to Himself, to Christ, and to all saints.

Therefore it is also profitable and necessary that the love and fellowship of Christ and all saints be hidden, invisible and spiritual, and that only a bodily, visible and outward sign of it be given us. For were this love, fellowship and help known to all, like the temporal fellowship of men, we should not be strengthened nor trained thereby to put our trust in the invisible and eternal things, or to desire them, but should much rather be trained to put our trust only in the temporal, visible things and to become so accustomed to them as to be unwilling to let them go and to follow God onward; we should thus be prevented from ever coming to Him, if we followed God only so far as visible and tangible things led us. For everything of time and sense must fall away, and we must learn to do without them, if we are to come to God.

Therefore the mass and this sacrament are a sign by which we train and accustom ourselves to let go all visible love, help, and comfort, and to trust in Christ and in the invisible love, help, and comfort of His saints. For death takes away everything visible, and separates us from men and temporal things; hence, to meet death, we must have the help of the invisible and eternal things; and these are indicated to us in the sacrament and sign, to which we cling by faith, until we attain to them also by sight. Thus the sacrament is or us a ford, a bridge, a door, a ship, and a litter, in which and by which we pass from this world into eternal life. Therefore all depends on faith. He who does not believe is like one who must cross the sea, but is so timid that he does not trust the ship; and so he must remain and never be saved, because he does not embark and cross over. This is due to our dependence on the senses and to our untried faith which shrinks from the passage across the Jordan of death--the devil also cruelly helps toward this.

22. This was indicated of old in Joshua iii [Josh. 3:7 ff.]. After the children of Israel had gone dry-shod through the Red Sea, a type of baptism, they went through Jordan in like manner; but the priests stood with the ark in Jordan, and the water below them lowed by, while that above them stood upon a heap, a type of this sacrament. The priests carry and uphold the ark in Jordan when in the hour of our death or peril they preach and administer to us this sacrament, Christ, and the fellowship of all saints. I we believe, the waters below us depart, that is, the temporal, visible things harm us not, but flee from us. And those above us stand up high, as though they would overwhelm us; these are the horrors and apparitions of the other world, which at the hour of death terrify us. If, however, we pay no heed to them, and pass on with a firm faith, we shall enter into eternal life dry-shod and unharmed.

We have, therefore, two principal sacraments in the church, baptism and the bread. Baptism leads us into a new life on earth; the bread guides us through death into eternal life. And the two are typified by the Red Sea and the Jordan, and by the two lands, one beyond and one on this side the Jordan. Therefore our Lord said at the Last Supper: "I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father's kingdom." [Matt. 26:29] So entirely is this sacrament intended and ordained to strengthen us against death, and to give us entrance into eternal life.

Finally, the blessing of this sacrament is fellowship and love, by which we are strengthened against death and all evil. This fellowship is twofold: on the one hand we partake of Christ and all saints, on the other hand we permit all Christians to be partakers of us, in whatever way they and we are able; so that by this sacrament all self-seeking love is uprooted and gives place to love which seeks the common good of all, and through this mutual love there is one bread, one drink, one body, one community,--that is the true union of Christian brethren. Now let us see how the pretentious brotherhoods, of which there are now so many, measure up to this and resemble it.

CONCERNING THE BROTHERHOODS.[30]

1. First, let us consider the evil practices of the brotherhoods. One of these is their gluttony and drunkenness,--one or more masses are held[31], afterward the entire day and night, and other days besides, are given over to the devil, and they do only what displeases God. Such mad reveling has been introduced by the evil spirit, and is called a brotherhood, whereas it is rather a debauch and altogether a heathenish, nay, swinish mode of life. There would far better be no brotherhoods in the world than that such an abomination should be permitted. Temporal lords and cities should unite with the clergy in abolishing it. For God, the saints, and all Christians are greatly dishonored thereby, and the divine services and feast-days made a sport for the devil. Saints' days should be kept and hallowed with good works; and the brotherhood should also be a special treasury of good works; instead it has become a treasury of beer money. What have the names of Our Lady, of St. Anne, St. Sebastian[32], or other saints to do with your brotherhoods, in which you have nothing but gluttony, drunkenness, squandering of money, howling, yelling, chattering, dancing and wasting of time? If a sow were made the patron saint of such a brotherhood she would not consent. Why then do they afflict the dear saints so sorely by taking their names in vain in such shameful practices and sins, and by dishonoring and blaspheming the brotherhoods named after them with such evil practices? Woe unto them who do and permit this!

2. If men desire to maintain a brotherhood, they should gather provisions, and feed and serve a tableful or two of poor people, for the sake of God; the day previous they should fast, and on the feast-day remain sober, and pass the time in prayer and other good works. Then God and His saints would be truly honored; this would lead to better conditions, and a good example would be given others. Or they should gather the money which they intended to squander or drink and form a common treasury, each trade[33] by itself, so that needy fellow-workmen might be assisted, or be lent money, or a young couple of that trade might be fitted out respectably from the common treasury: these would be true works of brotherhood, which would make God and His saints look with pleasure upon the brotherhoods, of which they would then gladly be the patrons. But where they are unwilling to do this, and follow after the old mummery, I admonish that it be not done on the saints' day's, nor in the name of the saints or of the brotherhood. Let them take some other weekday and leave off the names of the saints and of their brotherhoods, lest the saints at some time mark it with disapproval. Although there is no day which is not dishonored by such doings, at least the festivals and the names of the saints should be spared. For such brotherhoods call themselves brotherhoods of the saints while they do the work of the devil.

3. Another evil feature of the brotherhoods is of a spiritual nature; it is a false opinion of themselves, in that they think their brotherhood is to be a benefit to no one but to themselves,--to those who are members and are on the roll or contribute. This damnably wicked opinion is an even worse evil than the first, and is one of the reasons why God has brought it about that the brotherhoods are becoming such a mockery and blasphemy of God through gluttony, drunkenness and the like. For there they learn to seek their own good, to love themselves, to be faithful only to one another, to despise others, to think themselves better than others and presume to stand higher before God than others. And thus perishes the communion of saints, the Christian love, and the true brotherhood, established in the holy sacrament. Thus a selfish love grows in them; that is, by these many external work-brotherhoods they oppose and destroy the one, inner, spiritual, essential, common brotherhood of all saints.

When God sees this perverted state of affairs, He perverts it still more, as is written in Psalm xviii[34], "With the perverse thou wilt be perverted" [Ps. 18:26]; and He brings it to pass that they make themselves and their brotherhoods a mockery and a disgrace, and He casts them out from the common brotherhood of saints, which they oppose and do not make common cause with, into their brotherhood of gluttony, drunkenness and unchastity, so that they, who have neither sought nor thought of anything more than their own, may find their own; and then He blinds them that they do not recognize it as an abomination and disgrace, but adorn their unseemliness with the names of saints, as though they were doing right; beyond this He lets some fall into so deep an abyss that they openly boast and say whoever is in their brotherhood cannot be condemned, as though baptism and the sacrament, instituted by God Himself, were of less worth and were less certain than that which they have thought out with their darkened minds. Therefore their God will dishonor and blind those who, with their mad conduct and the swinish practices of their brotherhoods, mock and blaspheme His easts, His name, and His saints, to the injury of the common Christian brotherhood, which flowed from the wounds of Christ.

4. Therefore, for the right understanding and use of the brotherhoods, one must learn to distinguish rightly between brotherhoods. The first is the divine, the heavenly, the noblest, which surpasses all others, as gold surpasses copper or lead--the fellowship of all saints, of which we spoke above[35]. In this we are all brothers and sisters, so closely united that a closer relationship cannot be conceived, for here we have one baptism, one Christ, one sacrament, one food, one Gospel, one faith, one Spirit, one spiritual body, and each is a member of the other; no other brotherhood is so close. For natural brothers are, to be sure, brothers of one flesh and blood, of one heritage and home, but they must separate and join themselves to others' blood and heritage[36]. Organized brotherhoods have one roll, one mass, one kind of good works, one festival day, one treasury, and, as things are now, their common beer, common feast and common debauch, but none of these binds men so closely together as to produce one spirit, for that is done by Christ's brotherhood alone.

Since, then, the greater, broader and more embracing Christ's brotherhood is, the better it is, therefore all other brotherhoods should be so conducted as to keep this first and noblest brotherhood constantly before their eyes, to regard it alone as great, and with all their works to seek nothing for themselves, but do them for God's sake, to entreat God that He keep and prosper this Christian fellowship and brotherhood from day to day. Hence, when a brotherhood is formed, they should let it be seen that its members outstrip other persons in order to do Christianity some special service with their prayers, fastings, alms and good works, and not in order to seek selfish profit or reward, nor to exclude others, but to serve as the free servants of the whole community of Christians.

If men had such a correct conception, God would restore good order, so that the brotherhoods might not be brought to shame by debauchery. Then God's blessing would follow, so that a general fund might be gathered, with which other men also might be given material aid; then the spiritual and bodily works of the brotherhoods would be done in their proper order. Whoever will not follow this method in his brotherhood I advise to flee from it and let the brotherhood alone; it will do him harm in body and soul.

But if you say, If the brotherhood is not to give me some special advantage, of what use is it to me? I answer: If you are seeking some special advantage, how can the brotherhood or sisterhood help you? Serve the community and other men by it, as is the nature of love, and you will have your reward for this love without any effort and desire on your part. But if you deem the service and reward of love too small, it is evidence that yours is a perverted brotherhood. Love serves freely and for nothing, therefore God also gives again to it every blessing freely and or nothing. Since, then, everything must be done in love, if it is to please God at all, the brotherhood must also be a brotherhood in love. It is the nature, however, of that which is done in love not to seek its own, nor its own profit, but that of others, and, above all, that of the community.

5. To return once more to the sacrament; since the Christian fellowship also is at present in a bad way, as never before, and daily grows worse, especially among the rulers, and all places are full of sin and shame, you should not consider how many masses are said, or how often the sacrament is celebrated, or this will make things worse rather than better,--but how much you and others increase in that which the sacrament signifies and in the faith it demands,--for therein alone lies improvement; and the more you find yourself being incorporated into Christ and into the fellowship of His saints, the better it is with you,--that is, if you find that you are becoming strong in the confidence of Christ and of His dear saints, and are certain that they love you and stand by you in all the trials of life and in death, and that you in turn take to heart the shortcomings and lapses of all Christians and of the whole Church, that your love goes out to everyone, and that you desire to help everyone, to hate no one, to suffer with all and pray or them: then will the work of the sacrament proceed aright, then you will often weep, lament and mourn or the wretched condition of Christendom to-day. If, however, you find no such confidence in Christ and His saints, and the needs of the Church and of every fellowman do not trouble or move you, then beware of all other good works, if in doing them you think you are godly and will be saved. Be assured they are only hypocrisy, sham and deceit, or they are without love and fellowship, and without these nothing is good. For the sum of it all is, _Plenitudo legis est dilectio_, "Love is the fulfilling of the law." [Rom. 13:10] Amen.

FOOTNOTES

[1] See _Treatise on Baptism_, Vol. I, pp. 56 ff.

[2] Note the advance in _The Babylonian Captivity_, below, pp. 178 ff.

[3] Cf. _Babylonian Captivity_, below, p. 186.

[4] Cf. _Sermo_, 112, cap. 5 (Migne, xxxviii, 615).

[5] See Vol. I, p. 56.

[6] E. g., the danger of spilling the wine.

[7] See p. 37.

[8] Used here and above in the New Testament sense of true Christians, living or dead, cf. 1 Cor. 1:2.

[9] See p. 11.

[10] See above, pp. 12, 13, and Vol. I, pp. 59 ff.

[11] The virgin Mary.

[12] Cf. _Enarratio in Ps. XXI_ (Migne, xxxvi, 178).

[13] Penitential works.

[14] Cf. Acts 2:46.

[15] See Vol. I, p. 310.

[16] In the Vulgate the Greek word "mystery" is translated by _sacramentum_. See below, p. 258.

[17] Luther still adheres to the doctrine of transubstantiation. But see below, pp. 187 ff.

[18] See p. 11.

[19] Cf. below, p. 192.

[20] See Luther's explanation of the First Commandment in the Catechisms. Also the answer to the last question in Part V, Small Catechism.

[21] _Treatise on Penance_ (_Weimer Ed._, II, 721), where Luther exhorts the troubled conscience to pray with the father of the lunatic boy, "Lord, I believe, help Thou mine unbelief," and with the Apostles, "Lord, increase our faith."

[22] Cf. above, p. 17.

[23] The Church.

[24] A transubstantiation in the communicant.

[25] A work that is done without reference to the doer of it.

[26] A work considered with reference to the doer of it.

[27] An _opus operatum_.

[28] An _opus operantis_.

[29] Cf. 1 Cor. 11:30.

[30] Sodalities; see Introduction, p. 8, and below, pp. 137 f.

[31] On festival days of the order and on saints' days.

[32] The Carmelites are supposed to have been the first to organize sodalities, having organized in the fourteenth century the Sodality of Our Lady of Carmel. St. Anne was the mother of the Holy Virgin. Her sodalities were, as Kolde says, epidemic in 1520. Luther's appeal to St. Anne in the thunderstorm is well known (Comp. Kostlin-Kawerau, I, 55). There was a sodality of St. Anne, besides one of St. Augustine and one of St. Catherine, in the monastery at Erfurt in Luther's day. St. Sebastian was a martyr of the fourteenth century. His day is January 20. Comp. Arts. _Anna_, _Sebastian_ and _Bruderschaten_ in _Prot. Realencyk_., I, SS2; II, 534 l.

[33] A trades' guild brotherhood.

[34] Douay Version, based on Vulgate, from which Luther quotes.

[35] See above, p. 10.

[36] I. e., in marriage.

A Treatise Concerning The Ban

A TREATISE CONCERNING THE BAN

1520

INTRODUCTION

The ban, or excommunication, is the correlative of communion. Our conception of excommunication depends then, of course, upon our view of what constitutes communion. Luther gives us his view of communion in the preceding _Treatise concerning the Blessed Sacrament_. From the premise there laid down it follows that excommunication, or the ban, excludes only from external membership in the Church, but cannot really separate a man from the Church if he is in personal fellowship with his Lord[1]. Sin and unbelief cause this separation from Him, and the real ban, therefore, is put into effect not by the Church, but by the man himself when he sins against God. The ban of the Church cannot even deprive one of the Sacrament, but only of the outward use of it, for it can still be partaken of spiritually. This whole position, of course, is fatal to the Roman Catholic conception of the Church, and we do not wonder that it was vigorously opposed by the hierarchy.

Of like significance is Luther's advocacy of the separation of the temporal and spiritual powers, practically of Church and State,--the position which he develops later in the _Open Letter to the Nobility_. But in this treatise, again, Luther shows himself to be anything but the immoral monster his vilifiers have tried to make of him. He is again the man of conscience--will his critics say, "of oversensitive conscience"? Thank God that there were some sensitive consciences in an almost conscienceless age! Luther fears sin more than the ban, and sin has for him more than an ecclesiastical meaning. Sin is not primarily an act against the Church, but an offence against God. This the ban is to teach; it is to be the symbol of God's wrath against sin and it is to be used by the Church only remedially and in love. When so used it becomes the chastening rod of the dear Mother Church, provided it be accepted and borne in this spirit.

Why, then, did not Luther bear his own ban in this way? The justification for his subsequent conduct is to be found in two brief but important conditional clauses in this treatise. "God," he says, "cannot and will not permit authority to be wantonly and impudently resisted, _when it does not force us to do what is against God or His commandments_."[2] Again he says, "When unjustly put under the ban we should be very careful not to do, omit, say or withhold that on account of which we are under the ban, _unless we cannot do so without sin and without injury to our neighbor_."[3] God and his neighbor were for Luther the actors which made it necessary for him to speak and act, when for selfish reasons he would often rather have remained passive.

The inception of our treatise is to be found in a sermon preached in Wittenberg in the spring of 1518. Luther's pastoral concern for his people made it necessary for him to speak on this subject in order to quiet the consciences both embittered and distressed by the wanton and unjust use of the power of excommunication. Added to this must have been his own personal interest in the ban certain to fall on him. In a letter to Link[4], dated July 10, 1518, he speaks of having preached a sermon on the power of the ban which produced general consternation and fear that the ire enkindled by the XCV Theses would start afresh. He had desired a public disputation on the subject, but the Bishop of Brandenburg persuaded him to defer the matter. Under date of September 1st, Luther writes Staupitz[5] that because his sermon had been misrepresented and spread by unfriendly spies it became necessary for him to publish it. It appeared in August after Luther's summons to Rome, under the title _De Virtute Excommunicationis_. Our treatise is an elaboration in popular form of this Latin treatise of 1515.

The Grunberg text given in Clemen, Vol. I, which we have followed in most cases, is dated 1520, and must have appeared in its original edition at the end of 1519 or the beginning of 1520.

The text of the treatise is found in the following editions: Weimar Ed., vol. vi, 63; Erlangen Ed., vol. xxvii, 51; Walch Ed., vol. xix, 1089; St. Louis Ed., vol. .xix, 884; Clemen, vol. i, 213; Berlin Ed., vol. iii, 291.

J. J. SCHINDEL.

Allentown, PA.

FOOTNOTES

[1] See below, p. 37.

[2] See below, p. 50.

[3] See below, p. 51.

[4] See Enders, I, No. 84. Smith. _Luther's Correspondence_, I, No. 69.

[5] See Enders, I, No. 90. Smith, _Luther's Correspondence_, I, No. 77.

A TREATISE CONCERNING THE BAN

1520

JESUS

1. We have seen[1] that the sacrament of the holy body of Christ is a sign of the communion of all saints, therefore it becomes necessary to know also what the ban is which is employed in the Church by the power of the spiritual estate. For its chief and peculiar function and power is to deprive guilty Christians of the holy sacrament and forbid it to them. Therefore the one cannot be understood apart from the other, because the one is the opposite of the other; for the Latin word _communio_ means fellowship, and thus do the learned designate the Holy Sacrament. Its opposite is the word _excommunicatio_, which means exclusion from this fellowship, and so the learned term the ban.

2. There is a twofold fellowship, corresponding to the two things in the sacrament, the sign and the thing signified, as was said in the treatise[2]. The first is an inner, spiritual and invisible fellowship of the heart, by which one is incorporated by true faith, hope and love in the fellowship of Christ and of all the saints, signified and bestowed in the sacrament; and this is the effect and virtue of the sacrament. This fellowship can neither be given nor taken away by any one, be he bishop, pope, or angel or any creature. God alone through His Holy Spirit must pour it into the heart of the one who believes in the sacrament, as was said in the treatise[3]. This fellowship no ban can touch or affect, but only the unbelief or sin of the person himself; by these he can excommunicate himself, and thus separate himself from the grace, the and salvation of the fellowship. This St. Paul proves in Romans viii: "Who shall separate us from the God? Can anguish or need, or hunger or poverty, or danger or persecution, or shedding of blood? Nay, I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor principalities nor angelic hosts, neither things present nor things to come, naught that is mighty on the earth, neither height nor depth nor any other creature can separate us from the love of God which is ours in Christ Jesus our Lord." [Rom. 8:35, 38] And St. Peter says: "And who is he that will harm you, if ye be followers of that which is good?" [1 Peter 3:13]

3. The second kind of fellowship is an outward, bodily and visible fellowship, by which one is admitted to the Holy Sacrament and receives and partakes of it together with others. From this fellowship or communion bishop and pope can exclude one, and forbid it to him on account of his sin, and that is called putting him under the ban. This ban was much in vogue of old, and is now known as the lesser ban. For the ban goes beyond this and forbids even burial, selling, trading, all association and fellowship with men, finally, as they say, even fire and water[4], and this is known as the greater ban.

Not satisfied with this, there are some who go still farther and use the temporal powers against those under the ban, to coerce them with sword, fire, and war[5]. These, however, are new inventions, rather than the real meaning of Scripture. To wield the temporal sword belongs to the emperor, to kings, to princes, and to the rulers of this world, and by no means to the spiritual estate[6], whose sword is not to be of iron, but the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word and commandment of God, as St. Paul says. [Eph. 6:17]

4. This external ban, both the lesser and the greater, was instituted by Christ when He said in Matthew xviii: "If thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. If he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word or transaction may be established. If he will not hear them, then tell it unto the whole congregation, the Church. If he neglect to hear the Church, let him be unto thee a heathen man and a publican." [Matt. 18:15 ff.]

Likewise St. Paul says in I Corinthians v: "If any man among you be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner, with such an one keep not company, neither eat with him." [1. Cor. 5:11] Again he says in II Thessalonians iii: "If any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed." [2 Thess. 3:14] Again, John says in his second Epistle: "If any one come unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed, and he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds." [2 John 10]

From all these sayings we learn how the ban is to be used. First, we should seek neither vengeance nor our own profit, as is at present the disgraceful practice everywhere, but only the correction of our neighbor. Second, the penalty should stop short of his death or destruction; or St. Paul limits the purpose of the ban to the correction of our neighbor, that he be put to shame when no one associates with him, and he adds in 11 Thessalonians iii: "Count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother." [2 Thess. 3:15] But now the ruthless tyrants deal with men as though they would cast them down to hell, and do not in any wise seek their correction.

5. It may often happen that a person under the ban is deprived of the holy sacrament, and also of burial, and is nevertheless inwardly[7] secure and blessed in the fellowship of Christ and of all saints, signified in the sacrament. On the other hand, there are many who are not under the outward ban and who freely partake of the sacrament, but are nevertheless inwardly quite estranged and excommunicated from the fellowship of Christ; even though they be buried under the high altar in a golden pall with much pomp and singing and tolling of bells. Therefore, no one is to be judged, even if he be under the ban, especially if he has not been put under the ban for heresy or sin, but for the purpose of correction. For to put men under the ban for the sake of money or other temporal considerations is a new invention, of which the apostles and Christ knew nothing.

6. To put under the ban is not, as some think, to deliver a soul to Satan and deprive it of the intercession and of all the good works[8] of the Church. For where the true faith and love of God remain in the heart, there remains a real participation in all the possessions and intercessions of the Church, together with all the benefits of the sacrament, since the ban is and can be nothing else than exclusion from the external sacrament or from association with men. If I were cast into prison I would, of course, be deprived of the outward companionship of my friends, and yet not be deprived of their favor and friendship; so he that is put under the ban must relinquish the sacrament and association with men, but is not on that account cut off from their love, intercession and good works.

7. It is true that the ban, when it is rightly and deservedly applied, is a sign, an admonition and a chastisement, whereby the one under the ban should recognize that he himself has delivered his soul unto Satan by his transgression and sin, and has deprived himself of the fellowship of all the saints and of Christ. For by the penalty of the ban our mother, the holy Church, would show her dear son the awful consequences of sin and thereby bring him back from the devil to God. When an earthly mother rebukes and chastises her erring son, she does not give him over to the hangman or to the wolves, nor make a knave of him, but she restrains him and shows him by her chastisement that he is in danger of the hangman, and thus keeps him at home in his father's house. In the same way, when the spiritual power puts any one under the ban, it should be in this spirit: "Behold, thou has done this or that, whereby thou hast delivered thy soul unto the devil, deserved God's wrath, and deprived thyself of all Christian fellowship; thou art fallen under the inward spiritual ban in the sight of God and art unwilling to cease or to return. So then, I put thee also outwardly under the ban in the sight of men, and to thy shame I deprive thee of the sacrament and of fellowship with men, until thou come to thyself and bring back thy soul."

8. Let every bishop, provost or official[9], who uses the ban for any other purpose, take heed lest he put himself under the everlasting ban from which neither God nor any creature shall deliver him. There are none to whom the ban is more harmful and dangerous than those who apply it, even though it be laid quite justly and only on account of wrongdoing, for the reason that they seldom if ever have this object in view. Besides they go about it without fear and do not consider how perchance they themselves may be more worthy of a hundred bans in the sight of God, as the Gospel records of the servant who owed his Lord ten thousand pounds and yet would not have patience with his fellow servant who owed him a hundred pence. What will become of these miserable taskmasters, who for the sake of money have brought things to such a pass with their bans, often violently and unjustly imposed, that Turks and heathen have an easier life than Christians? It is very evident that many of them are under the ban in the sight of God, and are deprived of the blessing of the sacrament and of inward, spiritual fellowship, although they do nothing day and night but cite others to appear, harass them and put them under the ban, and deprive of the external sacrament those who are a thousandfold better inwardly and in the sight of God and are living in the spiritual fellowship of the sacrament. O miserable business! O terrible existence maintained by this abominable trade! I am not sure whether such publicans and officials were wolves before becoming officials or whether they are on the way to becoming wolves; their work is certainly wolves' work.

9. From this there follows the truth that the ban of itself ruins, condemns or harms no one, but seeks and finds the ruined and condemned soul for the purpose of bringing it back. For all chastisement is for the correction of sin; the ban is simply a chastisement and motherly correction; therefore it makes no one worse or more sinful, but is ordained solely to restore the inward spiritual fellowship when justly laid, or to deepen it when unjustly imposed. This is proved by St. Paul when he says in II Corinthians xiii: This I write to you according to the power which the Lord hath given me, to edification and not to destruction," [2 Cor. 13:10] And thus, when he rebukes him who had taken his step-mother to wife, he says in I Corinthians v: "I together with you deliver him unto the devil for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved at the last day." [1 Cor. 5:5] Thus also in the passage quoted above he said: "We should not count him who is under the ban as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother, in order that he may be put to shame and not be lost." [2 Thess. 3:15] Nay, even Christ Himself, as man, had not the power to cut off and deliver a single soul to the devil, as He says in John vi: "Him that cometh to Me I will in no wise cast out, and this is the will of My Father Who sent Me, that I should not destroy or lose what He giveth Me." [John 6:37, 39] Again He says: "The Son of Man is not come to destroy, but to save men's souls." [Luke 9:56] If Christ Himself and all the apostles had no other power than to help souls, and have let behind them no other power in the Church, how dare the blind tyrants presume and boast in their presumption that they have power to curse, to condemn and to destroy, which power is even denied them by their own canon law; for in the Liber Sextus[10], which treats of the sentence of excommunication, we read: "Since the ban is a medicine and not a poison, only a discipline, not a destructive uprooting, in so far as the one subjected to it does not despise it: therefore let every spiritual judge give diligence to prove himself one who seeks by the ban naught but to correct and to cure."

10. From the above passage it is evident that the ban, when it is not despised, is wholesome and harmless, and not fatal to the soul, as certain timid and dejected consciences, frightened by the outrageous abuses of some, imagine; although in apostolic times it was able to deliver the body to the devil and to death[11], as indeed it might still be, if the judges would wield the ban, not in the abuse of power, but in humble faith and love, for the correction of their neighbor. It follows further that the ban brings greater danger and terror to those who apply it and are not careful to seek only the correction and salvation of those under the ban, according to the words of the above passage[12]. For the ban can be nothing else than a kind, motherly scourge applied to the body and temporal possessions, by which no one is cast into hell, but rather drawn out of it, and freed from condemnation unto salvation. Therefore we should not only endure it without impatience, but receive it with all joy and reverence. But for the tyrants, who seek therein nothing else than power, awe and gain for themselves, the ban must be a terrible injury, because they pervert it and its purpose, turn the medicine into a poison, and seek only to become a terror to a frightened people; of correction they never think. For this they will have to give an awful reckoning--woe unto them!

11. They have devised a saying, to wit: "Our ban must be feared, right or wrong." With this saying they insolently comfort themselves, swell their chests and puff themselves up like adders, and almost dare to defy heaven and to threaten the whole world; with this bugaboo they have made a deep and mighty impression, imagining that there is more in these words than there really is. Therefore we would explain them more fully and prick this bladder, which with its three peas makes such a rightful noise.

Now, it is true, the ban must be feared and not be despised, whether it be just or unjust. But why apply this only to the ban, which is a motherly chastening, and not to all the other and greater penalties and tribulations as well? For what great thing have you done or the ban by saying it must be feared? Must we not also fear when we are sick, poor, slandered, despised, or deprived of goods, income or justice, nay, when the Turk and other enemies attack or afflict us? For all these and other adversities, whether deserved or undeserved, we should fear, suffer and endure, and in all things conduct ourselves as though we but received our deserts, as the Lord teaches: "O him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again." [Luke 6:30] Why are you not also afraid, dear tyrant, when you suffer injustice, when your income is refused, your property stolen, your rights denied, and why do you not think that you should endure these things in fear, whether they be right or wrong? Do you think that others are commanded to endure your power in ear, whether right or wrong, and that you are free from this commandment and need not endure violence or wrong in fear? You will learn that you also are human and under the same law with which you threaten others, puffing yourself up in your folly.

12. What perversity! The spiritual powers come along with their ban and say it should be eared and endured, whether right or wrong. But if they are subjected to violence and injustice they will not endure it to the extent of a single heller, but without any fear at all, cast up the accounts in their favor and demand what is theirs. Thus they withdraw themselves from God's commandment, in keeping which they, most of all, should be an example to others. For if it is true that pope, bishop and the whole spiritual estate may without fear resist injustice, injury and contempt in their own interest, then it is also true that the ban may be resisted and be repelled, as vigorously as they seek their interest. There is no distinction in God's commandment, it concerns every one alike. But may God forbid that! We are to bear both the ban and whatever tribulation may befall us in fear, as the Gospel teaches. Therefore, if any one wrong you or take your income, and you do not endure it in fear, but would frighten him with the ban[13], especially when you are seeking not his improvement, but your own benefit or self-will, take heed, you are already worse than he. For you intend to draw yourself out of fear and to draw him in, which you have no right to do, and compel him to keep the Gospel which you tear to pieces. How will you be able to stand before God? Therefore when they say, "Our ban must be feared, right or wrong," we reply: "Yes, that is true, but it is also true that your unjust ban harms no one but yourselves, and harms you in body and soul. And the just ban harms you more than it harms me. Therefore you should also endure your injury in fear, be it right or wrong, and if you glory over me because of the ban I will glory over you because of your suffering. If a criminal took my coat and said: 'You should endure it in fear and humility,' I would say, 'I will; not for the sake of your theft, which harms me not, but for the sake of Christ's commandment [Matt. 5:40].' Just so I fear your ban, not for the ban's sake (it does not harm me, but rather yourself), but for the sake of Christ's commandment."

13. Though it is true that the ban must be feared, whether it be right or wrong, yet those who lay the ban are always in greater danger than those on whom it is laid. He who is banned is in no danger but that of despising the ban and not bearing it, whether it be right or wrong. But he who bans is in danger, in the first place, of not enduring injustice in fear; in the second place, of avenging himself through the ban without any fear; in the third place, of not seeking, with singleness of purpose, his sinful neighbor's correction by means of the ban. This is evident because he despises his own sin and that of others, and only attacks the man who injures him, all of which is contrary to the Gospel. Hence it comes that by means of their dreadful perverseness those who use the ban nowadays pick up the spoon and tread in the dish[14]; they put others under the external ban and put themselves under condemnation inwardly; in addition, they become so blinded that they boast how greatly their external ban is to be feared, and inwardly they condemn themselves, and rejoice boldly and without fear like fools and madmen. For this reason I am sure that the Holy Spirit did not invent the saying, Our ban must be feared, right or wrong. It does not become a Christian, not to say one in the spiritual estate[15], to wrong another, much less to lord it over him and boast that this injustice must be feared. It behooves me to say, Thy injustice makes me tremble; it behooves thee much more to take heed and be in fear lest thou do me wrong and threaten me besides, saying that I must endure it in fear; or thy injustice can harm me only in time, but thee it harms to all eternity. So evil and lamentable are these present times, in which such furious tyrants shamelessly and openly boast of their sin and everlasting hurt (which would be horrible even in Turks and heathen), in order that they may be defiant now and mock at the misfortunes of those who suffer, whom they do not seek to correct, but only to inspire with fear and false terror.

In a word, the higher estate is always, with all its works, in greater danger than the lower estate, and where the lower estate must needs be in fear once, there the higher estate needs be in fear ten times over. On this account those who exercise the ban have no reason to lord it over those who are under the ban or to deal arrogantly with them, but all the more reason to weep or themselves. For God's judgment will not be pronounced on the lowly, but on the mighty, as Wisdom the wise man says [Wisdom 6:8 f.].

14. It were indeed better if Christians were taught to love the ban rather than to fear it[16], as we are taught by Christ to love chastisement, pain and even death, and not to fear them. But these prattlers speak only of fear in the ban, though they teach that all other chastisements and misfortunes are to be borne cheerfully. Whereby they betray their blind and cursed purpose, which is to rule by force over the people of Christ, and as it were to take the free Christian Church captive in fear. Therefore let us learn what is our chief duty with respect to the ban, namely, not to despise it or bear it impatiently, and this for two reasons. First, because the authority of the ban was given by Christ to the holy mother, the Christian Church, that is, to the community of all Christians. Therefore, in this matter we should honor and submit to our dear mother Church and to Christ. For what Christ and the Church do should have our approval, our love and our filial fear. Secondly, because the effect and purpose of the ban is beneficial and salutary and never injurious, if one endures it and does not despise it. To use a homely illustration: When a mother punishes her beloved son, whether he has deserved it or not, she certainly does not do it with evil intent, but it is a maternal, harmless and salutary punishment, if the son bears it patiently. Only when he becomes impatient, and is not influenced by it to leave the wrong or to do the good for the sake of which he is punished, but turns against his mother and despises her, does the punishment begin to do him harm; or then he offends against God, Who has commanded: "Thou shalt honor thy father and mother" [Ex. 20:12]; and out of a light, harmless, yea even beneficial chastisement he makes a terrible wrong and sin, to his everlasting pain and punishment.

15. Thus it happens in our day that certain officials[17] and their associates are murdered, beaten and bound, or are in constant fear of death. Doubtless this would not occur at all, or at least much less frequently, if the people did not hold the wrong opinion that the ban is more harmful than profitable. For this reason they venture everything, and commit such crimes as it were in despair. Although this is terrible, yet by God's dispensation the tyrants get what they deserve, because they conceal the real benefit of the ban from the people, and misuse it, making no effort toward correction, but aiming simply to increase their own power. For although every one ought to endure the ban, they too ought not to despise a poor human being, be he guilty or innocent, as Christ says: "Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones that believe on Me, for I say unto you that their angels do always behold the face of My Father which is in heaven." [Matt. 18:10] Why should they wonder if, in the providence of God, at times their heads are broken and their commands despised, because of the unjust tyrannical ban, since without ceasing they act so insolently against God's commandment? True, there is great wrong on both sides. Yet if the people were taught that the power of the ban is wholesome and necessary and that it is not ordained nor used to their hurt, but to their benefit, the officials would be in less danger, and find greater and readier obedience, nay, greater love, good will and honor among all the people.

16. Therefore the people should be taught in some such way as this: My dear people, let not those who have and use the power of the ban drive you to despair, whether they be pious or evil, whether they do you justice or injustice. The power of the ban cannot harm you, but must always be beneficial to the soul, if only you bear and endure it aright; their abuse of the ban does not hinder its virtue. Or if you cannot endure it, then try to escape from it with meekness, not with revenge and retaliation by word or deed. And in all things look not to them, but to the dear mother Church. What difference does it make to you whether she lays her rods of chastisement upon you through pious or through wicked rulers? It is and remains, nevertheless, your dearest mother's most salutary rod. From the beginning of the world it has been so, and will ever remain, that spiritual and temporal power is more often given to the Pilates, Herods, Annases and Caiaphases than to the pious Peters, Pauls and the like, and as in all other estates so in that of government there are always more of the wicked than of the pious. It is not to be supposed or hoped that we shall ever have an entirely pious government, nay, it must come as a pure git of grace or by special prayer and merit, if good government or a right use of power is to be had at all. For God punishes wicked subjects by wicked rulers, as He says: "I will give children to be their prelates and their rulers shall be childish men, I will take from them every mighty man, the wise, the prudent and the man of war," [Isa. 3:4] etc. Since, then, incapable or evil rulers are God's chastisement, and there are so many among us who deserve such chastisement, we must not be surprised if the government wrongs us and abuses its power toward us, nay, we must wonder and thank God when it does not wrong us and do us injustice.

17. Wherefore, since the world is at present overburdened, as it has abundantly deserved to be because of its heinous sins, with young, imprudent and inexperienced rulers, especially in the spiritual estate, so that this age of ours is extraordinarily perilous, we must act very prudently and by all means see to it that we hold the government and all authority in the highest honor, even as Christ honors the authority of Pilate, Herod, Annas, Caiaphas, and of the temporal rulers of His time we must not permit such grievous abuses and the childish rule of the prelates to move us to despise all authority, so that despite those unworthy persons who bear rule we may not at the same time despise their authority, but cheerfully bear what it imposes, or reuse to bear it at least with humility and proper respect. For God cannot and will not permit authority to be wantonly and impudently resisted when it does not force us to do what is against God or His commandments[18], though they themselves do as much as they can against God, or injure us as much as they will. There are some whom He Himself would judge and condemn, and such are those great and powerful tyrants; so too, there are those whom He would help, and such are the oppressed sufferers. Therefore we should yield to this His will and leave the mighty to His sword and judgment, and allow Him to help us, as St. Paul says: "O dearly beloved brethren, neither avenge nor defend yourselves, but rather give place unto the wrath of God, because it is written. Vengeance belongs to Me alone and I will repay each one [Deut. 32:35]." [Rom. 12:19]

And yet we should humbly tell these prelates (especially should the preachers rebuke them, yet only by showing them from the Word of God) that they are acting against God and show them what He would have them do, and in addition diligently and earnestly pray to God or them; even as Jeremiah wrote to the children of Israel in Babylon that they should zealously pray or the king of Babylon, or his son and for his kingdom, although he had taken them captive, had troubled and slain them and done them all manner of evil.

And we can easily do this if we remember that the ban and all unrighteous authority cannot harm our souls, provided we submit to them, and they must ever be of profit, unless they are despised. So also are the authorities a thousandfold worse in the sight of God than we, and are therefore to be pitied rather than wickedly to be despised. For this reason we are also commanded in the law of Moses that no one shall revile the rulers, be they good or evil, even though they give great occasion. In short, we must have evil or childish rulers,--if it is not the Turk, then it must needs be the Christians. The world is far too wicked to be worthy of good and pious lords, it must have princes who go to war, levy taxes and shed blood, and it must have spiritual tyrants who impoverish and burden it with bulls and letters[19] and laws. This and other chastisements are rather what it has deserved, and to resist them is nothing else than to resist God's chastisement. As humbly as I conduct myself when God sends me a sickness, so humbly should I conduct myself toward the evil government, which the same God also sends me.

18. When we are justly and deservedly put under the ban our chief concern should be to correct the sins of commission and omission which caused the ban, since the ban always is imposed on account of sin (which is far worse than the ban itself), and yet here as elsewhere things are perverted, so that we only consider how much the rod hurts and not why we are punished. Where can you find men to-day who are as much in fear of sinning and provoking God as they are in fear of the ban? Thus it happens that we are more in fear of the wholesome chastisement than of the heinous sins. We must let men think and act thus, because the natural man does not see the spiritual harm in sin as he feels the smarts of chastisement; although the fear of the ban has also been exaggerated by the tyrannous methods and threatenings of the spiritual judges who drive the people to fear punishment more than sin.

When, however, we are unjustly put under the ban, we should be very careful that we in no way do, omit, say or withhold that on account of which we are under the ban (unless we cannot do so without sin and without injury to our neighbor)[20], but rather should we endure the ban in humility, die happily under it, if it cannot be otherwise, and not be terrified, even though we do not receive the sacrament and are buried in unconsecrated ground. The reason is this: Truth and righteousness belong to the inner, spiritual fellowship[21] and may not be abandoned under penalty of falling under God's eternal ban. Therefore they dare not be surrendered for the sake of the external fellowship, which is immeasurably inferior, nor because of the ban. To receive the sacrament and to be buried in consecrated ground are of too little consequence that or their sake truth and righteousness be neglected. And that no one may think this strange I will go further and say that even he who dies under a just ban is not damned, unless indeed he did not repent of his sin or despised the ban. For sorrow and repentance make all things right, even though his body be exhumed or his ashes cast into the water[22].

19. The unjust ban then is much more to be desired than either the just ban or the external fellowship. It is a very precious merit in the sight of God, and blessed is he who dies under an unjust ban. God will grant him an eternal crown for the truth's sake, on account of which he is under the ban. Then let him sing in the words of Psalm cix, "They have cursed me, but Thou hast blessed me." [Ps. 109:28] Only let us beware of despising the authorities, and humbly declare our innocence; if this does not avail, then we are free and without guilt in the sight of God. For if we are in duty bound by the commandment of Christ to agree with our adversary [Matt. 5:25]; how much more should we agree with the authority of the Christian Church, be it exercised justly or unjustly, by worthy or unworthy rulers.

An obedient child, though it does not deserve the punishment it receives from its mother, suffers no harm from the unjust chastisement, nay, by its very patience it becomes much dearer and more pleasing to the mother; how much more do we become lovable in God's sight, if at the hands of evil rulers we endure the unmerited punishment of the Church, as our spiritual mother. For the Church remains our mother because Christ remains Christ, and she is not changed into a step-mother simply because of our evil rulers. Nevertheless, the prelates and bishops and their officials should be temperate and not hastily use the ban, for many bans means nothing else than many laws and commandments, and prescribing many laws is to set many snares for poor souls. And so by numerous ill-advised bans nothing more results than great offence and an occasion or sin, by which the wrath of God is provoked, although the ban was ordained to reconcile Him. And although we are truly bound to obey them, still more are they bound to direct, change and regulate their decree and authority according to our ability and need and for our correction and salvation; for we have shown from St. Paul[23] that power is given not for destruction but for edification [2 Cor. 13:10].

20. The ban should be applied not only to heretics and schismatics, but to all who are guilty of open sin, as we have shown above from St. Paul, who commands that the railer, extortioner, fornicator and drunkard be put under the ban [1 Cor. 5:11]. But in our day such sinners are let in peace, especially if they are bigwigs; and to the disgrace of this noble form of authority, the ban is used only for the collection of debts of money, often so insignificant that the costs amount to more than the original debt. In order to gloss this over they have hit upon a new device, saying they put under the ban not because of debt but because of disobedience, because the summons was not respected; were it not for debt, however, they would forget the disobedience, as we see when many other sins, even their own, escape the ban. A poor man must often be disobedient if he is cited to go so many miles, lose time and money and neglect his trade. It is utter tyranny to summon a man to come such a distance across country to court.

And I commend the temporal princes[24] who will not permit the ban and the abuses connected with it in their lands and among their people. What are princes and counsellors for if they do not concern themselves with and judge such temporal matters as debts, each in their city and province and among their subjects? The spiritual powers should be concerned with the Word of God, with sin, and with the devil, in order to bring souls to God, and should relinquish temporal cases to the temporal judges, as Paul writes[25][1 Cor. 6:1]. Indeed, as things are now, it is almost necessary to use the ban in order to drive the people into the Church and not out of it.

21. Whether one be justly or unjustly under the ban, no one may exclude him from the Church until the Gospel has been read or the sermon preached[26]. For from the hearing of the Gospel and the sermon no one shall or can exclude or be excluded. The hearing of the Word of God should remain free to every one[27]. Nay, those who are under a just ban ought most of all to hear it, that they may perchance be moved by it to acknowledge their sin and to reform. We read that it was the ancient practice of the Church to dismiss those under the ban after the sermon, and if a whole congregation were under the ban the sermon must be allowed to proceed just as though there were no ban. In addition, even though he who is under the ban may not remain for the mass after the sermon, nor come to the sacrament[28], nevertheless he should not neglect it, but spiritually come to the sacrament, that is, he should heartily desire it and believe that he can spiritually receive it, as was said in the treatise on the sacrament[29].

FOOTNOTES

[1] In the preceding treatise on the _Blessed Sacrament_.

[2] See above, p. 10.

[3] See above, p. 18.

[4] I. e., the necessaries of life.

[5] E. g., the crusades against heretics, and the inquisition of the thirteenth century. Luther's statement that to burn heretics is contrary to the will of the Holy Spirit was condemned in the Bull _Exsurge Domine_, of July 15, 1520.

[6] Cf. p. 53.

[7] Cf. p. 10.

[8] See Vol. I, pp. 53, 163 ff.

[9] The officials were officers of the bishops' courts; see also below, p. 103.

[10] In Vito, lib. V, tit. xi, c. I,_Cum medicinalis_.

[11] According to Luther's interpretation of 1 Cor. 5:5. Cf. also Acts 5:5.

[12] The passage quoted from the canon law.

[13] For instances see the _Gravamina of the German Nation_ (1521), Wrede, _Deutsche Reichstagsakten_, II, 685.

[14] Thiele, _Luthers Sprichwortersammlung_, No. 276.

[15] I. e., a cleric.

[16] This statement also was condemned in the papal bull.

[17] The "officials" were the administrators of this discipline, see above, p. 41.

[18] A very important limitation for Luther's position.

[19] See Open Letter to the Nobility, below, p. 98.

[20] Again an important limitation.

[21] See above, p. 41.

[22] The ashes of Hus were cast into the Rhine (1415), and the body of Wycliff was exhumed and cremated and the ashes cast into the water (1427).

[23] See above, p. 42.

[24] In 1518 both George and Frederick of Saxony took the position that spiritual jurisdiction should be limited to spiritual matters. Gess, _Akten und Briefe zur Kirchen politik Georgs_ 1, 44.

[25] Luther puts a peculiar construction upon this passage.

[26] The ancient service was divided into the service of the Word (_missa catechumenorum_) and the celebration of the sacrament (_missa fidelium_); before the second, those under the ban as well as the catechumens were required to withdraw.

[27] The "great ban" excluded from all services.

[28] According to Roman Catholic usage there is a distinction between hearing mass and receiving the sacrament.

[29] Compare Treatise Concerning the Blessed Sacrament, above, p. 25.

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE CHRISTIAN NOBILITY OF THE GERMAN NATION CONCERNING THE REFORM OF THE CHRISTIAN ESTATE

1520

INTRODUCTION

The _Open Letter to the Christian Nobility of the German Nation_ is closely related to the tract on _The Papacy at Rome: A Reply to the Celebrated Romanist at Leipzig_[1]. In a letter to Spalatin[2] dated before June 8, 1520, Luther says: "I shall assail that ass of an Alveld in such wise as not to forget the Roman pontiff, and neither of them will be pleased." In the same letter he writes, "I am minded to issue a broadside to Charles and the nobility of Germany against the tyranny and baseness of the Roman curia." The attack upon Alveld is the tract on _The Papacy at Rome_; the _scheda publica_ grew into the _Open Letter_. At the time when the letter to Spalatin was written, the work on _The Papacy at Rome_ must have been already in press, for it appeared in print on the 26th of the month[3], and the composition of the Open Letter had evidently not yet begun. On the 23d Luther sent the manuscript of the _Open Letter_ to Amsdorf[4], with the request that he read it and suggest changes. The two weeks immediately preceding the publication of the work _On the Papacy_ must, therefore, have been the time when the Open Letter was composed.

In the conclusion to the earlier work Luther had said: "Moreover, I should 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? 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 let on earth except in the temporal authorities. Of this I will say more anon, if this Romanist comes again; let this suffice for a beginning. May God help us at length to open our eyes. Amen."

This passage may fairly be regarded as the germ of the _Open Letter_. The ideas of the latter work are suggested with sufficient clearness to show that its materials are already at hand, and its plan already in the author's mind. The threat to write it is scarcely veiled. That Luther did not wait for that particular Romanist to "come again" may have been due to the intervention of another Romanist, none other than his old opponent, Sylvester Prierias. Before the 7th of June[5] Luther had received a copy of Prierias' _Epitome of a Reply to Martin Luther_[6], which is the boldest and baldest possible assertion of the very theory of papal power which Luther had sought to demolish in his tract on the Papacy. In the preface to his reprint of the Epitome, Luther bids farewell to Rome: "Farewell, unhappy, hopeless, blasphemous Rome! The wrath of God hath come upon thee, as thou hast deserved! We have cared for Babylon, and she is not healed; let us, then, leave her, that she may be the habitation of dragons, spectres and witches, and true to her name of Babel, an everlasting confusion, a new pantheon of wickedness."[7]

These words were written while the _Open Letter_ was in course of composition. The _Open Letter_ is, therefore, Luther's first publication after the time when he recognized that the breach between him and the papal church was complete, and likely to be permanent. Meanwhile, the opposing party had come to the same conclusion. The verdict of the pope upon Luther had been long delayed, but on the 15th of June, midway between the letter to Spalatin, above mentioned, and the completion of the _Open Letter_, Leo X signed the bull of excommunication, though it was not published in Germany until later. Thus the _Open Letter_ shows us the mind of Luther in the weeks when the permanent separation between him and Rome took place.

It was also the time when he had the highest hopes from the promised support of the German knights[8], who formed the patriotic party in Germany and are included in the "nobility" to whom the Open Letter is addressed[9].

The first edition of 4000 copies came off the press of Melchior Lotther in Wittenberg before the 18th of August[10]. It is surmised[11] that the earlier portion[12] of the work was not contained in the original manuscript, but was added while it was in the printer's hands; perhaps it was added at the suggestion of Amsdorf. Less than a week later a second edition was in course of preparation[13]. This "enlarged and revised edition"[14] contained three passages not included in the first[15]. They are indicated in the notes to the present edition.

He who would know the true Luther must read more than one of his writings; he must not by any chance omit to read the _Open Letter to the Christian Nobility of the German Nation_. In his other works we learn to know him as the man of God, or the prophet, or the theologian; in this treatise we meet Luther the German. His heart is full of grief for the affliction of his people, and grief turns to wrath as he observes that this affliction is put upon them by the tyranny and greed of the pope and the cardinals and the "Roman vermin." The situation is desperate; appeals and protests have been all in vain; and so, as a last resort, he turns to the temporal authorities,--to Charles V, newly elected, but as yet uncrowned; to the territorial lords, great and small, who have a voice in the imperial diet and powers of jurisdiction in their own domains,--reciting the abuses of "Roman tyranny," and pleading with them to intervene in behalf of the souls that are going to destruction "through the devilish rule of Rome." It is a cry out of the heart of Germany, a nation whose bent is all religious, but which, from that very circumstance, is all the more open to the insults and wrongs and deceptions of the Roman curia.

Yet it is no formless and incoherent cry, but an orderly recital of the ills of Germany. There are times when we feel in reading it that the writer is laying violent hands on his own wrath in the effort to be calm. For all its scathing quality, it is a sane arraignment of those who "under the holy name of Christ and St. Peter" are responsible for the nation's woes, and the remedies that are proposed are, many of them, practicable as well as reasonable.

The materials of the work are drawn from many sources,--from hearsay, from personal observation, from such histories as Luther had at his command, from the proceedings of councils and of diets; there are passages which would seem to bear more than an accidental resemblance to similar passages in Hutten's _Vadiscus_. All was grist that came to Luther's mill. But the spirit of the work is Luther's own.

For the general historian, who is concerned more with the practical than with the theoretical or theological aspects of the Reformation, the _Open Letter_ is undoubtedly Luther's greatest work. Its rank outspokenness about the true condition of Germany, the number and variety of the subjects that it treats, the multiplicity of the sources from which the subject-matter is drawn, and the point of view from which the whole is discussed make it a work of absorbing interest and priceless historical value. It shows, as does no other single work of the Reformation time, the things that were in men's minds and the variety of motives which led them to espouse the cause of the Protestant party. Doctrine, ethics, history, politics, economics, all have their place in the treatise. It is not only "a blast on the war-trumpet,"[16] but a connecting link between the thought of the Middle Ages and that of modern times, prophetic of the new age, but showing how closely the new is bound up with the old.

The text of the _Open Letter_ is found in _Weimar Ed_., VI, 404-469; _Erl. Ed._, XXI, 277-360; _Walch Ed._, X, 296-399; _St. Louis Ed._, X, 266-351; _Berlin Ed._, I, 203-290; _Clemen_ I, 363-425. The text of the Berlin Ed._ is modernized and annotated by E. Schneider. The editions of _K. Benrath_ (Halle, 1883) and E. Lemme (_Die 3 grossen Reformationsschriften L's vom J. 1520_; Gotha, 1884) contain a modernized text and extensive notes. A previous English translation in _Wace_ and _Buchheim_, _Luther's Primary Works_ (London and Philadelphia, 1896). The present translation is based on the text of Clemen.

For full discussion of the contents of the work, especially its sources, see _Weimar Ed._, VI, 381-391; _Schafer, Luther als Kirchenhistoriker_, Gutersloh, 1897; Kohler, _L's Schrift an den Adel . . . im Spiegel der Kulturgeschichte_, Halle, 1895, and _Luther und die Kirchengeschichte_, Erlangen, 1900. Extensive comment in all the biographies, especially Kostlin-Kawerau I, 315 ff.

CHARLES M. JACOBS.

Lutheran Theological Seminary,

Mount Airy, Philadelphia.

FOOTNOTES

[1] In this edition, I, 337 ff.

[2] Enders, II, 414; Smith, _L.'s Correspondence_, I, No. 266.

[3] Enders, II, 424.

[4] See below, p. 62.

[5] See letter of June 7th to John Hess, Enders, II, 411; Smith, I, No. 265.

[6] Published at Rome 1519; printed with Luther's preface and notes, Weimar Ed., VI, 328ff.; Erl. Ed., op. var. arg., II, 79 ff.

[7] _Weimar Ed._, VI, 329.

[8] See Enders, II, 415, 443; Smith, Nos. 269, 279, and documents in _St. Louis Ed._, XV, 1630 ff.

[9] See Kostlin-Kawerau, _Martin Luther_, I, 308 ff., and _Weimar Ed._, VI, 381 ff.

[10] See Luther's letters to Lang and Staupitz, who wished to have the publication withheld (Enders, II, 461, 463).

[11] _Clemen_, I. 362.

[12] Below, pp. 65-99.

[13] See _Weimar Ed._, VI, 397.

[14] See title _B_, _ibid_., 398.

[15] Printed as an appendix in _Clemen_, I, 421-425.

[16] So it was called by Johann Lang (Enders, II, 461).

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE CHRISTIAN NOBILITY OF THE GERMAN NATION CONCERNING THE REFORM OF THE CHRISTIAN ESTATE

1520

To the

Esteemed and Reverend Master

Nicholas Von Amsdorf,

NICHOLAS VON AMSDORF,

Licentiate of Holy Scripture and Canon at Wittenberg, my special and kind friend;

Doctor Martin Luther.

The grace and peace of God be with thee, esteemed and reverend dear sir and friend.

The time to keep silence has passed and the time to speak is come, as saith Ecclesiastes [Eccl. 3:7]. I have followed out our intention[1] and brought together some matters touching the reform of the Christian Estate, to be laid before the Christian Nobility of the German Nation, in the hope that God may deign to help His Church through the efforts of the laity, since the clergy, to whom this task more properly belongs, have grown quite indifferent. I am sending the whole thing to your Reverence, that you may pass judgment on it and, if necessary, improve it.

I know full well that I shall not escape the charge of presumption in that I, a despised monk, venture to address such high and great Estates on matters of such moment, and to give advice to people of such high intelligence. I shall offer no apologies, no matter who may chide me. Perchance I owe my God and the world another piece of folly, and I have now made up my mind honestly to pay that debt, if I can do so, and for once to become court-jester; if I fail, I still have one advantage,--no one need buy me a cap or cut me my comb[2]. It is a question which one will put the bells on the other[3]. I must fulfil the proverb, "Whatever the world does, a monk must be in it, even if he has to be painted in."[4] More than once a fool has spoken wisely, and wise men often have been arrant fools, as Paul says, "If any one will be wise, let him become a fool." [1 Cor. 3:18] Moreover since I am not only a fool, but also a sworn doctor of Holy Scripture, I am glad for the chance to fulfil my doctor's oath in this fool's way.

I pray you, make my excuses to the moderately intelligent, for I know not how to earn the grace and favor of the immoderately intelligent, though I have often sought to do so with great pains. Henceforth I neither desire nor regard their favor. God help us to seek not our own glory, but His alone! Amen.

Wittenberg, in the house of the Augustinians, on the Eve of St. John the Baptist (June 23d), in the year fifteen hundred and twenty.

To

His Most Illustrious and Mighty Imperial Majesty,

and to

the Christian Nobility of the German Nation,

Doctor Martin Luther.

Grace and power from God, Most Illustrious Majesty, and most gracious and dear Lords.

It is not out of sheer frowardness or rashness that I, a single, poor man, have undertaken to address your worships. The distress and oppression which weigh down all the Estates of Christendom, especially of Germany, and which move not me alone, but everyone to cry out time and again, and to pray for help[5], have forced me even now to cry aloud that God may inspire some one with His Spirit to lend this suffering nation a helping hand. Ofttimes the councils[6] have made some pretence at reformation, but their attempts have been cleverly hindered by the guile of certain men and things have gone from bad to worse. I now intend, by the help of God, to throw some light upon the wiles and wickedness of these men, to the end that when they are known, they may not henceforth be so hurtful and so great a hindrance. God has given us a noble youth to be our head and thereby has awakened great hopes of good in many hearts[7]; wherefore it is meet that we should do our part and profitably use this time of grace.

In this whole matter the first and most important thing is that we take earnest heed not to enter on it trusting in great might or in human reason, even though all power in the world were ours; for God cannot and will not suffer a good work to be begun with trust in our own power or reason. Such works He crushes ruthlessly to earth, as it is written in the xxxiii. Psalm, "There is no king saved by the multitude of an host: a mighty man is not delivered by much strength." [Ps. 33:16] On this account, I fear, it came to pass of old that the good Emperors Frederick I[8] and II[9], and many other German emperors were shamefully oppressed and trodden under foot by the popes, although all the world feared them. It may be that they relied on their own might more than on God, and therefore they had to all. In our own times, too, what was it that raised the bloodthirsty Julius II[10] to such heights? Nothing else, I fear, except that France, the Germans and Venice relied upon themselves. The children of Benjamin slew 42,000 Israelites[11] because the latter relied on their own strength.

That it may not so fare with us and our noble young Emperor Charles, we must be sure that in this matter we are dealing not with men, but with the princes of hell, who can fill the world with war and bloodshed, but whom war and bloodshed do not overcome. We must go at this work despairing of physical force and humbly trusting God; we must seek God's help with earnest prayer, and fix our minds on nothing else than the misery and distress of suffering Christendom, without regard to the deserts of evil men. Otherwise we may start the game with great prospect of success, but when we get well into it the evil spirits will stir up such confusion that the whole world will swim in blood, and yet nothing will come of it. Let us act wisely, therefore, and in the fear of God. The more force we use, the greater our disaster if we do not act humbly and in God's fear. The popes and the Romans have hitherto been, able, by the devil's help, to set kings at odds with one another, and they may well be able to do it again, if we proceed by our own might and cunning, without God's help.

I. The Three Walls Of The Romanists

I. THE THREE WALLS OF THE ROMANISTS

[Sidenote: The Three Walls Described]

The Romanists[12], with great adroitness, have built three walls about them, behind which they have hitherto defended themselves in such wise that no one has been able to reform them; and this has been the cause of terrible corruption throughout all Christendom.

_First_, when pressed by the temporal power, they have made decrees and said that the temporal power has no jurisdiction over them, but, on the other hand, that the spiritual is above the temporal power. _Second_, when the attempt is made to reprove them out of the Scriptures, they raise the objection that the interpretation of the Scriptures belongs to no one except the pope. Third, if threatened with a council, they answer with the fable that no one can call a council but the pope.

In this wise they have slyly stolen from us our three rods[13], that they may go unpunished, and have ensconced themselves within the safe stronghold of these three walls, that they may practise all the knavery and wickedness which we now see. Even when they have been compelled to hold a council they have weakened its power in advance by previously binding the princes with an oath to let them remain as they are. Moreover, they have given the pope full authority over all the decisions of the council, so that it is all one whether there are many councils or no councils,--except that they deceive us with puppet-shows and sham-battles. So terribly do they fear for their skin in a really free council! And they have intimidated kings and princes by making them believe it would be an offence against God not to obey them in all these knavish, crafty deceptions[14]. Now God help us, and give us one of the trumpets with which the walls of Jericho were overthrown [Josh. 6:20], that we may blow down these walls of straw and paper, and may set free the Christian rods or the punishment of sin, bringing to light the craft and deceit of the devil, to the end that through punishment we may reform ourselves, and once more attain God's favor.

Against the first wall we will direct our first attack.

[Sidenote: The First Wall--the Spiritual Estate above the Temporal]

It is pure invention that pope, bishops, priests and monks are to be called the "spiritual estate"; princes, lords, artisans, and farmers the temporal estate. That is indeed a fine bit of lying and hypocrisy. Yet no one should be frightened by it; and for this reason--viz., that all Christians are truly of the "spiritual estate," and there is among them no difference at all but that of office, as Paul says in I Corinthians xii. We are all one body, yet every member has its own work, whereby it serves every other, all because we have one baptism, one Gospel, one faith, and are all alike Christians [1 Cor. 12:12 ff.]; for baptism, Gospel and faith alone make us "spiritual" and a Christian people.

[Sidenote: The Priesthood of Believers]

But that a pope or a bishop anoints, confers tonsures, ordains, consecrates, or prescribes dress unlike that of the laity,--this may make hypocrites and graven images[15], but it never makes a Christian or "spiritual" man. Through baptism all of us are consecrated to the priesthood, as St. Peter says in I Peter ii, "Ye are a royal priesthood, a priestly kingdom," [1 Pet. 2:9] and the book of Revelation says, "Thou hast made us by Thy blood to be priests and kings." [Rev. 5:10] For if we had no higher consecration than pope or bishop gives, the consecration by pope or bishop would never make a priest, nor might anyone either say mass or preach a sermon or give absolution. Therefore when the bishop consecrates it is the same thing as if he, in the place and stead of the whole congregation, all of whom have like power, were to take one out of their number and charge him to use this power for the others; just as though ten brothers, all king's sons and equal heirs, were to choose one of themselves to rule the inheritance or them all,--they would all be kings and equal in power, though one of them would be charged with the duty of ruling.

To make it still clearer. If a little group of pious Christian laymen were taken captive and set down in a wilderness, and had among them no priest consecrated by a bishop, and if there in the wilderness they were to agree in choosing one of themselves, married or unmarried, and were to charge him with the office of baptising, saying mass, absolving and preaching, such a man would be as truly a priest as though all bishops and popes had consecrated him. That is why in cases of necessity any one can baptise and give absolution[16], which would be impossible unless we were all priests. This great grace and power of baptism and of the Christian Estate they have well-nigh destroyed and caused us to forget through the canon law[17]. It was in the manner aforesaid that Christians in olden days chose from their number bishops and priests, who were afterwards confirmed by other bishops, without all the show which now obtains. It was thus that Sts. Augustine[18], Ambrose[19] and Cyprian[20] became bishops.

[Sidenote: The Temporal Rulers, Priests]

[Sidenote: The Priest an Office-holder]

Since, then, the temporal authorities are baptised with same baptism and have the same faith and Gospel as we, we must grant that they are priests and bishops, and count their office one which has a proper and a useful place in the Christian community. For whoever comes out of the water of baptism[21] can boast that he is already consecrated priest, bishop and pope, though it is not seemly that every one should exercise the office. Nay, just because we are all in like manner priests, no one must put himself forward and undertake, without our consent and election, to do what is in the power of all of us. For what is common to all, no one dare take upon himself without the will and the command of the community; and should it happen that one chosen for such an office were deposed for malfeasance, he would then be just what he was before he held office. Therefore a priest in Christendom is nothing else than an office-holder. While he is in office, he has precedence; holder when deposed, he is a peasant or a townsman like the rest. Beyond all doubt, then, a priest is no longer a priest when he is deposed. But now they have invented _characteres indelebiles_[22], and prate that a deposed priest is nevertheless something different from a mere layman. They even dream that a priest can never become a layman, or be anything else than a priest. All this is mere talk and man-made law.

From all this it follows that there is really no difference between laymen and priests, princes and bishops, "spirituals" and "temporals," as they call them, except that of office and work, but not of "estate"; or they are all of the same estate[23],--true priests, bishops and popes,--though they are not all engaged in the same work, just as all priests and monks have not the same work. This is the teaching of St. Paul in Romans xii [Rom. 12:4 ff.] and I Corinthians xii [1 Cor. 12:12 ff.], and of St. Peter in I Peter ii [1 Pet. 2:9], as I have said above, viz., that we are all one body of Christ, the Head, all members one of another. Christ has not two different bodies, one "temporal," the other "spiritual." He is one Head, and He has one body.

Therefore, just as those who are now called "spiritual"--priests, bishops or popes--are neither different from other Christians nor superior to them, except that they are charged with the administration of the Word of God and the sacraments, which is their work and office, so it is with the temporal authorities,--they bear sword and rod with which to punish the evil and to protect the good [Rom. 13:4]. A cobbler, a smith, a farmer, each has the work and office of his trade, and yet they are all alike consecrated priests and bishops, and every one by means of his own work or office must benefit and serve every other, that in this way many kinds of work may be done for the bodily and spiritual welfare of the community, even as all the members of the body serve one another.

See, now, how Christian is the decree which says that the temporal power is not above the "spiritual estate" and may not punish it[24]. That is as much as to say that the hand shall lend no aid when the eye is suffering. Is it not unnatural, not to say unchristian, that one member should not help another and prevent its destruction? Verily, the more honorable the member, the more should the others help. I say then, since the temporal power is ordained of God to punish evil-doers and to protect them that do well [Rom. 13], it should therefore be left free to perform its office without hindrance through the whole body of Christendom without respect of persons, whether it affect pope, bishops, priests, monks, nuns or anybody else. For if the mere act that the temporal power has a smaller place among the Christian offices than has the office of preachers or confessors, or of the clergy, then the tailors, cobblers, masons, carpenters, pot-boys, tapsters, farmers, and all the secular tradesmen, should also be prevented from providing pope, bishops, priests and monks with shoes, clothing, houses, meat and drink, and from paying them tribute. But if these laymen are allowed to do their work unhindered, what do the Roman scribes mean by their laws, with which they withdraw themselves from the jurisdiction of the temporal Christian power, only so that they may be free to do evil and to fulfil what St. Peter has said: "There shall be false teachers among you, and through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you." [2 Pet. 2:1 ff.]

On this account the Christian temporal power should exercise its office without let or hindrance, regardless whether it be pope, bishop or priest whom it affects; whoever is guilty, let him suffer. All that the canon law has said to the contrary is sheer invention of Roman presumption. For thus saith St. Paul to all Christians: "Let every soul (I take that to mean the pope's soul also) be subject unto the higher powers; for they bear not the sword in vain, but are the ministers of God for the punishment of evil-doers, and for the praise of them that do well." [Rom. 13:1, 4] St. Peter also says: "Submit yourselves unto every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake, for so is the will of God." [1 Pet. 2:13, 15] He has also prophesied that such men shall come as will despise the temporal authorities [1 Pet. 2:10]; and this has come to pass through the canon law.

So then, I think this first paper-wall is overthrown, since the temporal power has become a member of the body of Christendom, and is of the "spiritual estate," though its work is of a temporal nature. Therefore its work should extend freely and without hindrance to all the members of the whole body; it should punish and use force whenever guilt deserves or necessity demands, without regard to pope, bishops and priests,--let them hurl threats and bans as much as they will.

This is why guilty priests, if they are surrendered to the temporal law[25], are first deprived of their priestly dignities, which would not be right unless the temporal sword had previously had authority over them by divine right. Again, it is intolerable that in the canon law so much importance is attached to the freedom, life and property of the clergy, as though the laity were not also as spiritual and as good Christians as they, or did not belong to the Church. Why are your life and limb, your property and honor so free, and mine not? We are all alike Christians, and have baptism, faith, Spirit and all things alike. If a priest is killed, the land is laid under interdict,[26]--why not when a peasant is killed? Whence comes this great distinction between those who are equally Christians? Only from human laws and inventions!

Moreover, it can be no good spirit who has invented such exceptions and granted to sin such license and impunity. For if we are bound to strive against the works and words of the evil spirit, and to drive him out in whatever way we can, as Christ commands and His Apostles, ought we, then, to suffer it in silence when the pope or his satellites are bent on devilish words and works? Ought we for the sake of men to allow the suppression of divine commandments and truths which we have sworn in baptism to support with life and limb? Of a truth we should then have to answer for all the souls that would thereby be abandoned and led astray.

It must therefore have been the very prince of devils who said what is written in the canon law: "If the pope were so scandalously bad as to lead souls in crowds to the devil, yet he could not be deposed."[27] On this accursed and devilish foundation they build at Rome, and think that we should let all the world go to the devil, rather than resist their knavery. If the act that one man is set over others were sufficient reason why he should escape punishment, then no Christian could punish another, since Christ commands that every man shall esteem himself the lowliest and the least. [Matt. 18:4]

Where sin is, there is no escape from punishment; as St. Gregory[28] also writes that we are indeed all equal, but guilt puts us in subjection one to another. Now we see how they whom God and the Apostles have made subject to the temporal sword deal with Christendom, depriving it of its liberty by their own wickedness, without warrant of Scripture. It is to be feared that this is a game of Anti-christ[29] or a sign that he is close at hand.

[Sidenote: The Second Wall--The Pope the Interpreter of Scripture; Papal Infallibility]

The second wall is still more flimsy and worthless. They wish to be the only Masters of the Holy Scriptures[31] even though in all their lives they learn nothing from them. They assume for themselves sole authority, and with insolent juggling of words they would persuade us that the pope, whether he be a bad man or a good man, cannot err in matters of faith[32]; and yet they cannot prove a single letter of it. Hence it comes that so many heretical and unchristian, nay, even unnatural ordinances have a place in the canon law, of which, however, there is no present need to speak. For since they think that the Holy Spirit never leaves them, be they never so unlearned and wicked, they make bold to decree whatever they will. And if it were true, where would be the need or use of the Holy Scriptures? Let us burn them, and be satisfied with the unlearned lords at Rome, who are possessed of the Holy Spirit,--although He can possess only pious hearts! Unless I had read it myself[33], I could not have believed that the devil would make such clumsy pretensions at Rome, and find a following.

But not to fight them with mere words, we will quote the Scriptures. St. Paul says in I Corinthians xiv: anyone something better is revealed, though he be sitting and listening to another in God's Word, then the first, who is speaking, shall hold his peace and give place." [1 Cor. 14:30] What would be the use of this commandment, if we were only to believe him who does the talking or who has the highest seat? [John 6:45] Christ also says in John vi, that all Christians shall be taught of God. Thus it may well happen that the pope and his followers are wicked men, and no true Christians, not taught of God, not having true understanding. On the other hand, an ordinary man may have true understanding; why then should we not follow him? Has not the pope erred many times? Who would help Christendom when the pope errs, if we were not to believe another, who had the Scriptures on his side, more than the pope?

Therefore it is a wickedly invented fable, and they cannot produce a letter in defence of it, that the interpretation of Scripture or the confirmation of its interpretation belongs to the pope alone. They have themselves usurped this power; and although they allege that this power was given to Peter when the keys were given to him, it is plain enough that the keys were not given to Peter alone, but to the whole community[34]. Moreover, the keys were not ordained for doctrine or government, but only for the binding and loosing of sin [John 20:22 ff.], and whatever further power of the keys they arrogate to themselves is mere invention. But Christ's word to Peter, "I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not," [Luke 22:32] cannot be applied to the pope, since the majority of the popes have been without faith, as they must themselves confess. Besides, it is not only for Peter that Christ prayed, but also or all Apostles and Christians, as he says in John xvii: "Father, I pray for those whom Thou hast given Me, and not for these only, but for all who believe on Me through their word." [John 17:9, 20] Is not this clear enough?

Only think of it yourself! They must confess that there are pious Christians among us, who have the true faith, Spirit, understanding, word and mind of Christ. Why, then, should we reject their word and understanding and follow the pope, who has neither faith nor Spirit? That would be to deny the whole faith and the Christian Church. Moreover, it is not the pope alone who is always in the right, if the article of the Creed is correct: "I believe one holy Christian Church"; otherwise the prayer must run: "I believe in the pope at Rome," and so reduce the Christian Church to one man,--which would be nothing else than a devilish and hellish error.

Besides, if we are all priests, as was said above[35], and all have one faith, one Gospel, one sacrament, why should we not also have the power to test and judge what is correct or incorrect in matters of faith? What becomes of the words of Paul in I Corinthians ii: "He that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man," [1 Cor. 2:15] and II Corinthians iv: "We have all the same Spirit of faith"? [2 Cor. 4:13] Why, then, should not we perceive what squares with faith and what does not, as well as does an unbelieving pope?

All these and many other texts should make us bold and free, and we should not allow the Spirit of liberty, as Paul calls Him [2 Cor. 3:17], to be frightened off by the fabrications of the popes, but we ought to go boldly forward to test all that they do or leave undone, according to our interpretation of the Scriptures, which rests on faith, and compel them to follow not their own interpretation, but the one that is better. In the olden days Abraham had to listen to his Sarah, although she was in more complete subjection to him than we are to anyone on earth [Gen. 21:12]. Balaam's ass, also, was wiser than the prophet himself [Num. 22:28]. If God then spoke by an ass against a prophet, why should He not be able even now to speak by a righteous man against the pope? In like manner St. Paul rebukes St. Peter as a man in error [Gal. 2:11 ff.]. Therefore it behooves every Christian to espouse the cause of the faith, to understand and defend it, and to rebuke all errors.

[Sidenote: The Third Wall--Pope and Council]

The _third wall_ falls of itself when the first two are down. For when the pope acts contrary to the Pope and Scriptures, it is our duty to stand by the Scriptures, to reprove him, and to constrain him, according to the word of Christ in Matthew xviii: "If thy brother sin against thee, go and tell it him between thee and him alone; if he hear thee not, then take with thee one or two more; if he hear them not, tell it to the Church; if he hear not the Church, consider him a heathen." [Matt. 18:15] Here every member is commanded to care for every other. How much rather should we do this when the member that does evil is a ruling member, and by his evil-doing is the cause of much harm and offence to the rest! But if I am to accuse him before the Church, I must bring the Church together.

They have no basis in Scripture or their contention that it belongs to the pope alone to call a council or confirm its actions[36]; for this is based merely upon their own laws, which are valid only in so far as they are not injurious to Christendom or contrary to the laws of God. When the pope deserves punishment, such laws go out of force, since it is injurious to Christendom not to punish him by means of a council.

Thus we read in Acts xv. that it was not St. Peter who called the Apostolic Council, but the Apostles and elders [Acts 15:6]. If, then, that right had belonged to St. Peter alone, the council would not have been a Christian council, but an heretical _conciliabulum_[37]. Even the Council of Nicaea--the most famous of all--was neither called nor confirmed by the Bishop of Rome, but by the Emperor Constantine[38], and many other emperors after him did the like, yet these councils were the most Christian of all[39]. But if the pope alone had the right to call councils, then all these councils must have been heretical. Moreover, if I consider the councils which the pope has created, I find that they have done nothing of special importance.

Therefore, when necessity demands, and the pope is an offence to Christendom, the first man who is able should, as a faithful member of the whole body, do what he can to bring about a truly free council[40]. No one can do this so well as the temporal authorities, especially since now they also are fellow-Christians, fellow-priests, "fellow-spirituals,"[41] fellow-lords over all things, and whenever it is needful or profitable, they should give free course to the office and work in which God has put them above every man. Would it not be an unnatural thing, if a fire broke out in a city, and everybody were to stand by and let it burn on and on and consume everything that could burn, for the sole reason that nobody had the authority of the burgomaster, or because, perhaps, the fire broke out in the burgomaster's house? In such case is it not the duty of every citizen to arouse and call the rest? How much more should this be done in the spiritual city of Christ, if a fire of offence breaks out, whether in the papal government, or anywhere else? In the same way, if the enemy attacks a city, he who first rouses the others deserves honor and thanks; why then should he not deserve honor who makes known the presence of the enemy from hell, and awakens the Christians, and calls them together?

But all their boasts of an authority which dare not be opposed amount to nothing after all. No one in Christendom has authority to do injury, or to forbid the resisting of injury. There is no authority in the Church save for edification. Therefore, if the pope were to use his authority to prevent the calling of a free council, and thus became a hindrance to the edification of the Church, we should have regard neither or him nor or his authority; and if he were to hurl his bans and thunderbolts, we should despise his conduct as that of a madman, and relying on God, hurl back the ban on him, and coerce him as best we could. For this presumptuous authority of his is nothing; he has no such authority, and he is quickly overthrown by a text of Scripture; for Paul says to the Corinthians, "God has given us authority not for the destruction, but for the edification of Christendom." [2 Cor. 10:8] Who is ready to overleap this text? It is only the power of the devil and of Antichrist which resists the things that serve or the edification of Christendom; it is, therefore, in no wise to be obeyed, but is to be opposed with life and goods and all our strength.

Even though a miracle were to be done in the pope's behalf against the temporal powers, or though someone were to be stricken with a plague--which they boast has sometimes happened--it should be considered only the work of the devil, because of the weakness of our faith in God. Christ Himself prophesied in Matthew xxiv: "There shall come in My Name false Christs and false prophets, and do signs and wonders, so as to deceive even the elect," [Matt. 24:24] and Paul says in II Thessalonians ii, that Antichrist shall, through the power of Satan, be mighty in lying wonders [2 Thess. 2:9]. Let us, therefore, hold fast to this: No Christian authority can do anything against Christ; as St. Paul says, "We can do nothing against Christ, but for Christ." [2 Cor. 13:8] Whatever does aught against Christ is the power of Antichrist and of the devil, even though it were to rain and hail wonders and plagues. Wonders and plagues prove nothing, especially in these last evil times, for which all the Scriptures prophesy false wonders [2 Thess. 2:9 f.]. Therefore we must cling with firm faith to the words of God, and then the devil will cease from wonders.

Thus I hope that the false, lying terror with which the Romans have this long time made our conscience timid and stupid, has been allayed. They, like all of us, are subject to the temporal sword; they have no power to interpret the Scriptures by mere authority, without learning; they have no authority to prevent a council or, in sheer wantonness, to pledge it, bind it, or take away its liberty; but if they do this, they are in truth the communion of Antichrist and of the devil, and have nothing at all of Christ except the name.

Ii. Abuses To Be Discussed In Councils

II. ABUSES TO BE DISCUSSED IN COUNCILS

We shall now look at the matters which should be discussed in the councils, and with which popes, cardinals, bishops and all the scholars ought properly to be occupied day and night if they loved Christ and His Church. But if they neglect this duty, then let the laity[42] and the temporal authorities see to it, regardless of bans and thunders; for an unjust ban is better than ten just releases, and an unjust release worse than ten just bans. Let us, therefore, awake, dear Germans, and fear God rather than men [Acts 5:29], that we may not share the fate of all the poor souls who are so lamentably lost through the shameful and devilish rule of the Romans, in which the devil daily takes a larger and larger place,--if, indeed, it were possible that such a hellish rule could grow worse, a thing I can neither conceive nor believe.

[Sidenote: Worldliness of the pope]

1. It is a horrible and frightful thing that the ruler of Christendom, who boasts himself vicar of Christ and successor of St. Peter, lives in such worldly splendor that in this regard no king nor emperor can equal or approach him, and that he who claims the title of "most holy" and "most spiritual" is more worldly than the world itself. He wears a triple crown, when the greatest kings wear but a single crown[43]; if that is like the poverty of Christ and of St. Peter, then it is a new kind of likeness. When a word is said against it, they cry out "Heresy!" but that is because they do not wish to hear how unchristian and ungodly such a practice is. I think, however, that if the pope were with tears to pray to God, he would have to lay aside these crowns, for our God can suffer no pride; and his office is nothing else than this,--daily to weep and pray or Christendom, and to set an example of all humility.

However that may be, this splendor of his is an offence, and the pope is bound on his soul's salvation to lay it aside, because St. Paul says, "Abstain from all outward shows, which give offence," [1 Thess. 5:21] and in Rom. xii, "We should provide good, not only in the sight of God, but also in the sight of all men." [Rom. 12:17] An ordinary bishop's crown would be enough for the pope; he should be greater than others in wisdom and holiness, and leave the crown of pride to Antichrist, as did his predecessors several centuries ago. They say he is a lord of the world; that is a lie; for Christ, Whose vicar and officer he boasts himself to be, said before Pilate, "My kingdom is not of this world," [John 17:36] and no vicar's rule can go beyond his lord's. Moreover he is not the vicar of the glorified, but of the crucified Christ, as Paul says, "I was willing to know nothing among you save Christ, and Him only as the Crucified" [1 Cor. 2:2]; and in Philippians ii, "So think of yourselves as ye see in Christ, Who emptied Himself and took upon Him the appearance of a servant" [Phil. 2:5]; and again in I Corinthians i, "We preach Christ, the Crucified." [1 Cor. 1:23] Now they make the pope a vicar of the glorified Christ in heaven, and some of them have allowed the devil to rule them so completely that they have maintained that the pope is above the angels in heaven and has authority over them[44]. These are indeed the very works of the very Antichrist.

[Sidenote: The Cardinals]

2. What is the use in Christendom of those people who are called the cardinals? I shall tell you. Italy and Germany have many rich monasteries, foundations, benefices, and livings. No better way has been discovered to bring all these to Rome than by creating cardinals and giving them the bishoprics, monasteries and prelacies, and so overthrowing the worship of God. For this reason we now see Italy a very wilderness--monasteries in ruins, bishoprics devoured, the prelacies and the revenues of all the churches drawn to Rome, cities decayed, land and people laid waste, because there is no more worship or preaching. Why? The cardinals must have the income[45]. No Turk could have so devastated Italy and suppressed the worship of God.

Now that Italy is sucked dry, they come into Germany[46], and begin oh, so gently. But let us beware, for Germany will soon become like Italy. Already we have some cardinals; what the Romans seek by that the "drunken Germans" are not to understand until we have not a bishopric, a monastery, a living, a benefice, a _heller_ or a _pfennig_ left. Antichrist must take the treasures of the earth, as it was prophesied [Dan. 11:39, 43]. So it goes on. They skim the cream of the bishoprics, monasteries and benefices, and because they do not yet venture to turn them all to shameful use, as they have done in Italy, they only practise for the present the sacred trickery of coupling together ten or twenty prelacies and taking a yearly portion from each of them, so as to make a tidy sum after all. The priory of Wurzburg yields a thousand _gulden_; that of Bamberg, something; Mainz, Trier and the others, something more; and so from one to ten thousand gulden might be got together, in order that a cardinal might live at Rome like a rich king.

"After they are used to this, we will create thirty or forty cardinals in a day[47], and give to one Mount St. Michael at Bamberg[48] and the bishopric of Wurzburg to boot, hang on to these a few rich livings, until churches and cities are waste, and after that we will say, 'We are Christ's vicars and shepherds of Christ's sheep; the mad, drunken Germans must put up with it.'"

I advise, however, that the number of the cardinals be reduced, or that the pope be made to keep them at his own expense. Twelve of them would be more than enough, and each of them might have an income of a thousand gulden a year[49]. How comes it that we Germans must put up with such robbery and such extortion of our property, at the hands of the pope? If the Kingdom of France has prevented it[50], why do we Germans let them make such fools and apes of us? It would all be more bearable if in this way they only stole our property; but they lay waste the churches and rob Christ's sheep of their pious shepherds, and destroy the worship and the Word of God. Even if there were not a single cardinal, the Church would not go under. As it is they do nothing for the good of Christendom; they only wrangle about the incomes of bishoprics and prelacies, and that any robber could do.

[Sidenote: The Curia]

3. If ninety-nine parts of the papal court[51] were done away and only the hundredth part allowed to remain, it would still be large enough to give decisions in matters of faith. Now, however, there is such a swarm of vermin yonder in Rome, all boasting that they are "papal," that there was nothing like it in Babylon. There are more than three thousand papal secretaries alone; who will count the other offices, when they are so many that they scarcely can be counted? And they all lie in wait for the prebends and benefices of Germany as wolves lie in wait for the sheep. I believe that Germany now gives much more to the pope at Rome than it gave in former times to the emperors. Indeed, some estimate that every year more than three hundred thousand gulden find their way from Germany to Rome, quite uselessly and fruitlessly; we get nothing for it but scorn and contempt. And yet we wonder that princes, nobles, cities, endowments, land and people are impoverished! We should rather wonder that we still have anything to eat!

Since we here come to the heart of the matter, we will pause a little, and let it be seen that the Germans are not quite such gross fools as not to note or understand the sharp practices of the Romans. I do not now complain that at Rome God's command and Christian law are despised; for such is the state of Christendom, and particularly of Rome, that we may not now complain of such high matters. Nor do I complain that natural or temporal law and reason count for nothing. The case is worse even than that. I complain that they do not keep their own self-devised canon law, though it is, to be sure, mere tyranny, avarice and temporal splendor, rather than law. Let us see!

[Sidenote: The Annates]

In former times German emperors and princes permitted the pope to receive the _annates_ from all the benefices of the German nation, i. e., the half of the first year's revenues from each benefice[52]. This permission was given, however, in order that by means of these large sums of money, the pope might accumulate a treasure for fighting against the Turks and infidels in defence of Christendom, so that the burden of the war might not rest too heavily upon the nobility, but that the clergy also should contribute something toward it. This single-hearted devotion of the German nation the popes have so used, that they have received this money for more than a hundred years, have now made of it a binding tax and tribute, and have not only accumulated no treasure, but have used the money to endow many orders and offices at Rome, and to provide these offices with salaries, as though the annates were a fixed rent.

[Sidenote: Saracen-tax]

When they pretend that they are about to fight against the Turks, they send out emissaries to gather money. Ofttimes they issue an indulgence on this same pretext of fighting the Turks[53], for they think the mad Germans are forever to remain utter and arrant fools, give them money without end, and satisfy their unspeakable greed; though we clearly see that not a _heller_ of the annates or of the indulgence-money or of all the rest, is used against the Turks, but all of it goes into the bottomless bag. They lie and deceive, make laws and make agreements with us, and they do not intend to keep any of them. All this must be counted the work of Christ and St. Peter!

Now, in this matter the German nation, bishops and princes, should consider that they too are Christians, and should protect the people, whom they are set to rule and guard in things temporal and spiritual, against these ravening wolves who, in sheep's clothing, pretend to be shepherds and rulers; and, since the annates are so shamefully abused and the stipulated conditions are not fulfilled, they should not permit their land and people to be so sadly robbed and ruined, against all justice; but by a law of the emperor or of the whole nation, they should either keep the annates at home or else abolish them again[54]. For since the Romans do not keep the terms of the agreement, they have no right to the annates. Therefore the bishops and princes are bound to punish or prevent such thievery and robbery, as the law requires.

In this they should aid the pope and support him, or he is perchance too weak to prevent such an abuse all by himself; or if he were to undertake to defend and maintain this practice, they ought resist him and fight against him as against a wolf and a tyrant, for he has no authority to do or to defend evil. Moreover, if it were ever desired to accumulate such a treasure against the Turks, we ought in the future to have sense enough to see that the German nation would be a better custodian or it than the pope; for the German nation has people enough or the fighting, if only the money is forthcoming. It is with the annates as it has been with many another Roman pretence.

[Sidenote: Papal Months]

Again, the year has been so divided between the pope and the ruling bishops and canons[55], that the pope has six months in the year--every other month--in which to bestow the benefices which all vacant in his months[56]. In this way almost all the benefices are absorbed by Rome, especially the very best livings and dignities[57], and when once they fall into the hands of Rome, they never come out of them again, though a vacancy may never again occur in the pope's month. Thus the canons are cheated. This is a genuine robbery, which intends to let nothing escape. Therefore it is high time that the "papal months" be altogether abolished, and that everything which they have brought to Rome be taken back again. For the princes and nobles should take measures that the stolen goods be returned, the thieves punished, and those who have abused privilege be deprived of privilege. If it is binding and valid when the pope on the day after his election makes, in his chancery, rules and laws whereby our foundations and livings are robbed,--a thing which he has no right to do; then it should be still more valid if the Emperor Charles on the day after his coronation[58] were to make rules and laws that not another benefice or living in all Germany shall be allowed to come into the hands of Rome by means of the "papal months," and that the livings which have already fallen into its hands shall be released, and redeemed from the Roman robbers; for he has this right by virtue of his office and his sword.

But now the Roman See of Avarice and Robbery has not been able to await the time when all the benefices, one after another, would, by the "papal months," come into its power, but hastens, with insatiable appetite, to get possession of them all as speedily as possible; and so besides the annates and the "months" it has hit upon a device by which benefices and livings all to Rome in three ways:

_First_, If any one who holds a free[59] living dies at Rome or on the way to Rome, his living must forever belong to the Roman--I should rather say the robbing--See[60]; and yet they will not be called robbers, though they are guilty of such robbery as no one has ever heard or read about.

_Second_, In case any one who belongs to the household of the pope or of the cardinals[61] holds or takes over a benefice, or in case one who already holds a benefice afterwards enters the "household" of the pope or of a cardinal. But who can count the "household" of the pope and of the cardinals, when the pope, if he only goes on a pleasure-ride, takes with him three or our thousand mule-riders, eclipsing all emperors and kings? Christ and St. Peter went on foot in order that their vicars might have the more pomp and splendor. Now avarice has cleverly thought out another scheme, and brings it to pass that even here many have the name of "papal servant," just as though they were in Rome; all in order that in every place the mere rascally little word "papal servant" may bring all benefices to Rome and tie them fast there forever. Are not these vexatious and devilish inventions? Let us beware! Soon Mainz, Madgeburg and Halberstadt will gently pass into the hands of Rome, and the cardinalate will be paid for dearly enough[62]. "Afterwards we will make all the German bishops cardinals so that there will be nothing let outside."

_Third_, When a contest has started at Rome over a benefice[63]. This I hold to be almost the commonest and widest road or bringing livings to Rome. For when there is no contest at home, unnumbered knaves will be found at Rome to dig up contests out of the earth and assail livings at their will. Thus many a good priest has to lose his living, or settle the contest for a time by the payment of a sum of money[64]. Such a living rightly or wrongly contested must also belong forever to the Roman See. It would be no wonder if God were to rain from heaven fire and brimstone and to sink Rome in the abyss, as He did Sodom and Gomorrah of old [Gen. 19:24]. Why should there be a pope in Christendom, if his power is used or nothing else than such archknavery, and if he protects and practices it? O noble princes and lords, how long will ye leave your lands and people naked to these ravening wolves!

[Sidenote: The Pallium]

Since even these practices were not enough, and Avarice grew impatient at the long time it took to get hold of all the bishoprics, therefore my Lord Avarice devised the fiction that the bishoprics should be nominally abroad, but that their land and soil should be at Rome, and no bishop can be confirmed unless with a great sum of money he buy the _pallium_[65], and bind himself with terrible oaths to be the pope's servant[66]. This is the reason that no bishop ventures to act against the pope. That, too, is what the Romans were seeking when they imposed the oath, and thus the very richest bishoprics have fallen into debt and ruin. Mainz pays, as I hear, 20,000 gulden. These be your Romans! To be sure they decreed of old in the canon law that the _pallium_ should be bestowed gratis, the number of papal servants diminished, the contests lessened, the chapters[67] and bishops allowed their liberty. But this did not bring in money, and so they turned over a new leaf, and all authority was taken from the bishops and chapters; they are made ciphers, and have no office nor authority nor work, but everything is ruled by the archknaves at Rome; soon they will have in hand even the office of sexton and bell-ringer in all the churches. All contests are brought to Rome, and by authority of the pope everyone does as he likes.

What happened this very year? The Bishop of Strassburg[68] wished to govern his chapter properly and to institute reforms in worship, and with this end in view made certain godly and Christian regulations. But my dear Lord Pope and the Holy Roman See, at the instigation of the priests, overthrew and altogether condemned this holy and spiritual ordinance. This is called "feeding the sheep of Christ!" [John 20:15-17] Thus priests are to be encouraged against their own bishop, and their disobedience to divine law is to be protected! Antichrist himself, I hope, will not dare to put God to such open shame! There you have your pope after your own heart! Why did he do this? Ah! if one church were reformed, it would be a dangerous departure; Rome's turn too might come! Therefore it were better that no priest should be let at peace with another, that kings and princes should be set at odds, as has been the custom heretofore, and the world filled with the blood of Christians, only so the concord of Christians should not trouble the Holy Roman See with a reformation.

So far we have been getting an idea of how they deal with livings which become vacant. But for tender-hearted Avarice the vacancies are too few, and so he brings his foresight to bear upon the benefices which are still occupied by their incumbents, so that they must be unfilled, even though they are not unfilled[69]. And this he does in many ways, as follows:

[Sidenote: Coadjutorships]

_First_, He lies in wait for fat prebends or bishoprics which are held by an old or a sick man, or by one with an alleged disability. To such an incumbent, without his desire or consent, the Holy See gives a coadjutor, i. e., an "assistant," or the coadjutor's benefit, because he is a "papal servant," or has paid for the position, or has earned it by some other ignoble service to Rome. In this case the rights of the chapter or the rights of him who has the bestowal of the living[70] must be surrendered, and the whole thing all into the hands of Rome.

[Sidenote: Commendations]

_Second_, There is a little word _commend_[71], by which the pope entrusts the keeping of a rich, fat monastery or church to a cardinal or to another of his people, just as though I were to give you a hundred gulden to keep. This is not called the giving or bestowing of the monastery nor even its destruction, or the abolition of the worship of God, but only "giving it into keeping"; not that he to whom it is entrusted is to care or it, or build it up, but he is to drive out the incumbent, to receive the goods and revenues, and to install some apostate, renegade monk[72], who accepts five or six gulden a year and sits in the church all day selling pictures and images to the pilgrims, so that henceforth neither prayers nor masses are said there. If this were to be called destroying monasteries and abolishing the worship of God, then the pope would have to be called a destroyer of Christendom and an abolisher of God's worship, because this is his constant practice. That would be a hard saying at Rome, and so we must call it a commend or a "command to take charge" of the monastery. The pope can every year make commends out of our or more of these monasteries, a single one of which may have an income of more than six thousand gulden. This is the way the Romans increase the worship of God and preserve the monasteries. The Germans also are beginning to find it out.

[Sidenote: Incorporation]

[Sidenote: Union]

_Third_, There are some benefices which they call _incompatibilia_[73], and which, according to the ordinances of the canon law, cannot be held by one man at the same time, as for instance, two parishes, two bishoprics and the like. In these cases the Holy Roman See of Avarice evades the canon law by making "glosses,"[74] called _unio_ and _incorporatio_, i. e., by "incorporating" many _incompatibilia_, so that each becomes a part of every other and all of them together are looked upon as though they were one living. They are then no longer "incompatible," and the holy canon law is satisfied, in that it is no longer binding, except upon those who do not buy these "glosses"[75] from the pope or his _datarius_[76]. The _unio_, i. e., "uniting," is of the same nature. The pope binds many such benefices together like a bundle of sticks, and by virtue of this bond they are all regarded as one benefice. So there is at Rome one courtesan[77] who holds, for himself alone, 22 parishes, 7 priories and 44 canonries besides,--all by the help of that masterly "gloss," which holds that this is not illegal. What cardinals and other prelates have, everyone may imagine or himself. In this way the Germans are to have their purses eased and their itch cured.

[Sidenote: Administration]

Another of the "glosses" is the _administratio_, i. e., a man may have beside his bishopric, an abbacy or a dignity[78], and possess all the property which goes with it, only he has no other title than that of "administrator."[79] For at Rome it is sufficient that words are changed and not the things they stand for; as though I were to teach that a bawdy-house keeper should have the name of "burgomaster's wife," and yet continue to ply her trade. This kind of Roman rule St. Peter foretold when he said, in II Peter ii: "There shall come false teachers, who in covetousness, with feigned words, shall make merchandise of you, to get their gains." [2 Pet. 2:3]

[Sidenote: Regression]

Again, dear Roman Avarice has invented the custom of selling and bestowing livings to such advantage that the seller or disposer retains reversionary rights[80] upon them: to wit, if the incumbent dies, the benefice freely reverts to him who previously sold, bestowed or surrendered it. In this way they have made livings hereditary property, so that henceforth no one can come into possession of them, except the man to whom the seller is willing to dispose of them, or to whom he bequeaths his rights at death. Besides, there are many who transfer to others the mere title to a benefice from which those who get the title derive not a _heller_ of income. It is now an old custom, too, to give another man a benefice and to reserve a certain part out of the annual revenue[81]. In olden times this was simony[82]. Of these things there are so many more that they cannot all be counted. They treat livings more shamefully than the heathen beneath the cross treated the garments of Christ. [Matt. 27:35]

[Sidenote: Reservation in pectore]

Yet all that has hitherto been said is ancient history and an every-day occurrence at Rome. Avarice has devised one thing more, which may, I hope, be his last morsel, and choke him. The pope has a noble little device called _pectoralis reservatio_, i. e., his "mental reservation," and _proprius motus_, i. e., the "arbitrary will of his authority."[83] It goes like this. When one man has gotten a benefice at Rome, and the appointment has been regularly signed and sealed, according to custom, and there comes another, who brings money, or has laid the pope under obligation in some other way, of which we will not speak, and desires of the pope the same benefice, then the pope takes it from the first man and gives it to the second[84]. If it is said that this is unjust, then the Most Holy Father must make some excuse, that he may not be reproved or doing such open violence to the law, and says that in his mind and heart he had reserved that benefice to himself and his own plenary disposal, although he had never before in his whole life either thought or heard of it. Thus he has now found a little "gloss" by which he can, in his own person, lie and deceive, and make a fool and an ape of anybody--all this he does brazenly and openly, and yet he wishes to be the head of Christendom, though with his open lies he lets the Evil Spirit rule him.

This arbitrary will and lying "reservation" of the pope creates in Rome a state of affairs which is unspeakable. There is buying, selling, bartering, trading, trafficking, lying, deceiving, robbing, stealing, luxury, harlotry, knavery, and every sort of contempt of God, and even the rule of Antichrist could not be more scandalous. Venice, Antwerp, Cairo[85] are nothing compared to this fair which is held at Rome and the business which is done there, except that in those other places they still observe right and reason. At Rome everything goes as the devil wills, and out of this ocean like virtue flows into all the world. Is it a wonder that such people fear a reformation and a free council, and prefer to set all kings and princes at enmity rather than have them unite and bring about a council? Who could bear to have such knavery exposed if it were his own?

[Sidenote: The Dataria]

Finally, for all this noble commerce the pope has built a warehouse, namely, the house of the datarius[86], in Rome. Thither all must come who deal after this fashion in benefices and livings. From him they must buy their "glosses"[87] and get the power to practice such archknavery. In former times Rome was generous, and then justice had either to be bought or else suppressed with money, but now she has become exorbitant, and no one dare be a knave unless with a great sum he has first bought the right. If that is not a brothel above all the brothels one can imagine, then I do not know what brothel means.

If you have money in this house, then you can come by all the things I have said; and not only these, but all sorts of usury[88] are here made honest, Phil. 2:5 for a consideration, and the possession of all property acquired by theft or robbery is legalised. Here vows are dissolved; here monks are granted liberty to leave their orders; here marriage is on sale to the clergy; here bastards can become legitimate; here all dishonor and shame can come to honor; all ill-repute and stigma of evil are here knighted and ennobled; here is permitted the marriage which is within the forbidden degrees or has some other defect[89]. Oh! what a taxing and a robbing rules there! It looks as though all the laws of the Church were made for one purpose only--to be nothing but so many money-snares, from which a man must extricate himself[90] if he would be a Christian. Yea, here the devil becomes a saint, and a god to boot. What heaven and earth cannot, that this house can do! They call them _compositiones_[91]! "Compositions" indeed! rather "confusions"! Oh, what a modest tax is the Rhine-toll[92], compared with the tribute taken by this holy house!

Let no one accuse me of exaggeration! It is all so open that even at Rome they must confess the evil to be greater and more terrible than any one can say. I have not yet stirred up the hell-broth of personal vices, nor do I intend to do so. I speak of things which are common talk, and yet I have not words to tell them all. The bishops, the priests and, above all, the doctors in the universities, who draw their salaries or this purpose, should have done their duty and with common consent have written and cried out against these things; but they have done the very opposite[93].

[Sidenote: The Fuggers]

There remains one last word, and I must say that too. Since boundless Avarice has not been satisfied with all these treasures, which three great kings might well think sufficient, he now begins to transfer this trade and sell it to Fugger of Augsburg[94], so that the lending and trading and buying of bishoprics and benefices, and the driving of bargains in spiritual goods has now come to the right place, and spiritual and temporal goods have become one business. And now I would fain hear of a mind so lofty that it could imagine what this Roman Avarice might yet be able to do and has not already done; unless Fugger were to transfer or sell this combination of two lines of business to somebody else. I believe we have reached the limit.

As for what they have stolen in all lands and still steal and extort, by means of indulgences, bulls, letters of confession[95], "butter-letters"[96] and other _confessionalia_[97],--all this I consider mere patch-work, and like casting a single devil more into hell[98]. Not that they bring in little, for a mighty king could well support himself on their returns, but they are not to be compared with the streams of treasure above mentioned. I shall also say nothing at present of how this indulgence money has been applied. Another time I shall inquire about that, for Campoflore[99] and Belvidere[100] and certain other places probably know something about it.

Since, then, such devilish rule is not only open robbery and deceit, and the tyranny of the gates of hell, but also ruins Christendom in body and soul, it is our duty to use all diligence in protecting Christendom against such misery and destruction. If we would fight the Turks, let us make a beginning here, where they are at their worst. If we justly hang thieves and behead robbers, why should we let Roman Avarice go free? For he is the greatest thief and robber that has come or can come into the world, and all in the holy Name of Christ and of St. Peter! Who can longer endure it or keep silence? Almost everything he owns has been gotten by theft and robbery; that is the truth, and all history shows it. The pope never got by purchase such great properties that from his _officia_[101] alone he can raise about a million ducats, not to mention the mines of treasure named above and the income of his lands. Nor did it come to him by inheritance from Christ or from St. Peter; no one ever loaned it or gave it to him; it has not become his by virtue of immemorial use and enjoyment. Tell me, then, whence he can have it? Learn from this what they have in mind when they send out legates to collect money or use against the Turks.

Iii. Proposals For Reform

III. PROPOSALS FOR REFORM

Now, although I am too small a man to make propositions which might effect a reform in this dreadful state of things, nevertheless I may as well sing my fool's song to the end, and say, so far as I am able, what could and should be done by the temporal authorities or by a general council.

[Sidenote: Abolition of Annates]

1. Every prince, nobleman and city should boldly forbid their subjects to pay the annates to Rome and should abolish them entirely[102]; for the pope has broken the compact, and made the annates a robbery, to the injury and shame of the whole German nation. He gives them to his friends, sells them for large amounts of money, and uses them to endow offices. He has thus lost his right to them, and deserves punishment. It is therefore the duty of the temporal authorities to protect the innocent and prevent injustice, as Paul teaches in Romans xiii [Rom. 13:4], and St. Peter in I Peter ii [1 Pet. 2:14], Rom. and even the canon law in Case 16, Question 7, _de filiis_[103]. Thus it has come about that men are saying to the pope and his followers, _Tu ora_, "Thou shalt pray"; to the emperor and his followers, _Tu protege_, "Thou shalt guard"; to the common man, _Tu labora_, "Thou shalt work." Not, however, as though everyone were not to pray, guard and work; for the man who is diligent in his calling is praying, guarding and working in all that he does, but everyone should have his own especial task.

[Sidenote: Prohibition of Roman Appointments]

2. Since the pope with his Roman practices--his commends[104], adjutories[105], reservations[106], _gratiae expectativae_[107], papal months[108], incorporations[109], unions[110], _pallia_[111], rules in chancery[112], and such like knavery--usurps all the German foundations without authority and right, and gives and sells them to foreigners at Rome, who do nothing in German lands to earn them; and since he thereby robs the ordinaries[113] of their rights, makes the bishops mere ciphers and figure-heads, and acts against his own canon law, against nature and against reason, until it has finally gone so far that out of sheer avarice the livings and benefices are sold to gross, ignorant asses and knaves at Rome, while pious and learned folk have no profit of their wisdom and merit, so that the poor people of the German nation have to go without good and learned prelates and thus go to ruin:

Therefore, the Christian nobility should set itself against the pope as against a common enemy and destroyer of Christendom, and should do this for the salvation of the poor souls who must go to ruin through his tyranny. They should ordain, order, and decree, that henceforth no benefice shall be drawn into the hands of Rome, and that hereafter no appointment shall be obtained there in any manner whatsoever, but that the benefices shall be brought out and kept out from under this tyrannical authority; and they should restore to the ordinaries the right and office of ordering these benefices in the German nation as best they may. And if a "courtesan" were to come from Rome, he should receive a strict command either to keep his distance, or else to jump into the Rhine or the nearest river, and take the Roman ban, with its seals and letters, to a cold bath. They would then take note at Rome that the Germans are not always mad and drunken, but that they have really become Christians, and intend to permit no longer the mockery and scorn of the holy name of Christ, under which all this knavery and destruction of souls goes on, but have more regard to God and His glory than to the authority of men.

[Sidenote: Restoration of Local Church Rights]

3. An imperial law should be issued, that no bishop's cloak[114] and no confirmation of any dignity[115] whatsoever shall henceforth be secured from Rome, but that the Church ordinance of the most holy and most famous Council of Nicaea[116] shall be restored, in which it is decreed that a bishop shall be confirmed by the two nearest bishops or by the archbishop. If the pope will break the statutes of this and of all other councils, what is the use of holding councils; or who has given him the authority thus to despise and break the rules of councils?

If he has this power then we should depose all bishops, archbishops and primates[117] and make them mere parish-priests, so that the pope alone may be over them, as he now is. He leaves to bishops, archbishops and primates no regular authority or office, usurps everything for himself, and lets them keep only the name and empty title. It has gone so far that by his "exemptions"[118] the monasteries, the abbots and the prelates are withdrawn from the regular authority of the bishops, so that there is no longer any order in Christendom. From this must follow what has followed--relaxation of discipline and license to do evil everywhere--so that I verily fear the pope can be called the "man of sin." [2 Thess. 2:3] There is in Christendom no discipline, no rule, no order; and who is to blame except the pope? This usurped authority of his he applies strictly to all the prelates, and takes away their rods; and he is generous to all subjects, giving them or selling them their liberty.

Nevertheless, for fear he may complain that he is robbed of his authority, it should be decreed that when the primates or archbishops are unable to settle a case, or when a controversy arises among themselves, such a case must be laid before the pope, but not every little matter[120]. Thus it was done in olden times, and thus the famous Council of Nicaea decreed[121]. If a case can be settled without the pope, then his Holiness should not be troubled with such minor matters, but give himself to that prayer, meditation and care for all Christendom, of which he boasts. This is what the Apostles did. They said, "It is not meet that we should leave the Word of God and serve tables, but we will keep to preaching and prayer and set others over the work." [Acts 6:2] But now Rome stands or nothing else than the despising of the Gospel and of prayer, and for the serving of "tables," i. e., of temporal affairs, and the rule of the Apostles and of the pope agree as Christ agrees with Lucifer, heaven with hell, night with day; yet he is called "Vicar of Christ and Successor of the Apostles."

[Sidenote: Exclusion of Temporal Matters from the Papal Court]

4. It should be decreed that no temporal matter shall be taken to Rome[122], but that all such cases shall be left to the temporal authorities, as the Romans themselves decree in that canon law of theirs, which they do not keep. For it should be the duty of the pope, as the man most learned in Papal the Scriptures and most Holy, not in name only, but in truth, to administer affairs which concern the faith and holy life of Christians, to hold the primates and archbishops to these things, and to help them in dealing with and caring for these matters. So St. Paul teaches in I Corinthians vi, and takes the Corinthians severely to task or their concern with worldly things [1 Cor. 6:7]. For it works intolerable injury to all lands that such cases are tried at Rome. It increases the costs, and moreover the judges do not know the manners, laws and customs of the various countries, so that they often do violence to the acts and base their decisions on their own laws and opinions, and thus injustice is inevitably done the contestants.

[Sidenote: and from the Bishops' Courts]

Moreover, the outrageous extortion practised by the _officiales_[123] must be forbidden in all the dioceses, courts so that they may attend to nothing else than matters of faith and good morals, and leave to the temporal judges the things that concern money, property, life and honor. The temporal authorities, therefore, should not permit sentences of ban or exile when faith or right life is not concerned. Spiritual authorities should have rule over spiritual goods, as reason teaches; but spiritual goods are not money, nor anything pertaining to the body, but they are faith and good works.

[Sidenote: A German Church Organization]

Nevertheless it might be granted that cases which concern benefices or livings should be tried before bishops, archbishops and primates. Therefore, in order to decide contests and contentions, it might be possible for the Primate of Germany to maintain a general consistory, with auditors and chancellors, which should have control over the _signaturae gratiae_ and _signaturae justitiae_[124], that are now controlled at Rome, and which should be the final court of appeal for German cases. The officers of this consistory must not, however, be paid, as at Rome, by chance presents and gifts, and thereby acquire the habit of selling justice and injustice, which they now have to do at Rome because the pope gives them no remuneration, but allows them to fatten themselves on presents. For at Rome no one cares what is right or not right, but only what is money or not money. This court might, however, be paid out of the annates, or some other way might easily be devised, by those who are more intelligent and who have more experience in these matters than I. All I wish to do is to arouse and set to thinking those who have the ability and the inclination to help the German nation become once more free and Christian, after the wretched, heathenish and unchristian rule of the pope.

[Sidenote: Abolition of Reservations]

5. No more reservations should be valid, and no more benefices should be seized by Rome, even if the incumbent dies, or there is a contest, or the incumbent is a "servant" of a cardinal or of the pope[125]; and it should be strictly forbidden and prevented that any "courtesan"[126] should institute a contest over any benefice, so as to cite pious priests to Rome, harass them and drive them into lawsuits. If, in consequence of this prohibition, there should come from Rome a ban or an ecclesiastical censure, it should be disregarded, just as though a thief were to lay a man under the ban because he would not let him steal. Indeed they should be severely punished because they so blasphemously misuse the ban and the name of God to support their robbery, and with falsely devised threats would drive us to endure and to praise such blasphemy of God's name and such abuse of Christian authority, and thus to become, in the sight of God, partakers in their rascality; it is our duty before God to resist it, or St. Paul, in Romans i, reproves as guilty of death not only "those who do such things," but also those who consent to such things and allow them to be done [Rom. 1:32]. Most unbearable of all is the lying _reservatio pectoralis_[127], whereby Christendom is so scandalously and openly put to shame and scorn, because its head deals in open lies, and out of love for the accursed money, shamelessly deceives and fools everybody.

[Sidenote: Abolition of Reserved Cases]

6. The _casus reservati_[128], the "reserved cases," should also be abolished, for not only are they the means of served extorting much money from the people, but by means of them the ravening tyrants ensnare and confuse many poor consciences, to the intolerable injury of their faith in God. This is especially true of the ridiculous and childish cases about which they make so much ado in the Bull _Coena Domini_[129], and which are not worth calling daily sins, still less cases so grave that the pope may not remit them by any indulgence; as for example, hindering a pilgrim on his way to Rome, furnishing weapons to the Turks, or tampering with papal letters. With such gross, crazy, clumsy things do they make fools of us! Sodom and Gomorrah, and all the sins which are committed and can be committed against the commandments of God are not reserved cases; but sins against what God has never commanded and what they have themselves devised, these must be reserved cases, solely that no one be hindered in bringing money to Rome, in order that, safe from the Turks, they may live in luxury and keep the world under their tyranny with their wanton, useless bulls and breves[130].

All priests ought rightly to know, or else there should be a public ordinance to that effect, that no secret sin, of which a man has not been publicly accused, is a reserved case, and that every priest has the power to remit all sorts of sins, however they may be called, so long as they are secret; moreover that no abbot, bishop or pope has the power to reserve any such case to himself[131]. If they attempt it, their reservation does not hold and is not valid, and they should be reproved, as men who without authority interfere in God's judgment, and without cause ensnare and burden poor, ignorant consciences. But if great public sins are committed, especially sins against God's commandments, then there is indeed a reason for reserved cases, but even then there should not be too many of them, and they should not be reserved arbitrarily and without cause; for Christ has set in His Church not tyrants, but shepherds, as saith St. Peter [1 Pet. 5:3].

[Sidenote: Diminution of the Papal Household]

7. The Roman See should also do away with the _officia_[132], and diminish the swarm of vermin at Rome, so that the pope's household can be supported by the pope's own purse. The pope should not allow his court to surpass in pomp and extravagance the courts of all kings, seeing that such a condition not only has never been serviceable to the cause of Christian faith, but the courtiers have been kept thereby from study and prayer, until they are scarce able to speak about the faith at all. This they proved quite plainly at the last Roman Council[133], in which, amongst many other childish and frivolous things, they decreed that the soul of man is immortal and that every priest must say his prayers once a month on pain of losing his benefice. How shall matters which concern faith and the Church be decided by people so hardened and blinded by great avarice, wealth and worldly splendor, that they have only now decreed that the soul is immortal? It is no small shame to all Christians that at Rome they deal so disgracefully with the faith. If they had less wealth and pomp, they could pray and study better, and so become worthy and able to deal with matters of faith, as was the case in olden times when they were bishops, and did not presume to be kings over all kings.

[Sidenote: Bishops' Oaths]

8. The hard and terrible oaths should be abolished, which the bishops are wrongfully compelled to render to the pope[134], and by which they are bound like servants, as that worthless and unlearned chapter, _Significasti_[135], arbitrarily and most stupidly decrees. It is not enough that they burden us in body, soul and property with their many mad laws, by which faith is weakened and Christendom ruined; but they seize upon the person and office and work of the bishops, and now upon the investiture[136] also, which was in olden times the right of the German emperors, and in France and other kingdoms still belongs to the kings. On this point they had great wars and disputes with the emperors[137] until at last, with impudent authority, they took the right and have kept it until now; just as though the Germans, above all the Christians on earth, had to be the puppets of the pope and the Roman See and do and suffer what no one else will do and suffer. Since, then, this is sheer violence and robbery, hindering the regular authority of the bishops and injuring poor souls, therefore the emperor and his nobles are in duty bound to prevent and punish such tyranny.

[Sidenote: Pope and Emperor]

9. The pope should have no authority over the emperor, except that he anoints and crowns him at the altar, just as a bishop anoints and crowns a king[138]; and we should not henceforth yield to that devilish pride which compels the emperor to kiss the pope's feet or sit at his feet, or, as they claim, hold his stirrup or the bridle of his mule when he mounts for a ride; still less should he do homage and swear faithful allegiance to the pope, as the popes have shamelessly ventured to demand as if they possessed that right. The chapter _Solite_[139], in which the papal authority is raised above the imperial authority, is not worth a heller, nor are any of those who rest upon it or fear it; for it does nothing else than force the holy words of God out of their true meaning, and wrest them to human dreams, as I have showed in a Latin treatise[140].

Such extravagant, over-presumptuous, and more than wicked doings of the pope have been devised by the devil, in order that under their cover he may in time bring in Antichrist, and raise the pope above God, as many are already doing and have done. It is not proper for the pope to exalt himself above the temporal authorities, save only in spiritual offices such as preaching and absolving. In other things he is to be subject, as Paul and Peter teach, in Romans xiii [Rom. 13:1], and I Peter iii [1 Pet. 2:13 f.], and as I have said above.

He is not vicar of Christ in heaven, but of Christ as He walked on earth [Phil. 2:7][142]. For Christ in heaven, in the form of a ruler, needs no vicar, but He sits and sees, does, and knows all things, and has all power. But He needs a vicar in the form of a servant, in which He walked on earth, toiling, preaching, suffering and dying. Now they turn it around, take from Christ the heavenly form of ruler and give it to the pope, leaving the form of a servant to perish utterly. He might almost be the "Counter-christ" whom the Scriptures call Antichrist, for all his nature, work and doings are against Christ, for the destruction of Christ's nature and work.

It is also ridiculous and childish that the pope, with such perverted and deluded reasoning, boasts in his decretal _Pastoralis_[143], that he is rightful heir to the Empire, in case of a vacancy. Who has given him this right? Did Christ, when He said, "The princes of the Gentiles are lords, but ye shall not be so" [Luke 22:25 f.]? Did St. Peter will it to him? It vexes me that we must read and learn such shameless, gross, crazy lies in the canon law, and must even hold them for Christian doctrine, when they are devilish lies. Of the same sort is also that unheard-of lie about the "Donation of Constantine."[144] It must have been some special plague of God that so many people of understanding have let themselves be talked into accepting such lies as these, which are so manifest and clumsy that I should think any drunken peasant could lie more adroitly and skilfully. How can a man rule an empire and at the same time continue to preach, pray, study and care for the poor? Yet these are the duties which properly and peculiarly belong to the pope, and they were imposed by Christ in such earnest that He even forbade His disciples to take with them cloak or money [Matt. 10:10], since these duties can scarcely be performed by one who has to rule even a single household. Yet the pope would rule an empire and continue to be pope! This is a device of the knaves who would like, under the pope's name, to be lords of the world, and by means of the pope and the name of Christ, to restore the Roman Empire to its former state.

[Sidenote: Temporal Power--the Kingdom of Naples]

10. The pope should restrain himself, take his fingers out of the pie, and claim no title to the Kingdom of Naples the and Sicily[145]. He has exactly as much right to that kingdom as I have, and yet he wishes to be its overlord. It is plunder got by violence, like almost all his other possessions. The emperor, therefore, should not grant him this fief, and if it has been granted, he should no longer give his consent to it, and should point him instead to the Bible and the prayer-books, so that he may preach and pray, and leave to temporal lords the ruling of lands and peoples, especially when no one has given them to him.

[Sidenote: The States of the Church]

The same opinion should hold as regards Bologna, Imola, Vicenza, Ravenna and all the territories in the Mark of Ancona, in Romagna, and in other Italian lands, which the pope has taken by force and possesses without right[146]. Moreover, he has meddled in these things against all the commands of Christ and of St. Paul. For thus saith St. Paul, "No one entangleth himself with worldly affairs, whose business it is to wait upon the divine knighthood."[147][2 Tim. 2:3] Now the pope should be the head and front of this knighthood, yet he meddles in worldly affairs more than any emperor or king. Why then he must be helped out of them and allowed to attend to his knighthood. Christ also, Whose vicar he boasts himself to be, was never willing to have aught to do with temporal rule; indeed, to one who asked of him a decision respecting his brother. He said, "Who made Me a judge over you?" [Luke 12:14] But the pope rushes in unbidden, and boldly takes hold of everything as though he were a god, until he no longer knows what Christ is, Whose vicar he pretends to be.

[Sidenote: Papal Homage]

11. The kissing of the pope's feet[148] should take place no more. It is an unchristian, nay, an antichristian thing for a poor sinful man to let his feet be kissed by one who is a hundred times better than himself. If it is done in honor of his authority, why does not the pope do the same to others in honor of their holiness? Compare the two--Christ and the pope! Christ washed His disciples' feet and dried them [John 13:1 ff.], and the disciples never washed His feet; the pope, as though he were higher than Christ, turns things around and, as a great favor, allows people to kiss his feet, though he ought properly to use all his power to prevent it, if anyone wished to do it; like Paul and Barnabas, who would not let the people of Lystra pay them divine honor, but said, "We are men like you." [Acts 14:11-16] But our sycophants have gone so far as to make for us an idol, and now no one ears God so much as he fears the pope, no one pays Him such ceremonious honor. That they can endure! What they cannot endure is that a hair's-breadth should be taken away from the proud estate of the pope. Now if they were Christians, and held God's honor above their own, the pope would never be happy while he knew that God's honor was despised and his own exalted, and he would let no man pay him honor until he saw that God's honor was again exalted and was greater than his own.

[149][It is another piece of the same scandalous pride, that the pope is not satisfied to ride or to be driven in a vehicle, but although he is strong and in good health, he has himself borne by men, with unheard-of splendor, like an idol. How, pray, does such satanic pride agree with the example of Christ, Who went on foot, as did all His disciples? Where has there ever been a worldly monarch who went about in such worldly glory as he who wishes to be the head of all those who are to despise and lee worldly glory, i. e., of Christians? Not that this in itself should give us very much concern, but we should rightly fear the wrath of God, if we flatter this kind of pride and do not show our indignation. It is enough that the pope should rant and play the fool in this wise; but that we should approve it and tolerate it,--this is too much.

For what Christian heart can or ought to take pleasure in seeing that when the pope wishes to receive the communion, he sits quiet, like a gracious lord, and has the sacrament passed to him on a golden rod by a bowing cardinal on bended knee? As though the holy sacrament were not worthy that a pope, a poor stinking sinner, should rise to show God honor, when all other Christians, who are much more holy than the Most Holy Father, the pope, receive it with all reverence! Would it be a wonder if God were to send a plague upon us all because we suffer such dishonor to be done Him by our prelates, and approve it, and by our silence or our flattery make ourselves partakers of such damnable pride?

It is the same way when he carries the sacrament in procession. He must be carried, but the sacrament is set before him, like a can of wine on the table. In short, at Rome Christ counts for nothing, the pope counts for everything; and yet they would compel us with threats to approve, and praise and honor such antichristian sins, though this is against God and against all Christian doctrine. Now God help a free Council to teach the pope that he too is a man, and is not more than God, as he presumes to be.]

[Sidenote: Abolition of Pilgrimages to Rome]

12. Pilgrimages to Rome[150] should either be abolished, or else no one should be allowed to make such a pilgrimage out of curiosity or because of a pious impulse, unless it is first recognized by his parish-priest, his town authorities or his overlord, that he has good and sufficient reason for it. I say this not because pilgrimages are bad, but because they are at this time ill-advised. For men see at Rome no good example, but only that which offends; and they have themselves made the proverb, "The nearer Rome, the worse Christians."[151] Men bring back with them contempt or God and His commandments. It is said: "The first time one goes to Rome he seeks a rascal, the second time he finds him, the third time he brings him home with him."[152] Now, however, they have become so clever that they make the three journeys at once, and they have verily brought back from Rome such pretty things that it were better never to have seen or known Rome.

Even if this reason did not exist, there is still another and a better: to wit, that by these pilgrimages men are led away into a false conceit and a misunderstanding of the divine commandments; or they think that this going on pilgrimage is a precious, good work, and this is not true. It is a very small good work, oftentimes an evil, delusive work, for God has not commanded it. But He has commanded that a man shall care for his wife and children, and look after such other duties as belong to the married state, and besides this, to serve and help his neighbor. Now it comes to pass that a man makes a pilgrimage to Rome when no one has commanded him to do so, spends fifty or a hundred gulden, more or less, and leaves his wife and child, or at least his neighbor, at home to suffer want. Yet the foolish fellow thinks to gloss over such disobedience and contempt of the divine commandments with his self-willed pilgriming, when it is really only curiosity or devilish delusion which leads him to it. The popes have helped this along with their false, feigned, foolish, "golden years,"[153] by which the people are excited, stirred up, torn away from God's commandments, and drawn toward their own deluded undertakings. Thus they have accomplished the very thing they should have forbidden; but it has brought in money and strengthened false authority, therefore it has had to continue, though it is against God and the salvation of souls.

In order to destroy in simple Christians this false, seductive faith, and to restore a true understanding of good works, all pilgrimages should be given up; for there is in them nothing good--no commandment, no obedience--but, on the contrary, numberless occasions for sin and for the despising of God's commandments. Hence come the many beggars, who by this pilgriming carry on endless knaveries and learn the habit of begging when they are not in want. Hence, too, come vagabondage, and many other ills which I shall not now recount.

If any one, now, wishes to go on pilgrimage or take a pilgrim's vow, he should first show his reasons to his parish-priest or to his lord. If it turns out that he wishes to do it for the sake of the good work, the priest or lord should boldly tread the vow and good work under foot, as though it were a lure of the devil, and show him how to apply the money and labor necessary for the pilgrimage to the keeping of God's commandments and to works a thousandfold better, viz., by spending it on his own family or on his poor neighbors. But if he wishes to make the pilgrimage out of curiosity, to see new lands and cities, he may be allowed to do as he likes. If, however, he has made the vow while ill, then such vows ought to be forbidden and canceled, and the commandments of God exalted, and he ought to be shown that he should henceforth be satisfied with the vow he made in baptism[154], to keep the commandments of God. And yet, in order to quiet his conscience, he may be allowed this once to perform his foolish vow. No one wants to walk in the straight and common path of God's commandments; everyone makes himself new roads and new vows, as though he had fulfilled all the commandments of God.

[Sidenote: Reform of the Mendicant Orders]

13. Next we come to that great crowd who vow much and keep little. Be not angry, dear lords! Truly, I mean it well. It is the truth, and bitter-sweet, and it is this,--the building of mendicant-houses[155] should no more be permitted. God help us, there are already far too many of them! Would to God they were all done away, or at least given over to two or three orders! Wandering about the land has never brought any good, and never will bring any good. It is my advice, therefore, to put together ten of these houses, or as many as may be necessary, and out of them all to make one house, which will be well provided and need no more begging. It is much more important to consider what the common people need for their salvation, than what St. Francis, St. Dominic, St. Augustine[156] or any other man has decreed; especially since things have not turned out as they expected.

The mendicants should also be relieved of preaching and hearing confession, except when they are called to this work by the express desire of bishops, parishes, congregations or the temporal authorities. Out of their preaching and shriving there has come nothing but hatred and envy between priests and monks, and great offence and hindrance to the common people. For this reason it should properly and deservedly cease, because it can well be dispensed with[157]. It looks suspiciously as though it were not for nothing that the Holy Roman See has increased this army, so that the priests and bishops, tired of its tyranny, might not some time become too strong or it and begin a reformation which would not be to the liking of his Holiness.

At the same time the manifold divisions and differences within one and the same order should be abolished. These divisions have at times arisen for small reason and maintained themselves for still smaller, combatting one another with unspeakable hatred and envy[158]. Nevertheless the Christian faith, which can well exist without any of these distinctions, is lost by both sides, and a good Christian life is valued and sought after only in outward laws, works and forms; and this results only in the devising of hypocrisy and the destruction of souls, as everyone may see with his own eyes.

The pope must also be forbidden to found and confirm any more of these orders; nay, he must be commanded to abolish some of them and reduce their number, since the faith of Christ, which is alone the highest good and which exists without any orders, is in no small danger, because these many different works and forms easily mislead men into living for them instead of giving heed to the faith. Unless there are in the monasteries wise prelates, who preach and who concern themselves with faith more than with the rules of the orders, the order cannot but harm and delude simple souls who think only of works.

In our days, however, the prelates who have had faith and who founded the orders have almost all passed away. Just as in olden days among the children of Israel, when the fathers, who knew God's works and wonders, had passed away, the children, from ignorance of God's works and of faith, immediately became idolatrous and set up their own human works; so now, alas! these orders have lost the understanding of God's works and of faith, and only torture themselves pitifully, with labor and sorrow, in their own rules, laws and customs, and withal never come to a right understanding of a good spiritual life, as the Apostle declared when he said, in II Timothy iii: "They have the appearance of a spiritual life, yet there is nothing back of it; they are ever and ever learning, but they never come to a knowledge of what a true spiritual life is." [2 Tim. 3:5, 7] There should be no monastery unless there were a spiritual prelate, learned in the Christian faith, to rule it, for no other kind of prelate can rule without injury and ruin, and the holier and better he appears to be in his outward works and life, the more injury and ruin he causes.

To my way of thinking it would be a necessary measure, especially in these perilous times of ours, that all foundations and monasteries should be re-established as they were at the first, in the days of the Apostles and for a long time afterwards, when they were all open to every man, and every man might remain in them as long as he pleased. For what were the foundations and monasteries except Christian schools in which the Scriptures and Christian living were taught, and people were trained to rule and to preach? So we read that St. Agnes[159] went to school, and we still see the same practice in some of the nunneries, like that at Quedlinburg[160] and others elsewhere. And in truth all monasteries and convents ought to be so free that God is served in them with free will and not with forced avarice. Afterward, however, they hedged them about with vows and turned them into a lifelong prison, so that these vows are thought to be of more account than the vows of baptism. What sort of fruit this has borne, we see, hear, read and learn more and more every day.

I suppose this advice of mine will be regarded as the height of foolishness; but I am not concerned about that just now. I advise what I think best; let him reject it who will! I see how the vows are kept, especially the vow of chastity, which has become so universal through these monasteries and yet is not commanded by Christ; on the contrary, it is given to very few to keep it, as He himself says [Matt. 19:11 ff.], and St. Paul [1 Cor. 7:7, Col. 2:20]. I would have all men to be helped, and not have Christian souls caught in human, self-devised customs and laws.

[Sidenote: Marriage of the Clergy]

14. We also see how the priesthood has fallen, and how many a poor priest is overburdened with wife and child, and his conscience troubled, yet no one does anything to help him though he might easily be helped. Though pope and bishops may let things go as they go, and let them go to ruin if they will, I will save my conscience and open my mouth freely, whether it vex pope, bishops or any one else. Wherefore I say that according to the institution of Christ and the Apostles every city should have a priest or bishop, as St. Paul clearly says in Titus i [Tit. 1:6]; and this priest should not be compelled to live without a wedded wife, but should be permitted to have one, as St. Paul says in I Timothy iii, and Titus i, "A bishop should be a man who is blameless, and the husband of but one wedded wife, whose children are obedient and virtuous," etc. [1 Tim. 3:2, Tit. 1:6] For with St. Paul a bishop and a priest are one and the same thing, as witness also St. Jerome[161]. But of bishops as they now are, the Scriptures know nothing; they have been appointed by the ordinance of the Christian Church, that one of them may rule over many priests.

So then we clearly learn from the Apostle that it should be the custom for every town to choose out of the congregation[162] a learned and pious citizen, entrust to him the office of the ministry, and support him at the expense of the community, leaving him free choice to marry or not. He should have with him several priests or deacons, who might also be married or not, as they chose, to help him rule the people of the community[163] by means of preaching and the sacraments, as is still the practice in the Greek Church. At a later time[164], when there were so many persecutions and controversies with heretics, there were many holy fathers who of their own accord abstained from matrimony, to the end that they might the better devote themselves to study and be prepared at any time for death or for controversy. Then the Roman See interfered, out of sheer wantonness, and made a universal commandment forbidding priests to marry[165]. This was done at the bidding of the devil, as St. Paul declares in I Timothy iv, "There shall come teachers who bring doctrines of devils, and forbid to marry." From this has arisen so much untold misery, occasion was given for the withdrawal of the Greek Church[166], and division, sin, shame and scandal were increased without end,--which is the result of everything the devil does.

What, then, shall we do about it? My advice is that matrimony be again made free[167], and that every one be let free choice to marry or not to marry. In that case, however, there must be a very different government and administration of Church property, the whole canon law must go to pieces and not many benefices find their way to Rome[168]. I fear that greed has been a cause of this wretched unchaste chastity, and as a result of greed every man has wished to become a priest and everyone wants his son to study for the priesthood, not with the idea of living in chastity, for that could be done outside the priesthood, but of being supported in temporal things without care or labor, contrary to the command of God in Genesis iii, "In the sweat of thy face shat thou eat thy bread." [Gen. 3:19] They have construed this to mean that their labor was to pray and say mass.

I am not referring here to popes, bishops, canons and monks. God has not instituted these offices. They have taken burdens on themselves; let them bear them. I would speak only of the ministry which God has instituted[169] and which is to rule a congregation by means of preaching and sacraments, whose incumbents are to live and be at home among the people. Such ministers should be granted liberty by a Christian council to marry, for the avoidance of temptation and sin. For since God has not bound them, no one else ought to bind them or can bind them, even though he were an angel from heaven [Gal. 1:8], still less if he be only a pope; and everything that the canon law decrees to the contrary is mere fable and idle talk.

Furthermore, I advise that henceforth neither at his consecration to the priesthood nor at any other time shall any one under any circumstances promise the bishop to live in celibacy, but shall declare to the bishop that he has no authority to demand such a vow, and that to demand it is the devil's own tyranny.

But if anyone is compelled to say or wishes to say, as do some, "so far as human frailty permits,"[170] let everyone frankly interpret these words negatively, to mean "I do not promise chastity."[171] For human frailty does not permit a chaste life[172], but only angelic power and celestial might[2 Pet. 2:11][173] Thus he should keep his conscience free from all vows.

On the question whether those who are not yet married should marry or remain unmarried, I do not care to give advice either way. I leave that to common Christian order and to everyone's better judgment. But as regards the wretched multitude who now sit in shame and heaviness of conscience because their wives are called "priests' harlots" and their children "priests' children" I will not withhold my faithful counsel nor deprive them of the comfort which is their due. I say this boldly by my jester's right[174]. You will find many a pious priest against whom no one has anything to say except that he is weak and has come to shame with a woman, though both parties may be minded with all their heart to live always together in wedded love and troth, if only they could do it with a clear conscience, even though they might have to bear public shame. Two such persons are certainly married before God. And I say that where they are thus minded, and so come to live together, they should boldly save their consciences; let him take and keep her as his wedded wife, and live honestly with her as her husband, caring nothing whether the pope will have it so or not, whether it be against canon law or human law. The salvation of your soul is of more importance than tyrannical, arbitrary, wicked laws, which are not necessary for salvation and are not commanded by God. You should do like the children of Israel, who stole from the Egyptians the hire they had earned [Ex. 12:35 f.], or like a servant who steals from his wicked master the wages he has earned. In like manner steal thou from the pope thy wife and child! Let the man who has faith enough to venture this, boldly follow me; I shall not lead him astray. Though I have not the authority of a pope, I have the authority of a Christian to advise and help my neighbor against sins and temptations; and that not without cause and reason.

_First_, Not every priest can do without a woman, not only on account of the weakness of the flesh, but much more because of the necessities of the household. If he, then, may have a woman, and the pope grants him that, and yet may not have her in marriage,--what is that but leaving a man and a woman alone and forbidding them to fall? It is as though one were to put fire and straw together and command that it shall neither smoke nor burn.

_Second_, The pope has as little power to command this, as he has to forbid eating, drinking, the natural movement of the bowels or growing fat. No one, therefore, is bound to keep it, but the pope is responsible for all the sins which are committed against this ordinance, for all the souls which are lost thereby, for all the consciences which are thereby confused and tortured; and therefore he has long deserved that some one should drive him out of the world, so many wretched souls has he strangled with this devil's snare; though I hope that there are many to whom God has been more gracious at their last hour than the pope has been in their life. Nothing good has ever come out of the papacy and its laws, nor ever will.

_Third_, Although the law of the pope is against it, nevertheless, when the estate of matrimony has been entered against the pope's law, then his law is at an end, and is no longer valid; for the commandment of God, which decrees that no one shall put man and wife asunder [Matt. 19:6], takes precedence of the law of the pope; and the commandments of God must not be broken and neglected for the sake of the pope's commandment, though many mad jurists, in the papal interest, have devised "impediments"[175] and have prevented, destroyed and confused the estate of matrimony, until by their means God's commandment has been altogether destroyed. To make a long story short, there are not in the whole "spiritual" law of the pope two lines which could be instructive to a pious Christian, and there are, alas! so many mistaken and dangerous laws that the best thing would be to make a bonfire of it[176].

But if you say that this[177] would give offence, and the pope must first grant dispensation, I reply that whatever offence is in it, is the fault of the Roman See, which has established such laws without right and against God; before God and the Scriptures it is no offence. Moreover, if the pope can grant dispensations from his avaricious and tyrannical laws for money's sake, then every Christian can grant dispensations from them--for the sake of God and the salvation of souls. For Christ has set us free from all human laws, especially when they are opposed to God and the salvation of souls, as St. Paul teaches in Galatians v [Gal. 5:1] and I Corinthians xi [1 Cor. 9:4 ff.; 10:23].

[Sidenote: Abolition of Reserved Cases in the Monasteries]

15. Nor must I forget the poor convents! The evil spirit, who by human laws now confuses all estates in life, and has made them unbearable, has taken possession of in certain abbots, abbesses and prelates also, and causes them so to govern their brethren and sisters as to send them the more speedily to hell, and make them lead a wretched life even here; for such is the lot of all the devil's martyrs. That is to say, they have reserved to themselves in confession, all, or at least some, of the mortal sins which are secret, so that no brother, on his obedience and on pain of the ban, can absolve another from these sins[178]. Now we do not always find angels everywhere, but we find also flesh and blood, which suffers all bannings and threatenings rather than confess secret sins to the prelates and the appointed confessors. Thus they go to the sacrament with such consciences that they become "irregular"[179] and all sorts of other terrible things. O blind shepherds! O mad prelates! O ravening wolves!

To this I say: If a sin is public or notorious, then it is proper that the prelate alone should punish it, and of these sins only and no others he may make exceptions, and reserve them to himself; over secret sins he has no authority, even though they were the worst sins that are or ever can be found, and if the prelate makes exceptions of these sins, he is a tyrant, for he has no such right and is interfering in the judgment of God.

And so I advise these children, brethren and sisters: If your superiors are unwilling to grant you permission to confess your secret sins to whomever you wish, then take them to whatever brother or sister you will and confess them, receive absolution, and then go and do whatever you wish and ought to do; only believe firmly that you are absolved, and nothing more is needed. And do not allow yourself to be troubled by ban, "irregularity," or any of the other things they threaten; these things are valid only in the case of public or notorious sins which one is unwilling to confess; they do not affect you at all. Why do you try by your threatenings, O blind prelate, to prevent secret sins? Let go what you cannot publicly prove, so that God's judgment and grace may also have its work in your subjects! He did not give them so entirely into your hands as to let them go entirely out of His own! Nay, what you have under your rule is but the smaller part. Let your statutes be statutes, but do not exalt them to heaven, to the judgment-seat of God.

[Sidenote: Abolition of Mortuary Masses]

16. It were also necessary to abolish all anniversary, mortuary and "soul" masses[180], or at least to diminish their number, since we plainly see that they have become nothing but a mockery, by which God is deeply angered, and that their only purpose is money-getting, gorging and drunkenness. What kind of pleasure should God have in such a miserable gabbling of wretched vigils and masses, which is neither reading nor praying, and even when prayed[181], they are performed not for God's sake and out of willing love, but for money's sake and because they are a bounden duty. Now it is not possible that any work not done out of willing love can please God or obtain anything from Him. And so it is altogether Christian to abolish, or at least diminish, everything which we see growing into an abuse, and which angers rather than reconciles God. It would please me more--nay, it would be more acceptable to God and far better--that a foundation, church or monastery should put all its anniversary masses and vigils together, and on one day, with hearty sincerity, devotion and faith, hold a true vigil and mass for all its benefactors, rather than hold them by the thousand every year, for each benefactor a special mass, without this devotion and faith. O dear Christians! God cares not for much praying, but for true praying! Nay, He condemns the many and long prayers, and says in Matthew vi, they will only earn more punishment thereby [Matt. 67:7; 23:14]. But avarice, which cannot trust God, brings such things to pass, earing that otherwise it must die of hunger!

[Sidenote: Abolition of the Interdict]

17. Certain of the penalties or punishments of the canon law should also be abolished, especially the interdict[182], which is, beyond all doubt, an invention of the evil Spirit. Is it not a devil's work to try to atone for one sin with many greater sins? And yet, to put God's Word and worship to silence, or to do away with them, is a greater sin than strangling twenty popes at once, and far greater than killing a priest or keeping back some Church property. This is another of the tender virtues taught in the "spiritual law." For one of the reasons why this law is called "spiritual" is because it comes from the Spirit; not, however, from the Holy Spirit, but from the evil spirit.

The ban[183] is to be used in no case except where the Scriptures prescribe its use, i. e., against those who do not hold the true faith, or who live in open sin; it is not to be used for the sake of temporal possessions. But now it is the other way around. Everyone believes and lives as he pleases, most of all those who use the ban to plunder and defame other people, and all the bans are now laid only on account of temporal possessions, or which we have no one to thank but the holy "spiritual lawlessness."[184] Of this I have previously said more in the Discourse[185].

The other punishments and penalties,--suspension, irregularity, aggravation, reaggravation, deposition, lightnings, thunderings, cursings, damnings and the rest of these devices,--should be buried ten fathoms deep in the earth, so that there should be neither name nor memory of them left on earth. The evil spirit, who has been let loose by the "spiritual law" has brought this terrible plague and misery into the heavenly kingdom of the holy Church, and has accomplished by it nothing else than the destruction and hindrance of souls, so that the word of Christ may well be applied to them[186]: "Woe unto you scribes! Ye have taken upon you the authority to teach, and ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men. Ye go not in yourselves, and ye suffer not them that are entering." [Matt. 23:13]

[Sidenote: Abolition of Saints'-Days]

18. All festivals[187] should be abolished, and Sunday alone retained. If it were desired, however, to retain the festivals of Our Lady and of the greater saints, they should be transferred to Sunday, or observed only by a morning mass, after which all the rest of the day should be a working-day. The reason is this: The feast-days are now abused by drinking, gaming, idleness and all manner of sins, so that on the holy days we anger God more than on other days, and have altogether turned things around; the holy days are not holy and the working days are holy, and not only is no service done to God and His saints by the many holy days, but rather great dishonor. There are, indeed, some mad prelates who think they are doing a good work if they make a festival in honor of St. Ottilia or St. Barbara or some other saint, according to the promptings of their blind devotion; but they would be doing a far better work if they honored the saint by turning a saint's-day into a working day.

Over and above the spiritual injury, the common man receives two material injuries from this practice, i. e., he neglects his work and he spends more than at other times; nay, he also weakens his body and unfits it for work. We see this every day, yet no one thinks to make it better. We ought not to consider whether or not the pope has instituted the feasts, and whether we must have dispensation and permission to omit them. If a thing is opposed to God, and harmful to man in body and soul, any community[188], council[189] or government has not only the right to abolish it and put a stop to it, without the will or knowledge of pope or bishop, but they are bound on their souls' salvation to prevent it, even against the will of pope and bishop, though these ought to be themselves the first to forbid it.

Above all, we ought utterly to abolish the consecration days[190], since they have become nothing else than taverns, airs and gaming places[191], and serve only to the increase of God's dishonor and to the damnation of souls. All the pretence about the custom having had a good beginning and being a good work is of no avail. Did not God Himself set aside His own law, which He had given from heaven, when it was perverted and abused? And does He not still daily overturn what He has appointed and destroy what He has made, because of such perversion and abuse? As it is written of Him in Psalm xviii, "With the perverted Thou wilt show Thyself perverse." [Ps. 18:27]

[Sidenote: Extension of Right of Dispensation]

19. The grades or degrees within which marriage is forbidden should be changed, as, for instance, the sponsorships and the third and fourth degrees; and if the pope can grant dispensation in these matters or money and for the sake of his shameful traffic[192], then every parish priest may give the same dispensations gratis and or the salvation of souls. Yea, would to God that all the things which we must buy at Rome to free ourselves from that money-snare, the canon law,--such things as indulgences, letters of indulgence, "butter-letters,"[193] "mass-letters,"[194] and all the rest of the _confessionalia_[195] and knaveries for sale at Rome, with which the poor folk are deceived and robbed of their money; would to God, I say, that any priest could, without payment, do and omit all these things! For if the pope has the authority to sell his snares for money and his spiritual nets (I should say laws)[196], surely any priest has much more authority to rend his nets and for God's sake to tread them under foot. But if he has not this right, neither has the pope the right to sell them at his shameful fair[196].

This is the place to say too that the fasts should be matters of liberty, and all sorts of food made free, as the Gospel makes them [Matt. 15:11]. For at Rome they themselves laugh at the fasts, making us foreigners eat the oil with which they would not grease their shoes, and afterwards selling us liberty to eat butter and all sorts of other things; yet the holy Apostle says that in all these things we already have liberty through the Gospel [1 Cor. 10:25 ff.]. But they have caught us with their canon law and stolen our rights from us, so that we may have to buy them back with money. Thus they have made our consciences so timid and shy that it is no longer easy to preach about this liberty because the common people take such great offence, thinking it a greater sin to eat butter than to lie, to swear, or even to live unchastely. Nevertheless, what men have decreed, that is the work of man; put it where you will[198], nothing good ever comes out of it.

[Sidenote: Prohibition of Pilgrimages]

20. The forest chapels and rustic churches[199] must be utterly destroyed,--those, namely, to which the recent pilgrimages have been directed,--Wilsnack[200], Sternberg[201], Trier[202], the Grimmenthal[203], and now Regensburg[204] and a goodly number of others. Oh, what a terrible and heavy account will the bishops have to render, who permit this devilish deceit and receive its profits![205] They should be the first to forbid it, and yet they think it a divine and holy thing, and do not see that it is the devil's doing, to strengthen avarice, to create a false, feigned faith, to weaken the parish churches, to multiply taverns and harlotry, to waste money and labor, and to lead the poor folk by the nose. If they had only read the Scriptures to as good purpose as they have read their damnable canon law, they would know well how to deal with this matter.

That miracles are done at these places does not help things, for the evil spirit can do miracles, as Christ has told us in Matthew xxiv [Matt. 24:24]. If they took the matter seriously and forbade this sort of thing, the miracles would quickly come to an end; on the other hand, if the thing were of God their prohibition would not hinder it [Acts 5:39]. And if there were no other evidence that it is not of God, this would be enough,--that people run to these places in excited crowds, as though they had lost their reason, like herds of cattle; for this cannot possibly be of God. Moreover, God has commanded nothing of all this; there is neither obedience nor merit in it; the bishops, therefore, should boldly step in and keep the folk away. For what is not commanded--and is concerned for self rather than for the commands of God--that is surely the devil himself. Then, too, the parish churches receive injury, because they are held in smaller honor. In short, these things are signs of great unbelief among the people; if they truly believed, they would have all that they need in their own churches, for to them they are commanded to go.

[Sidenote: Canonisations to be Prohibited]

But what shall I say? Every one[206] plans only how he may establish and maintain such a place of pilgrimage in his diocese and is not at all concerned to have the people believe and live aright; the rulers are like the people; one blind man leads another [Matt. 13:14]. Nay, where pilgrimages are not successful, they begin to canonise saints[207], not in honor of the saints--for they are sufficiently honored without canonisation--but in order to draw crowds and bring in money. Pope and bishop help along; it rains indulgences; there is always money enough for that. But for what God has commanded no one provides; no one runs after these things; there is no money or them. Alas, that we should be so blind! We not only give the devil his own way in his tricks, but we even strengthen him in his wantonness and increase his pranks. I would that the dear saints were let in peace, and the poor folk not led astray! What spirit has given the pope the authority to canonise the saints? Who tells him whether they are saints or not? Are there not already sins enough on earth, that we too must tempt God, interfere in His judgment and set up the dear saints as lures for money?

Therefore I advise that the saints be left to canonise themselves. Yea, it is God alone who should canonise them. And let every man stay in his own parish, where he finds more than in all the shrines of pilgrimage, even though all the shrines were one. Here we find baptism, the sacrament, preaching and our neighbor, and these are greater things than all the saints in heaven, for it is by God's Word and sacrament that they have all been made saints. So long as we despise such great things God is just in the wrathful judgment by which He appoints the devil to lead us hither and thither, to establish pilgrimages, to found churches and chapels, to secure the canonisation of saints, and to do other such fool's-works, by which we depart from true faith into new, false misbelief. This is what he did in olden times to the people of Israel, when he led them away from the temple at Jerusalem to countless other places, though he did it in the name of God and under the plausible guise of holiness, though all the prophets preached against it and were persecuted or so doing. But now no one preaches against it, perhaps or fear that pope, priests and monks would persecute him also. In this way St. Antoninus of Florence[208] and certain others must now be made saints and canonised, that their holiness, which would otherwise have served only for the glory of God and as a good example, may serve to bring in fame and money.

Although the canonising of saints may have been good in olden times, it is not good now; just as many other things were good in olden times and are now scandalous and injurious, such as feast-days, church-treasures and church-adornment. For it is evident that through the canonising of saints neither God's glory nor the improvement of Christians is sought, but only money and glory, in that one church wants to be something more and have something more than others, and would be sorry if another had the same thing and its advantage were common property. So entirely, in these last, evil days, have spiritual goods been misused and applied to the gaining of temporal goods, that everything, even God Himself, has been forced into the service of avarice. And even these special advantages lead only to dissensions, divisions and pride, in that the churches, differing from one another, hold each other in contempt, and exalt themselves one above another, though all the gifts which God bestows are the common and equal property of all churches and should only serve the cause of unity. The pope, too, is glad or the present state of affairs; he would be sorry if all Christians were equal and were at one.

[Sidenote: Prohibition of Special Privileges]

pThis is the place to speak of the church licenses, bulls and other things which the pope sells at his laying-place in Rome. We should either abolish them or disregard them, or at least make them the common property of all churches. For if he sells or gives away licenses and privileges, indulgences, graces, advantages, faculties[209] to Wittenberg, to Halle, to Venice and, above, all to his own Rome, why does he not give these things to all churches alike? Is he not bound to do for all Christians, gratis and for God's sake, everything that he can, and even to shed his blood for them? Tell me, then, why he gives or sells to one church and not to another? Or must the accursed money make, in the eyes of His Holiness, so great a difference among Christians, who all have the same baptism, Word, faith, Christ, God and all things? [Eph. 4:4 f.] Are we to be blind while we have eyes to see, fools while we have our reason, that they expect us to worship such greed, knavery and humbug? He is a shepherd,--yes, so long as you have money, and no longer! And yet they are not ashamed of their knavery, leading us hither and yon with their bulls! Their one concern is the accursed money, and nothing else!

My advice is this: If such fool's-work cannot be abolished, then every pious Christian man should open his eyes, and not be misled by the hypocritical Roman bulls and seals, stay at home in his own church and be content with his baptism, his Gospel, his faith, his Christ and with God, Who is everywhere the same; and let the pope remain a blind leader of the blind. Neither angel nor pope can give you as much as God gives you in your parish-church. Nay, the pope leads you away from the gifts of God, which you have without pay, to his gifts, which you must buy; and he gives you lead[210] for gold, hide for meat, the string for the purse, wax for honey, words for goods, the letter for the spirit. You see this before your very eyes, but you are unwilling to notice it. If you are to ride to heaven on his wax and parchment, your chariot will soon go to pieces, and you will fall into hell, not in God's name!

Let this be your fixed rule: What you must buy from the pope is neither good nor of God; for what is from God, to wit, the Gospel and the works of God, is not only given without money, but the whole world is punished and damned because it has not been willing to receive it as a free gift. We have deserved of God that we should be so deceived, because we have despised His holy Word and the grace of baptism, as St. Paul says: "God shall send a strong delusion upon all those who have not received the truth to their salvation, to the end that they may believe and follow after lies and knavery," [2 Thess. 2:11 f.] which serves them right.

[Sidenote: Mendicancy to be Prohibited, and the Poor to be Cared for]

21. One of our greatest necessities is the abolition of all begging throughout Christendom. Among Christians no one ought to go begging! It would also be easy to make a law, if only we had the courage and the serious intention, to the effect that every city should provide for its own poor, and admit no foreign beggars by whatever name they might be called, whether pilgrims or mendicant monks. Every city could support its own poor, and if it were too small, the people in the surrounding villages also should be exhorted to contribute, since in any case they have to feed so many vagabonds and knaves in the guise of mendicants. In this way, too, it could be known who were really poor and who not.

There would have to be an overseer or warden who knew all the poor and informed the city council or the priests what they needed; or some other better arrangement might be made. In my judgment there is no other business in which so much knavery and deceit are practised as in begging, and yet it could all be easily abolished. Moreover, this free and universal begging hurts the common people. I have considered that each of the five or six mendicant orders[211] visits the same place more than six or seven times every year; besides these there are the common beggars, the "stationaries"[212] and the palmers[213], so that it has been reckoned that every town is laid under tribute about sixty times a year, not counting what is given to the government in taxes, imposts and assessments, what is stolen by the Roman See with its wares, and what is uselessly consumed. Thus it seems to me one of God's greatest miracles that we can continue to support ourselves.

To be sure, some think that in this way[214] the poor would not be so well provided for and that not so many great stone houses and monasteries would be built. This I can well believe. Nor is it necessary. He who wishes to be poor should not be rich; and if he wishes to be rich, let him put his hand to the plow and seek his riches in the earth! It is enough if the poor are decently cared for, so that they do not die of hunger or of cold. It is not fitting that one man should live in idleness on another's labor, or be rich and live comfortably at the cost of another's discomfort, according to the present perverted custom; for St. Paul says, "If a man will not work, neither shall he eat." [2 Thess. 3:10] God has not decreed that any man shall live from another's goods save only the priests, who rule and preach, and these because of their spiritual labor, as Paul says in I Corinthians ix [1 Cor. 9:14], and Christ also says to the Apostles, "Every laborer is worthy of his hire." [Luke 10:7]

[Sidenote: Prohibition of Endowed Masses]

22. It is also to be feared that the many masses[215] which are endowed in the foundations and monasteries are not only of little use, but greatly arouse the wrath of God. It would therefore be profitable not to endow any more, but rather Masses to abolish many that are already endowed, since we see that they are regarded only as sacrifices and good works[216], though they are really sacraments, just like baptism and penance[217], which profit only those who receive them, and no others. But now the custom has crept in, that masses are said for the living and the dead, and all hopes are built upon them; for this reason so many of them have been founded and the present state of affairs has come about.

My proposal is perhaps too novel and daring, especially for those who fear that through the discontinuance of these masses their trade and livelihood may be destroyed, and so I must refrain from saying more about it until we have come back to a correct understanding of what the mass is and what it is good for. These many years, alas, it has been made a trade practised for a temporal livelihood, so that I would henceforth advise a man to become a shepherd or to seek some other trade rather than become a priest or a monk, unless he first knows well what it is to celebrate mass. I am not speaking, however, of the old foundations and cathedrals, which were doubtless established in order that the children of the nobility (since, according to the customs of the German nation not all of them can become heirs or rulers), might be provided for in these foundations, and there be free to serve God, to study, to become scholars and to make scholars. But I am speaking of the new foundations, which have been established only for the saying of prayers and masses; for after their example, even the old foundations have been burdened with like prayers and masses, so that they are of little or no profit; though it is also of God's grace that they too come at last, as they deserve, to the dregs, i. e., to the wailing of organs and of choral singers, and to dead, cold masses, by which the incomes of the worldly endowments are gotten and spent. Such things pope, bishops and doctors should examine and proscribe; but now it is they who are most given to them. They let everything pass, if only it brings in money; one blind man is always leading another. This is the work of avarice and of the spiritual law.

Again, no one person should be allowed any longer to hold more than one canonry or prebend. He must be content with a modest position, that some one else may also have something. This would do away with the excuses of those who say that they must hold more than one such office to "maintain a proper station." A "proper station" might be so broadly interpreted that a whole land would not be enough to maintain it! Moreover avarice and veiled distrust of God assuredly go with it, so that what is alleged to be the need of "a proper station" is often nothing else than avarice and distrust.

[Sidenote: Sodalities and Indulgences]

23. Sodalities[218], indulgences, letters of indulgence, "butter-letters,"[219] mass-letters[220], dispensations, and everything else of the sort, are to be drowned and destroyed. There is nothing good in them. If the pope has the power to grant you dispensation to eat butter and to absent yourself from mass, then he ought also be able to leave this power to the priests, from whom, indeed, he has no right to take it. I speak especially of those fraternities in which indulgences, masses and good works are portioned out. Dear friend, in your baptism you entered into a fraternity with Christ, all the angels, saints and Christians on earth. Hold to this fraternity and live up to its demands, and you have fraternities enough. The others--let them glitter as they will--are but as counters compared with _guldens_. But if there were a fraternity which contributed money to feed the poor or to help somebody in some other way, such a one would be good, and would have its indulgence and its merit in heaven. Now, however, they have become excuses or gluttony and drunkenness[221].

Above all, we should drive out of German lands the papal legates with their "faculties,"[222] which they sell us for large sums of money, though that is sheer knavery. For example, in return for money they legalize unjust gains, dissolve oaths, vows and agreements, break and teach men to break the faith and fealty which they have pledged to one another; and they say the pope has the authority to do this. It is the evil Spirit who bids them say this. Thus they sell us a doctrine of devils, and take money or teaching us sin and leading us to hell.

If there were no other evil wiles to prove the pope the true Antichrist, yet this one thing were enough to prove it. Hearest thou this, pope, not most holy, but most sinful? O that God from heaven would soon destroy thy throne and sink it in the abyss of hell! Who hath given thee authority to exalt thyself above thy God, to break and to loose His commandments, and to teach Christians, especially the German nation, praised in all history for its nobility, its constancy and fidelity, to be inconstant, perjurers, traitors, profligates, faithless? God hath commanded to keep oath and faith even with an enemy, and thou undertakest to loose this His commandment, and ordainest in thine heretical, antichristian decretals that thou hast His power. Thus through thy throat and through thy pen the wicked Satan doth lie as he hath never lied before. Thou dost force and wrest the Scriptures to thy fancy. O Christ, my Lord, look down, let the day of thy judgment break, and destroy the devil's nest at Rome! Here sitteth the man of whom St. Paul hath said that he shall exalt himself above Thee, sit in Thy Church and set himself up as God [2 Thess. 2:3 f.],--the man of sin and the son of perdition! What else is the papal power than only the teaching and increasing of sin and evil, the leading of souls to damnation under Thy name and guise?

In olden times the children of Israel had to keep the oath which they had unwittingly been deceived into giving to their enemies, the Gibeonites [Josh. 9:19 ff.], and King Zedekiah was miserably lost, with all his people, because he broke this oath to the King of Babylon [2 Kings 24:20; 25:4 ff.]. Even among us, a hundred years ago, that fine king of Hungary and Poland, Wladislav[223], was slain by the Turk, with so many noble people, because he allowed himself to be deceived by the papal legate and cardinal, and broke the good and advantageous treaty which he had sworn with the Turk. The pious Emperor Sigismund had no good fortune after the Council of Constance, when he allowed the knaves to break the safe-conduct which had been given to John Hus and Jerome[224] and all the trouble between us and the Bohemians was the consequence. Even in our own times, God help us! how much Christian blood has been shed over the oath and alliance which Pope Julius made between the Emperor Maximilian and King Louis of France[225], and afterwards broke? How could I tell all the troubles which the popes have stirred up by the devilish presumption with which they annul oaths and vows which have been made between great princes, making a jest of these things, and taking money for it. I have hopes that the judgment day is at the door; nothing can possibly be worse than the Roman See. He suppresses God's commandment, he exalts his own commandment over it; if he is not Antichrist, then let some one else tell who he can be! But more of this another time, and better.

24. It is high time that we seriously and honestly consider the case of the Bohemians[224], and come into union with them so that the terrible slander, hatred and envy on both sides may cease. As befits my folly, I shall be the first to submit an opinion on this subject, with due deference to every one who may understand the case better than I.

_First_, We must honestly confess the truth, stop justifying ourselves, and grant the Bohemians that John Hus and Jerome of Prague were burned at Constance in violation of the papal, Christian, imperial safe-conduct and oath; whereby God's commandment was sinned against and the Bohemians were given ample cause for bitterness; and although they ought to have been perfect and to have patiently endured this great injustice and disobedience of God on our part, nevertheless they were not bound to approve of it and to acknowledge that it was well done. Nay, even to-day they should give up life and limb rather than confess that it is right to violate an imperial, papal, Christian safe-conduct, and faithlessly to act contrary to it. So then, although it is the impatience of the Bohemians which is at fault, yet the pope and his followers are still more to blame for all the trouble, error and loss of souls that have followed upon that council.

I have no desire to pass judgment at this time upon John Hus's articles or to defend his errors, though I have not yet found any errors in his writings, and I am quite prepared to believe that it was neither fair judgment nor honest condemnation which was passed by those who, in their faithless dealing, violated a Christian safe-conduct and a commandment of God. Beyond doubt they were possessed rather by the evil spirit than by the Holy Spirit. No one will doubt that the Holy Spirit does not act contrary to the commandment of God; and no one is so ignorant as not to know that the violation of faith and of a safe-conduct is contrary to the commandment of God, even though they had been promised to the devil himself, still more when the promise was made to a mere heretic. It is also quite evident that such a promise was made to John Hus and the Bohemians and was not kept, but that he was burned in spite of it. I do not wish, however, to make John Hus a saint or a martyr, as do some of the Bohemians, though I confess that injustice was done him, and that his books and doctrines were unjustly condemned; for the judgments of God are secret and terrible, and no one save God alone should undertake to reveal or utter them. All I wish to say is this: though he were never so wicked a heretic, nevertheless he was burned unjustly and against God's commandment, and the Bohemians should not be forced to approve of such conduct, or else we shall never come into unity. Not obstinacy but the open admission of truth must make us one. It is useless to pretend, as was done at that time, that a safe-conduct given to a heretic need not be kept[227]. That is as much as to say that God's commandments are not to be kept to the end that God's commandments may be kept. The devil made them mad and foolish, so that they did not know what they were saying or doing. God has commanded that a safe-conduct shall be kept. This commandment we should keep though the world all. How much more, when it is only a question of freeing a heretic! We should vanquish heretics with books, not with burning; for so the ancient fathers did. If it were a science to vanquish the heretics with fire, then the hang-men would be the most learned doctors on earth; we should no longer need to study, but he who overcame another by force might burn him at the stake.

_Second_, The emperor and the princes should send to the Bohemians some pious and sensible bishops and scholars; but by no means a cardinal or papal legate or inquisitor, for those people are utter ignoramuses as regards things Christian; they seek not the welfare of souls, but, like all the pope's hypocrites, only their own power, profit and glory; indeed, they were the prime movers in this miserable business at Constance. The men thus sent into Bohemia should inform themselves about the faith of the Bohemians, and whether it be possible to unite all their sects. Then the pope should, for their souls' sake, lay aside his supremacy for the time being, and, according to the decree of the most Christian Council of Nicaea[228], allow the Bohemians to choose one of their number to be Archbishop of Prague[229], and he should be confirmed by the bishop of Olmutz in Moravia, or the bishop of Gran in Hungary, or the bishop of Gnesen in Poland, or the bishop of Magdeburg in Germany[230]. It will be enough if he is confirmed by one or two of these, as was the custom in the time of St. Cyprian[231]. The pope has no right to oppose such an arrangement, and if he does oppose it, he becomes a wolf and a tyrant; no one should follow him and his ban should be met with a counter-ban.

If, however, it were desired, in honor of the See of St. Peter, to do this with the pope's consent, I should be satisfied, provided it does not cost the Bohemians a _heller_ and the pope does not bind them at all nor make them subject to his tyrannies by oaths and obligations, as he does all other bishops, in despite of God and of justice. If he will not be satisfied with the honor of having his consent asked, then let them not bother any more about him[232] and his rights, laws and tyrannies; let the election suffice, and let the blood of all the souls which are endangered cry out against him, for no one should consent to injustice; it is enough to have offered tyranny an honor. If it cannot be otherwise, then an election and approval by the common people can even now be quite as valid as a confirmation by a tyrant; but I hope this will not be necessary. Some of the Romans or the good bishops and scholars will sometime mark and oppose papal tyranny.

I would also advise against compelling them to abolish both kinds in the sacrament[233], since that is neither unchristian nor heretical, but they should be allowed to retain their own practice, if they wish. Yet the new bishop should be careful that no discord arise because of such a practice, but should kindly instruct them that neither practice is wrong[234]; just as it ought not to cause dissension that the clergy differ from the laity in manner of life and in dress. In like manner if they were unwilling to receive the Roman canon law, they should not be forced to do so, but we should first make sure that they live in accordance with faith and with the Scriptures. For Christian faith and life can well exist without the intolerable laws of the pope, nay, they cannot well exist unless there be fewer of these Roman laws, or none at all. In baptism we have become free and have been made subject to God's Word only; why should any man ensnare us in his words? As St. Paul says, "Ye have become free, be not servants of men," [1 Cor. 7:23; Gal. 5:1] i. e. of those who rule with man-made laws.

If I knew that the Picards[235] held no other error touching the sacrament of the altar except that they believe that the bread and wine are present in their true nature, but that the body and blood of Christ are truly present under them, then I would not condemn them, but would let them enter the obedience of the bishop of Prague. For it is not an article of faith that bread and wine are not essentially and naturally in the sacrament, but this is an opinion of St. Thomas[236] and the pope. On the other hand, it is an article of faith that in the natural bread and wine the true natural body and blood of Christ are present[237]. And so we should tolerate the opinions of both sides until they come to an agreement, because there is no danger in believing that bread is there or is not there. For we have to endure many practices and ordinances so long as they are not harmful to faith. On the other hand, if they had a different faith[238], I would rather have them outside the Church; yet I would teach them the truth.

Whatever other errors and schisms might be discovered in Bohemia should be tolerated until the archbishop had been restored and had gradually brought all the people together again in one common doctrine. They will assuredly never be united by force, nor by defiance, nor by haste; it will take time and forbearance. Had not even Christ to tarry with His disciples a long while and bear with their unbelief, until they believed His resurrection? If they but had again a regular bishop and church order, without Roman tyranny, I could hope that things would soon be better.

The restoration of the temporal goods which formerly belonged to the Church should not be too strictly demanded, but since we are Christians and each is bound to help the rest, it is in our power, for the sake of unity, to give them these things and let them keep them in the sight of God and men. For Christ says, "Where two are at one with each other on earth, there am I in the midst of them." [Matt. 18:19 f.] Would to God that on both sides we were working toward this unity, offering our hands to one another in brotherly humility, and not standing stubbornly on our powers or rights! Love is greater and more necessary than the papacy at Rome, or there can be papacy without love and love without papacy.

With this counsel I shall have done what I could. If the pope or his followers hinder it, they shall render an account for seeking their own things rather than the things of their neighbor, contrary to the love of God [Phil. 2:4]. The pope ought to give up his papacy and all his possessions and honors, if he could by that means save one soul; but now he would let the world go to destruction rather than yield a hair's-breadth of his presumptuous authority. And yet he would be the "most holy"! Here my responsibility ends.

[Sidenote: The Universities]

[Sidenote: Aristotle]

25. The universities also need a good, thorough reformation--I must say it no matter whom it vexes--for everything which the papacy has instituted and ordered is directed only towards the increasing of sin and error. What else are the universities, if their present condition remains unchanged, than as the book of Maccabees says, _Gymnasia Epheborum et Graecae gloriae_[239][2 Macc. 4:9, 12], in which loose living prevails, the Holy Scriptures and the Christian faith are little taught, and the blind, heathen Aristotle master Aristotle[240] rules alone, even more than Christ. In this regard my advice would be that Aristotle's _Physics_, _Metaphysics_, _On the Soul_, _Ethics_, which have hitherto been thought his best books, should be altogether discarded, together with all the rest of his books which boast of treating the things of nature, although nothing can be learned from them either of the things of nature or the things of the Spirit. Moreover no one has so far understood his meaning, and many souls have been burdened with profitless labor and study, at the cost of much precious time. I venture to say that any potter has more knowledge of nature than is written in these books. It grieves me to the heart that this damned, conceited, rascally heathen has with his false words deluded and made fools of so many of the best Christians. God has sent him as a plague upon us for our sins.

Why, this wretched man, in his best book, _On the Soul_, teaches that the soul dies with the body, although many have tried with vain words to save his reputation. As though we had not the Holy Scriptures, in which we are abundantly instructed about all things, and of them Aristotle had not the faintest inkling! And yet this dead heathen has conquered and obstructed and almost suppressed the books of the living God, so that when I think of this miserable business I can believe nothing else than that the evil spirit has introduced the study of Aristotle. Again, his book on _Ethics_ is the worst of all books. It flatly opposes divine grace and all Christian virtues, and yet it is considered one of his best works. Away with such books! Keep them away from all Christians! Let no one accuse me of exaggeration, or of condemning what I do not understand! My dear friend, I know well whereof I speak. I know my Aristotle as well as you or the likes of you. I have lectured on him[241] and heard lectures on him, and I understand him better than do St. Thomas or Scotus[242]. This I can say without pride, and if necessary I can prove it. I care not that so many great minds have wearied themselves over him for so many hundred years. Such objections do not disturb me as once they did; for it is plain as day that other errors have remained or even more centuries in the world and in the universities.

I should be glad to see Aristotle's books on _Logic_, _Rhetoric_ and _Poetics_ retained or used in an abridged form; as text-books for the profitable training of young people in speaking and preaching. But the commentaries and notes should be abolished, and as Cicero's _Rhetoric_ is read without commentaries and notes, so Aristotle's _Logic_ should be read as it is, without such a mass of comments. But now neither speaking nor preaching is learned from it, and it has become nothing but a disputing and a weariness to the flesh. Besides this there are the languages--Latin, Greek and Hebrew--the mathematical disciplines and history. But all this I give over to the specialists, and, indeed, the reform would come of itself, if we were only seriously bent upon it. In truth, much depends upon it; for it is here[243] that the Christian youth and the best of our people, with whom the future of Christendom lies, are to be educated and trained. Therefore I consider that there is no work more worthy of pope or emperor than a thorough reformation of the universities, and there is nothing worse or more worthy of the devil than unreformed universities.

[Sidenote: The Canon Law]

The medical men I leave to reform their own faculties; the jurists and theologians I take as my share, and I say, in the first place, that it were well if the canon law, from the first letter to the last, and especially the decretals, were utterly blotted out. The Bible contains more than enough directions for all our living, and so the study of the canon law only stands in the way of the study of the Holy Scriptures; moreover, it smacks for the most part of mere avarice and pride. Even though there were much in it that is good, it might as well be destroyed, for the pope has taken the whole canon law captive and imprisoned it in the "chamber of his heart,"[244] so that the study of it is henceorth a waste of time and a farce. At present the canon law is not what is in the books, but what is in the sweet will of the pope and his flatterers. Your cause may be thoroughly established in the canon law; still the pope has his _scrinium pectoris_[245], and all law and the whole world must be guided by that. Now it is ofttimes a knave, and even the devil himself, who rules this _scrinium_, and they boast that it is ruled by the Holy Spirit! Thus they deal with Christ's unfortunate people. They give them many laws and themselves keep none of them, but others they compel either to keep them or else to buy release.

Since, then, the pope and his followers have suspended the whole canon law, and since they pay no heed to it, but regard their own wanton will as a law exalting them above all the world, we should follow their example and for our part also reject these books. Why should we waste our time studying them? We could never discover the whole arbitrary will of the pope, which has now become the canon law. The canon law has arisen in the devil's name, let it all in the name of God, and let there be no more _doctores decretorum_[246] in the world, but only _doctores scrinii papalis_, that is, "hypocrites of the pope"! It is said that there is no better temporal rule anywhere than among the Turks, who have neither spiritual nor temporal law, but only their Koran; and we must confess that there is no more shameful rule than among us, with our spiritual and temporal law, so that there is no estate which lives according to the light of nature, still less according to Holy Scripture.

[Sidenote: Secular Law]

The temporal law,--God help us! what a wilderness it has become![247] Though it is much better, wiser and more rational than the "spiritual law" which has nothing good about it except the name, still there is far too much of it. Surely the Holy Scriptures and good rulers would be law enough; as St. Paul says in I Corinthians vi, "Is there no one among you can judge his neighbor's cause, that ye must go to law before heathen courts?" [1 Cor. 6:1] It seems just to me that territorial laws and territorial customs should take precedence of the general imperial laws, and the imperial laws be used only in case of necessity. Would to God that as every land has its own peculiar character, so it were ruled by its own brief laws, as the lands were ruled before these imperial laws were invented, and many lands are still ruled without them! These diffuse and far-etched laws are only a burden to the people, and hinder causes more than they help them. I hope, however, that others have given this matter more thought and attention than I am able to do.

[Sidenote: Theology]

My friends the theologians have spared themselves pains and labor; they leave the Bible in peace and read the Sentences. I should think that the Sentences[248] ought to be the first study of young students in theology and the Bible ought to be the study for the doctors. But now it is turned around; the Bible comes first, and is put aside when the bachelor's degree is reached, and the Sentences come last. They are attached forever to the doctorate, and that with such a solemn obligation that a man who is not a priest may indeed read the Bible, but the Sentences a priest must read. A married man, I observe, could be a Doctor of the Bible, but under no circumstances a Doctor of the Sentences. What good fortune can we expect if we act so perversely and in this way put the Bible, the holy Word of God, so far to the rear? Moreover the pope commands, with many severe words, that his laws are to be read and used in the schools and the courts, but little is said of the Gospel. Thus it is the custom that in the schools and the courts the Gospel lies idle in the dust under the bench[249], to the end that the pope's harmful laws may rule alone.

If we are called by the title of teachers[250] of Holy Scripture, then we ought to be compelled, in accordance with our name, to teach the Holy Scriptures and nothing else, although even this title is too proud and boastful and no one ought to be proclaimed and crowned teacher of Holy Scripture. Yet it might be suffered, if the work justified the name; but now, under the despotism of the Sentences, we find among the theologians more of heathen and human opinion than of the holy and certain doctrine of Scripture. What, then, are we to do? I know of no other way than humbly to pray God to give us Doctors of Theology, Pope, emperor and universities may make Doctors of Arts, of Medicine, of Laws, of the Sentences; but be assured that no one will make a Doctor of Holy Scripture, save only the Holy Ghost from heaven, as Christ says in John vi, "They must all be taught of God Himself." [John 6:45] Now the Holy Ghost does not concern Himself about red or brown birettas[251] or other decorations, nor does He ask whether one is old or young, layman or priest, monk or secular, virgin or married; nay He spake of old by an ass, against the prophet who rode upon it [Num. 22:28]. Would God that we were worthy to have such doctors given us, whether they were layman or priests, married or virgin. True, they now try to force the Holy Ghost into pope, bishops and doctors, although there is no sign or indication whatever that He is in them.

[Sidenote: Theological Textbooks]

The number of theological books must also be lessened, and a selection made of the best of them. For it is not many books or much reading that makes men learned; but it is good things, however little of them, often read, that make men learned in the Scriptures, and make them godly, too. Indeed the writings of all the holy fathers should be read only for a time, in order that through them we may be led to the Holy Scriptures. As it is, however, we read them only to be absorbed in them and never come to the Scriptures. We are like men who study the sign-posts and never travel the road. The dear fathers wished, by their writings, to lead us to the Scriptures, but we so use them as to be led away from the Scriptures, though the Scriptures alone are our vineyard in which we ought all to work and toil.

[Sidenote: Schools]

Above all, the foremost and most general subject of study, both in the higher and the lower schools, should be the Holy Scriptures, and for the young boys the Gospel. And would to God that every town had a girls' school also, in which the girls were taught the Gospel for an hour each day either in German or Latin. Indeed the schools, monasteries and nunneries began long ago with that end in view, and it was a praiseworthy and Christian purpose, as we learn from the story of St. Agnes[252] and other of the saints. That was the time of holy virgins and martyrs, and then it was well with Christendom; but now they[253] have come to nothing but praying and singing. Ought not every Christian at his ninth or tenth year to know the entire holy Gospel from which he derives his name[254] and his life? A spinner or a seamstress teaches her daughter the trade in her early years; but now even the great, learned prelates and bishops themselves do not know the Gospel.

O how unjustly we deal with these poor young people who are committed to us for direction and instruction! We must give a terrible accounting or our neglect to set the Word of God before them. They are as Jeremiah says in Lamentations ii: "Mine eyes are grown weary with weeping, my bowels are terrified, my liver is poured out upon the ground, because of the destruction of the daughter of my people, or the youth and the children perish in all the streets of the whole city; they said to their mothers, Where is bread and wine? and they swooned as the wounded in the streets of the city and gave up the ghost in their mothers' bosom." [Lam. 2:11 ff.] This pitiful evil we do not see,--how even now the young folk in the midst of Christendom languish and perish miserably for want of the Gospel, in which we ought to be giving them constant instruction and training.

[Sidenote: Restriction of Number of Students]

Moreover, if the universities were diligent in the study of Holy Scripture, we should not send everybody there, as we do when all we ask is numbers, and everyone wishes to have a doctor's degree; but we should send only the best qualified students, who have previously been well trained in the lower schools. A prince or city council ought to see to this, and permit only the well qualified to be sent. But where the Holy Scriptures do not rule, there I advise no one to send his son. Everyone not unceasingly busy with the Word of God must become corrupt; that is why the people who are in the universities and who are trained there are the kind of people they are. For this no one is to blame but the pope, the bishops and the prelates, who are charged with the training of the youth. For the universities ought to turn out only men who are experts in the Holy Scriptures, who can become bishops and priests, leaders in the fight against heretics, the devil and all the world. But where do you find this true? I greatly fear that the universities are wide gates of hell, if they do not diligently teach the Holy Scriptures and impress them on the youth.

[Sidenote: The Pope and the Holy Roman Empire]

26.[255] I know full well that the Roman crowd will make pretensions and great boasts about how the pope took the Holy Roman Empire from the Greek Emperor[256] and bestowed it on the Germans, for which honor and benevolence he is said to have justly deserved and obtained from the Germans submission and thanks and all good things. For this reason they will, perhaps, undertake to throw to the winds all attempts to reform them, and will not allow us to think about anything but the bestowal of the Roman Empire. For this cause they have heretofore persecuted and oppressed many a worthy emperor so arbitrarily and arrogantly that it is pity to tell of it, and with the same adroitness they have made themselves overlords of all the temporal powers and authorities, contrary to the Holy Gospel. Of this too I must therefore speak.

There is no doubt that the true Roman Empire, which the writings of the prophets foretold in Numbers xxiv [Num. 24:24] and in Daniel [Dan. 2:39 ff.], has long since been overthrown and brought to an end, as Balaam clearly prophesied in Numbers xxiv, when he said: "The Romans shall come and overthrow the Jews; and afterwards they also shall be destroyed." That was brought to pass by the Goths[257], but especially when the Turkish Empire arose almost a thousand years ago[258]; then in time Asia and Africa fell away, and finally Venice arose, and there remained to Rome nothing of its former power.

Now when the pope could not subdue to his arrogant will the Greeks and the emperor at Constantinople, who was hereditary Roman Emperor, he bethought himself of this device, viz., to rob him of his empire and his title and turn it over to the Germans, who were at that time warlike and of good repute, so as to bring the power of the Roman Empire under his control and give it away as a fief. So too it turned out. It was taken away from the emperor at Constantinople and its name and title were given to us Germans. Thereby we became the servants of the pope, and there is now a second Roman Empire, which the pope has built upon the Germans; for the other, which was first, has long since fallen, as I have said.

So then the Roman See has its will. It has taken possession of Rome, driven out the German Emperor and bound him with oaths not to dwell at Rome. He is to be Roman Emperor, and yet he is not to have possession of Rome, and besides he is at all times to be dependent upon the caprice of the pope and his followers, so that we have the name and they have the land and cities. They have always abused our simplicity to serve their own arrogance and tyranny, and they call us mad Germans, who let ourselves be made apes and fools at their bidding.

Ah well! For God the Lord it is a small thing to toss empires and principalities to and fro! He is so generous with them that once in a while He gives a kingdom to a knave and takes it from a good man, sometimes by the treachery of wicked, faithless men and sometimes by heredity, as we read of the Kingdoms of Persia and Greece, and of almost all kingdoms; and Daniel ii and iv says: "He Who ruleth over all things dwelleth in heaven, and it is He alone Who changeth kingdoms, tosseth them to and fro, and maketh them." [Dan. 2:21; 4:14] Since, therefore, no one can think it a great thing to have a kingdom given him, especially if he is a Christian, we Germans too cannot be puffed up because a new Roman Empire is bestowed on us; for in His eyes it is a trifling gift, which He often gives to the most unworthy, as Daniel iv says: "All who dwell upon the earth are in His eyes as nothing, and He has power in all the kingdoms of men, to give them to whomsoever He will." [Dan. 4:35]

But although the pope unjustly and by violence robbed the true emperor of his Roman Empire, or of its name, and gave it to us Germans, it is certain, nevertheless, that in this matter God has used the pope's wickedness to give such an empire to the German nation, and after the all of the first Roman Empire, to set up another, which still exists. And although we gave no occasion to this wickedness of the popes, and did not understand their false aims and purposes, nevertheless, through this papal trickery and roguery, we have already paid too dearly for our empire, with incalculable bloodshed, with the suppression of our liberty, with the risk and robbery of all our goods, especially the goods of the churches and canonries, and with the suffering of unspeakable deception and insult. We have the name of the empire, but the pope has our wealth, honor, body, life, soul and all that is ours. So we Germans are to be cheated in the trade[259]. What the popes sought was to be emperors, and since they could not manage that, they at least succeeded in setting themselves over the emperors.

Because then, the empire has been given us without our fault, by the providence of God and the plotting of evil men, I would not advise that we give it up, but rather that we rule it wisely and in the fear of God, so long as it shall please Him. For, as has been said, it matters not to Him where an empire comes from; it is His will that it shall be ruled. Though the popes took it dishonestly from others, nevertheless we did not get it dishonestly. It is given us by the will of God through evil-minded men; and we have more regard for God's will than for the treacherous purpose of the popes, who, in bestowing it, wished to be emperors themselves, and more than emperors, and only to fool and mock us with the name. The King of Babylon also seized his empire by robbery and force; yet it was God's will that it should be ruled by the holy princes, Daniel, Hananiah, Azariah and Mishael [Dan 3:30; 5:29]; much more then is it His will that this empire be ruled by the Christian princes of Germany, regardless whether the pope stole it, or got it by robbery, or made it anew. It is all God's ordering, which came to pass before we knew of it.

Therefore the pope and his followers may not boast that they have done a great favor to the German nation by the bestowal of this Roman Empire. _First_, because they did not mean it for our good, but were rather taking advantage of our simplicity in order to strengthen themselves in their proud designs against the Roman Emperor at Constantinople, from whom the pope godlessly and lawlessly took this empire, a thing which he had no right to do. _Second_, because the pope's intention was not to give us the empire, but to get it for himself, that he might bring all our power, our freedom, wealth, body and soul into subjection to himself and use us (if God had not prevented) to subdue all the world. He clearly says so himself in his decretals, and he has attempted it, by many evil wiles, with a number of the German emperors. How beautifully we Germans have been taught our German! When we thought to be lords, we became slaves of the most deceitful tyrants; we have the name, title and insignia of the empire, but the pope has its treasures, its authority, its law and its liberty. So the pope gobbles the kernel, and we play with the empty hulls.

Now may God, Who by the wiles of tyrants has tossed this empire into our lap, and charged us with the ruling of it, help us to live up to the name, title and insignia, to rescue our liberty, and to show the Romans, for once, what it is that we, through them, have received from God! They boast that they have bestowed on us an empire. So be it, then! If it is true, then let the pope give us Rome and everything else which he has got from the empire; let him free our land from his intolerable taxing and robbing, and give us back our liberty, authority, wealth, honor, body and soul; let the empire be what an empire should be, and let his words and pretensions be fulfilled!

If he will not do that, then why all this shamming, these false and lying words and juggler's tricks? Is he not satisfied with having so rudely led this noble nation by the nose these many hundred years without ceasing? It does not follow that the pope must be above an emperor because he makes or crowns him. The prophet Samuel at God's command anointed and crowned Kings Saul and David, and yet he was their subject; and the prophet Nathan anointed King Solomon, but was not set over him on that account [1 Sam. 16:1; 16:13]; Elisha too had one of his servants anoint Jehu King of Israel [1 Kings 1:38 f.], and yet they remained obedient and subject to him [2 Kings 9:1 ff.]. Except in the case of the pope, it has never happened in all the world's history that he who consecrated or crowned the king was over the king. He lets himself be crowned pope by three cardinals, who are under him, and he is nevertheless their superior. Why then should he, contrary to the example which he himself sets, and contrary to the custom and teaching of all the world and of the Scriptures, exalt himself above temporal authorities, or the empire, simply because he crowns or consecrates the emperor? It is enough that he should be the emperor's superior in divine things, to wit, in preaching, teaching and administering the sacraments, in which things, indeed, any bishop or priest is over every other man, as St. Ambrose in his See was over the emperor Theodosius[260], and the prophet Nathan over David, and Samuel over Saul. Therefore, let the German Emperor be really and truly emperor, and let not his authority or his sword be put down by this blind pretension of papal hypocrites, as though they were to be excepted from his dominion and themselves direct the temporal sword in all things.]

[Sidenote: Economic and Social Reforms]

27. Enough has now been said about the failings of the clergy, though more of them can and will be found if these are properly considered. We would say something too about the failings of the temporal estate.

[Sidenote: Luxury in Dress]

1. There is great need of a general law and decree of the German nation against the extravagance and excess in dress, by which so many nobles and rich men are impoverished[251]. God has given to us, as to other lands, enough wool, hair, lax and every thing else which properly serves or the seemly and honorable dress of every rank, so that we do not need to spend and waste such enormous sums or silk and velvet and golden ornaments and other foreign wares. I believe that even if the pope had not robbed us Germans with his intolerable exactions, we should still have our hands more than full with these domestic robbers, the silk and velvet merchants[262]. In the matter of clothes, as we see, everybody wants to be equal to everybody else, and pride and envy are aroused and increased among us, as we deserve. All this and much more misery would be avoided if our curiosity would only let us be thankful, and be satisfied with the goods which God has given us.

[Sidenote: The Spice Trade]

2. In like manner it is also necessary to restrict the spice-traffic[263] which is another of the great ships in which money is carried out of German lands. There grows among us, by God's grace, more to eat and drink than in any other land, and just as choice and good. Perhaps the proposals that I make may seem foolish and impossible and give the impression that I want to suppress the greatest of all trades, that of commerce; but I am doing what I can. I reforms are not generally introduced, then let every one who is willing reform himself. I do not see that many good customs have ever come to a land through commerce, and in ancient times God made His people of Israel dwell away from the sea on this account, and did not let them engage much in commerce.

[Sidenote: The Traffic in Annuities]

3. But the greatest misfortune of the German nation is certainly the traffic in annuities[264]. If that did not exist many a man would have to leave unbought his silks, velvets, golden ties ornaments, spices and ornaments of every sort. It has not existed much over a hundred years, and has already brought almost all princes, cities, endowed institutions, nobles and their heirs to poverty, misery and ruin; if it shall continue or another hundred years Germany cannot possibly have a _pfennig_ left and we shall certainly have to devour one another. The devil invented the practice, and the pope, by confirming it[265], has injured the whole world. Therefore I ask and pray that everyone open his eyes to see the ruin of himself, his children and his heirs, which not only stands before the door, but already haunts the house, and that emperor, princes, lords and cities do their part that this trade be condemned as speedily as possible, and henceforth prevented, regardless whether or not the pope, with all his law and unlaw, is opposed to it, and whether or not benefices or church foundations are based upon it. It is better that there should be in a city one living based on an honest freehold or revenue, than a hundred based on an annuity; indeed a living based on an annuity is worse and more grievous than twenty based on freeholds. In truth this traffic in rents must be a sign and symbol that the world, for its grievous sins, has been sold to the devil, so that both temporal and spiritual possessions must fail us, and yet we do not notice it at all.

Here, too, we must put a bit in the mouth of the Fuggers and similar corporations[266]. How is it possible that in the lifetime of a single man such great possessions, worthy of a king, can be piled up, and yet everything be done legally and according to God's will? I am not a mathematician, but I do not understand how a man with a hundred gulden can make a profit of twenty gulden in one year, nay, how with one gulden he can make another[267]; and that, too, by another way than agriculture or cattle-raising, in which increase of wealth depends not on human wits, but on God's blessing. I commend this to the men of affairs. I am a theologian, and find nothing to blame in it except its evil and offending appearance, of which St. Paul says, "Avoid every appearance or show of evil." [1 Thess. 5:22] This I know well, that it would be much more pleasing to God if we increased agriculture and diminished commerce, and that they do much better who, according to the Scriptures, till the soil and seek their living from it, as was said to us and to all men in Adam, "Accursed be the earth when thou laborest therein, it shall bear thee thistles and thorns, and in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat thy bread." [Gen. 3:17 ff.] There is still much land lying untilled.

[Sidenote: Excesses in Eating and Drinking]

4. Next comes the abuse of eating and drinking[268] which gives us Germans a bad reputation in foreign lands, as though it were our special vice. Preaching cannot stop it; it has become too common, and has got too firmly the upper hand. The waste of money which it causes would be a small thing, were it not followed by other sins,--murder, adultery, stealing, irreverence and all the vices. The temporal sword can do something to prevent it; or else it will be as Christ says: "The last day shall come like a secret snare, when they shall be eating and drinking, marrying and wooing, building and planting, buying and selling." [Luke 21:34 f.] It is so much like that now that I verily believe the judgment day is at the door, though men are thinking least of all about it.

[Sidenote: The Social Evil]

5. Finally, is it not a pitiful thing that we Christians should maintain among us open and common houses of prostitution, though all of us are baptised unto chastity? I know very well what some say to this, to wit, that it is not the custom of any one people, that it is hard to break up, that it is better that there should be such houses than that married women, or maidens, or those of more honorable estate should be outraged. But should not the temporal, Christian government consider that in this heathen way the evil is not to be controlled? I the people of Israel could exist without such an abomination, why could not Christian people do as much? Nay, how do many cities, towns and villages exist without such houses? Why should not great cities also exist without them?

In this, and in the other matters above mentioned, I have tried to point out how many good works the temporal government could do, and what should be the duty of every government, to the end that every one may learn what an awful responsibility it is to rule, and to have high station. What good would it do that an overlord were in his own life as holy as St. Peter, if he have not the purpose diligently to help his subjects in these matters? His very authority will condemn him! For it is the duty of the authorities to seek the highest good of their subjects. But if the authorities were to consider how the young people might be brought together in marriage, the hope of entering the married state would greatly help every one to endure and to resist temptation.

[Sidenote: Celibacy and Its Abuses]

But now every man is drawn to the priesthood or the monastic life, and among them, I fear, there is not one in a hundred who has any other reason than that he seeks a living, and doubts that he will ever be able to support himself in the estate of matrimony. Therefore they live wildly enough beforehand, and wish, as they say, to "wear out their lust," but rather wear it in[269], as experience shows. I find the proverb true, "Despair makes most of the monks and priests"[270]; and so things are as we see them.

My faithful counsel is that, in order to avoid many sins which have become very common, neither boy nor maid should take the vow of chastity, or of the "spiritual life," before the age of thirty years[271]. It is, as St. Paul says, a peculiar gift [1 Cor. 7]. Therefore let him whom God does not constrain, put off becoming a cleric and taking the vows. Nay, I will go farther and say, If you trust God so little that you are not willing to support yourself as a married man, and wish to become a cleric only because of this distrust, then for the sake of your own soul, I beg of you not to become a cleric, but rather a farmer, or whatever else you please. For if to obtain your temporal support you must have one measure of trust in God, you must have ten measures of trust to continue in the life of a cleric. If you do not trust God to support you in the world, how will you trust him to support you in the Church? Alas, unbelief and distrust spoil everything and lead us into all misery, as we see in every estate of life!

Much could be said of this miserable condition. The young people have no one to care for them. They all do as they please, and the government is of as much use to them as if it did not exist; and yet this should be the chief concern of pope, bishops, lords and councils. They wish to rule far and wide, and yet to help no one. O, what a rare bird will a lord and ruler be in heaven just on this account, even though he build a hundred churches or God and raise up all the dead!

[Sidenote: Conclusion]

[Let this suffice for this time! Of what the temporal powers and the nobility ought to do, I think I have said enough in the little book. _On Good Works_[272]. There is room for improvement in their lives and in their rule, and yet the abuses of the temporal power are not to be compared with those of the spiritual power, as I have there shown.][273]

I think too that I have pitched my song in a high key, have made many propositions which will be thought impossible and have attacked many things too sharply. But what am I to do? I am in duty bound to speak. If I were able, these are the things I should wish to do. I prefer the wrath of the world to the wrath of God; they can do no more than take my life[274]. Many times heretofore I have made overtures of peace to my opponents; but as I now see, God has through them compelled me to open my mouth wider and wider and give them enough to say, bark, shout and write, since they have nothing else to do. Ah well, I know another little song about Rome and about them if I their ears itch for it I will sing them that song too, and pitch the notes to the top of the scale. Understandest thou, dear Rome, what I mean?

I have many times offered my writings for investigation and judgment, but it has been of no use. To be sure, I know that if my cause is just, it must be condemned on earth, and approved only by Christ in heaven; or all the Scriptures show that the cause of Christians and of Christendom must be judged by God alone. Such a cause has never yet been approved by men on earth, but the opposition has always been too great and strong. It is my greatest care and fear that my cause may remain uncondemned, by which I should know or certain that it was not yet pleasing to God.

Therefore let them boldly go to work,--pope, bishop, priest, monk and scholar! They are the right people to persecute the truth, as they have ever done.

God give us all a Christian mind, and especially to the Christian nobility of the German nation a right spiritual courage to do the best that can be done for the poor Church. Amen.

Wittenberg, 1520.

FOOTNOTES

[1] _Unserm furnchmen nach_. See Introduction, p. 57.

[2] An ironical comparison of the monks' cowl and tonsure with the headgear of the jester.

[3] i. e., Which one turns out to be the real fool.

[4] The proverb ran, _Monachus semper praesens_, "a monk is always there." See Wander, _Deutsches Sprichworterlexicon_, under Monch, No. 130.

[5] Evidently a reference to the _Gravamina of the German Nation_; see Gebhardt, _Die Grav. der Deutschen Nation_, Breslau, 1895.

[6] Councils of the Church, especially those of Constance (1414-18), and of Basel (1431-39).

[7] Charles V. was elected Emperor in 1519, when but twenty years of age. Hutten expresses his "hopes of good" from Charles in _Vadiscus_ (Bocking, IV, 156).

[8] Frederick Barbarossa (1152-1100).

[9] Frederick II (1212-1250), grandson of Barbarossa and last of the great Hohenstaufen Emperors. He died under excommunication.

[10] Pope Julius II (1503-1513). Notorious among the popes for his unscrupulous pursuit of political power, he was continually involved in war with one and another of the European powers over the possession of territories in Italy.

[11] Luther's recollection of the figures was faulty.

[12] The term "Romanist" is applied by Luther to the champions of the extreme form of papal supremacy. C. Vol. I, p. 343 f.

[13] i. e., The three rods for the punishment of an evil pope.

[14] _Spuknisse_, literally "ghosts." The gist of the sentence is, "the Romanists have frightened the world with ghost-stories."

[15] _Olegotze_--"an image anointed with holy oil to make it sacred"; in modern German, "a blockhead."

[16] Lay-baptism in view of imminent death is a practice as old as the Christian Church. The right of the laity to administer baptism in such cases was expressly recognized by the Council of Elvira, in the year 306, and the decree of that Council became a part of the law of the Church. The right of the laity to give absolution in such cases rests on the principle that in the absence of the appointed official of the Church any Christian can do for any other Christian the things that are absolutely necessary or salvation, for "necessity knows no law." Cf. Vol. I, p. 30, note 2.

[17] The canon law, called by Luther throughout this treatise and elsewhere, the "spiritual law," is a general name for the decrees of councils ("canons" in the strict sense) and decisions of the popes ("decretals," "constitutions," etc.), promulgated by authority of the popes, and collected in the so-called _Corpus juris canonici_. It comprised the whole body of Church law, and embodied in legal forms the mediaeval theory of papal absolutism, which accounts for the bitterness with which Luther speaks of it, especially in this treatise. The Corpus includes the following collections of canons and decretals: The _Decretum of Gratian_ (1142), the _Liber Extra_ (1234), the _Liber Sextus_ (1298), the _Constitutiones Clementinae_ (1318 or 1317), and the two books of _Extravagantes_ ,--the _Extravagantes of John XXII_, and the _Extravagantes communes_. The last pope whose decrees are included is Sixtus IV (died 1484). See _Catholic Encyclop._,IV, pp. 391 ff.

[18] Augustine, the master-theologian of the Ancient Church, bishop of Hippo in Africa from 395-430.

[19] Ambrose, bishop of Milan from 374-397, had not yet been baptised at the time of his election to the episcopate, which was forced upon him by the unanimous voice of the people of the city.

[20] Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, 247-258, is said to have consented to accept the office only when the congregation surrounded his house and besought him to yield to their entreaties.

[21] _Was ausz der Tauff krochen ist_.

[22] The _character indelebilis_, or "indelible mark," received authoritative statement in the bull _Exultate Deo_ (1439). Eugenius IV, summing up the Decrees of the Council of Florence, says: "Among these sacraments there are three--baptism, confirmation, and orders--which indelibly impress upon the soul a character, i. e., a certain spiritual mark which distinguishes them from the rest" (Mirbt, _Quellen_, 2d ed., No. 150). The Council of Trent in its XXIII. Session, July 15, 1563 (Mirbt, No. 312), defined the correct Roman teaching as follows: "Since in the sacrament of orders, as in baptism and confirmation, a character is impressed which cannot be destroyed or taken away, the Holy Synod justly condemns the opinion of those who assert that the priests of the New Testament have only temporary power, and that those once rightly ordained can again be made laymen, if they do not exercise the ministry of the Word of God."

[23] i. e., They are all Christians, among whom there can be no essential difference.

[24] The sharp distinction which the Roman Church drew between clergy and laity found practical application in the contention that the clergy should be exempt from the jurisdiction of the civil courts, This is the so-called _privilegium fori_, "benefit of clergy." It was further claimed that the government of the clergy and the administration of Church property must be entirely in the hands of the Church authorities, and that no lay rulers might either make or enforce laws which in any way affected the Church. See Lea, _Studies in Church History_, 169-219 and _Prot. Realencyk._, VI, 594.

[25] It was the contention of the Church authorities that priests charged with infraction of the laws of the state should first be tried in the ecclesiastical courts. If found guilty, they were degraded from the priesthood and handed over to the state authorities for punishment. Formula for degradation in the canon law, C. 2 in VI, _de poen._ (V, 9). See _Prot. Realencyk._, VI, 589.

[26] The interdict is the prohibition of the administration of the sacraments and of the other rites of the Church within the territory upon which the interdict is laid (_Realencyk._, IX, 208 f.). Its use was not uncommon in the Middle Ages, and during the time that the power of the popes was at its height it proved an effective means of bringing refractory rulers to terms. A famous instance is the interdict laid upon the Kingdom of England by Innocent III in 1208. Interdicts of more limited local extent were quite frequent. The use of the interdict as punishment for trifling infractions of church law was a subject of complaint at the diets of Worms (1521) and Nurnberg (1524). See A. Wrede, _Deutsche Reichstagsakten unter Kaiser Karl V._, II, pp. 685 f, III, 665.

[27] The statement of which Luther here complains is found in the Decretum of Gratian, _Dist. XL, c. 6, Si papa_. In his _Epitome_ (see Introduction, p. 58), Prierias had quoted this canon against Luther, as follows: "_A Pontifex indubitatus_ (i. e., a pope who is not accused of heresy or schism) cannot lawfully be deposed or judged either by a council or by the whole world, even if he is so scandalous as to lead people with him by crowds into the possession of hell." Luther's comment is: "Be astonished, O heaven; shudder, O earth! Behold, O Christians, what Rome is!" (_Weimar Ed._, VI, 336).

[28] Gregory the Great, pope 590-604. The passage is found in Migne, LXXVI, 203; LXXVII, 34.

[29] Antichrist, the incarnation of all that is hostile to Christ and His Kingdom. His appearance is prophesied in 2 Thess. 2:3-10 (the "man of sin, sitting in the temple of God"); 1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3, and Rev. 13. In the early Church the Fathers sometimes thought the prophecies fulfilled in the person of some especially pestilent heretic. Wyclif applied the term to the pope,--"the pope would seem to be not the vicar of Christ, but the vicar of Antichrist" (see Loos, _Dogmengeschichte_, 4th ed., p. 649). On Dec. 11, 1518, Luther wrote to Link: "You can see whether my suspicion is correct that at the Roman court the true Antichrist rules of whom St. Paul speaks"; and March 13, 1519, he wrote to Spalatin: "I am not sure but that the pope is Antichrist or his apostle." It was the worldly pretensions of the papacy which suggested the idea both to Wyclif and to Luther. By the year 1520 Luther had come to the definite conclusion that the pope was the "man of sin, sitting in the temple of God," and this opinion he never surrendered.

[30] See above, p. 65.

[31] According to academic usage, the holder of a Master's degree was authorised to expound the subject named in the degree.

[32] The doctrine of papal infallibility was never officially sanctioned in the Middle Ages, but the claim of infallibility was repeatedly made by the champions of the more extreme view of papal power, e. g., Augustinus Triumphus (died 1328) in his _Summa de potestate Papae_. In his attack upon the XCV Theses (_Dialogus de potestate Papae_, Dec, 1517) Prierias had asserted, "The supreme pontiff (i. e., the pope) cannot err when giving a decision as pontiff, i. e., speaking officially (_ex officio_), and doing what in him lies to learn the truth"; and again, "Whoever does not rest upon the teaching of the Roman Church and the supreme pontiff as an infallible rule of faith, from which even Holy Scripture draws its vigor and authority, is a heretic" (_Erl. Ed., op. var. arg._, I, 348). In the _Epitome_ he had said: "Even though the pope as an individual (_singularis persona_) can do wrong and hold a wrong faith, nevertheless as pope he cannot give a wrong decision" (_Weimar Ed._, VI, 337).

[33] Most recently in Prierias's _Epitome_. See preceding note.

[34] Luther had discussed the whole subject of the power of the keys in a Latin treatise, _Resolutio super propositione xiii. de potestate papae_, of 1519 (_Weimar Ed._, II, pp. 185 ff.), and in the German treatise _The Papacy at Rome_ (Vol. I, pp. 337-394).

[35] Pp. 66 ff.

[36] Another contention of Prierias. In 1518 (Nov. 25th) Luther had appealed his cause from the decision of the pope, which he foresaw would be adverse, to the decision of a council to be held at some future time. In the _Epitome_ Prierias discusses this appeal, asserting, among other things, that "when there is one undisputed pontiff, it belongs to him alone to call a council," and that "the decrees of councils neither bind nor hold (_nullum ligant vel astringunt_) unless they are confirmed by authority of the Roman pontiff" (_Weimar Ed._, VI, 335).

[37] i. e., A mere gathering of people.

[38] The Council of Nicaea, the first of the great councils of the Church, assembled in 325 for the settlement of the Arian controversy. Luther's statement that it was called by the Emperor Constantine, and that its decisions did not derive their validity from any papal confirmation, is historically correct. On Luther's statements about this council, see _Schaffer, _Luther als Kirchenhistoriker_, pp. 291 ff.; Kohler, Luther und die Kg., pp. 148 ff.

[39] Luther is here referring to the earlier so-called "ecumenical" councils.

[40] i. e., A council which will not be subject to the pope. Cf. _Erl. Ed._, xxvi, 112.

[41] i. e., They belong to the "spiritual estate"; see above, p. 69.

[42] _Der Haufe_, i. e. Christians considered _en masse_, without regard to official position in the Church.

[43] The papal crown dates from the XI Century; the triple crown, or tiara, from the beginning of the XIV. It was intended to signify that very superiority of the pope to the rulers of this world, of which Luther here complains. See _Realencyk._, X, 532, and literature there cited.

[44] A statement made by Augustinus Triumphus. See above, p. 73, note 5; and below, p. 246.

[45] The Cardinal della Rovere, afterwards Pope Julius II, held at one time the archbishopric of Avignon, the bishoprics of Bologna, Lausanne, Coutances, Viviers, Mende, Ostia and Velletri, and the abbacies of Nonantola and Grottaferrata. This is but one illustration of the scandalous pluralism practised by the cardinals. Cf. Lea, in _Cambridge Mod. Hist._, I, pp. 650 f.

[46] The complaint that the cardinals were provided with incomes by appointment to German benefices goes back to the Council of Constance (1415). C. Benrath, p. 87, note 17.

[47] The creation of new cardinals was a lucrative proceeding for the popes. On July 31, 1517, Leo X created thirty-one cardinals, and is said to have received from the new appointees about 300,000 ducats. Needless to say, the cardinals expected to make up the fees out of the income of their livings. See _Weimar Ed._, VI, 417, note I, and Pastor, _Gesch. der Papste_ IV, I, 137. C. Hutten's _Vadiscus_ (Bocking IV, 188).

[48] The famous Benedictine monastery just outside the city of Bamberg.

[49] The proposal made at Constance (see above, p. 82, note 2) was more generous. It suggested a salary of three to four thousand gulden.

[50] As early as the XIV Century both England and France had enacted laws prohibiting the very practices of which Luther here complains. It should be noted, however, that these laws were enforced only occasionally, and never very strictly.

[51] The papal court or curia consisted of all the officials of various sorts who were employed in the transaction of papal business, including those who were in immediate attendance upon the person of the pope, the so-called "papal family." On the number of such officials in the XVI Century, see Benrath, p. 88, note 18, where reference is made to 949 offices, exclusive of those which had to do with the administration of the city of Rome and of the States of the Church, and not including the members of the pope's "family." The _Gravamina_ of 1521 complain that the increase of these offices in recent years has added greatly to the financial burdens of the German Church (Wrede, _Deutsche Reichstagsakten unter Kaiser Karl V_, II, 675).

[52] On the annates, see Vol. I, p. 383, note 1. Early in their history, which dates from the beginning of the XIV. Century, the annates (_fructus medii temporis_) had become a fixed tax on all Church offices which fell vacant, and the complaint of extortion in their appraisement and collection was frequently raised. The Council of Constance restricted the obligation to bishoprics and abbacies, and such other benefices as had a yearly income of more than 24 gulden. The Council of Basel (1430) resolved to abolish them entirely, but the resolution of the Council was inoperative, and in the Concordat of Vienna (1448) the German nation agreed to abide by the decision of Constance. On the use of the term "annates" to include other payments to the curia, especially the _servitia_, see Catholic Encyclopedia, I, pp. 537 f.

Luther here alleges that the annates are not applied to their ostensible purpose, viz., the Crusade. This charge is repeated in the _Gravamina_ of the German Nation presented to the Diet of Worms (1521), with the additional allegation that the amount demanded in the way of annates has materially increased (A. Wrede, _Deutsche Reichstagsakten unter Kaiser Karl V._, II, pp. 675 f.). Similar complaints had been made at the Diet of Augsburg (1518), and were repeated at the Diet of Nurnberg (Wrede, _op. cit._, III, 660). Hutten calls the annates "a good at robbery" (_Ed._ Bocking, IV, 207). In England the annates were abolished by Act of Parliament (April 10, 1532)

[53] On the crusading-indulgences, see Vol. I, p. 18.

[54] i. e., As was done by the Council of Basel. See above, p. 84, note i.

[55] The canons are the clergy attached to a cathedral church who constituted the "chapter" of that cathedral, and to whom the right to elect the bishop normally belonged.

[56] This whole section deals with the abuse of the "right of reservation," i. e., the alleged right of the pope to appoint directly to vacant church positions. According to papal theory the right of appointment belonged absolutely to the pope, who graciously yielded the right to others under certain circumstances, reserving it to himself in other cases. The practice of reserving the appointments seems to date from the XII Century, and was originally an arbitrary exercise of papal authority. The rules which came to govern the reservation of appointments were regarded as limitations upon the authority of the pope, The rule of the "papal months," as it obtained in Germany in Luther's time, is found in the Concordat of Vienna of 1448 (Mirbt, _Quellen_, 2d ed., No. 261, pp. 167 f.). It provides that livings, with the exception of the higher dignities in the cathedrals and the chief posts in the monasteries, which all vacant in the months of February, April, June, August, October and December, shall be filled by the ordinary method--election, presentation, appointment by the bishop, etc.--but that vacancies occurring in the other months shall be filled by appointment of the pope.

[57] i. e., Church offices which carried with them certain rights of jurisdiction and gave their possessors a certain honorary precedence over other officials of the Church. See Meyer in _Realencyk._, IV, 658.

[58] Charles V, though elected emperor, was not crowned until October 22d.

[59] i. e., A living which has not hitherto been filled by papal appointment.

[60] This rule, like that of the "papal months," is found in the Concordat of Vienna. Luther's complaint is reiterated in the _Gravamina_ of 1521. (Wrede, _Deutsche Reichstagsakten_, etc., II, 673.)

[61] _Des Papstes und der Cardinale Gesinde_, i. e., all those who were counted members of the "family" or "household" (called _Dienstverwandte_ in the Gravamina of 1521) of the pope or of any of the cardinals. The term included those who were in immediate attendance upon the pope or the cardinals, and all those to whom, by virtue of any special connection with the curia, the name "papal servant" could be made to apply. These are the "courtesans" to whom Luther afterwards refers.

[62] In 1513 Albrecht of Brandenburg was made Archbishop of Magdeburg and later in the same year Administrator of Halberstadt; in 1514 he became Archbishop of Mainz as well. In 1518 he was made cardinal.

[63] This rule, like the others mentioned above, is contained in the Concordat of Vienna.

[64] Cf. The _Gravamina_ of 1521, No. 20, _Von anfechtung der cordissanen_ (see above, p. 88, note 3), where the name _cordissei_ is applied to the practice of attacking titles to benefices. (Wrede, _op. cit._, II, pp. 677 f.)

[65] The _pallium_ is a woolen shoulder-cape which is the emblem of the archbishop's office, and which must be secured from Rome. The bestowal of the _pallium_ by the pope is a very ancient custom. Gregory I (590-604) mentions it as _prisca consuetudo_ (_Dist._, C.c. 3). The canon law prescribes (_Dist. C. c. I_) that the archbishop-elect must secure the _pallium_ from Rome within three months of his election; otherwise he is forbidden to discharge any of the duties of his office. It is regarded as the necessary complement of his election and consecration, conferring the "plenitude of the pontifical office," and the name of archbishop. Luther's charge that it had to be purchased "with a great sum of money" is substantiated by similar complaints from the XII Century on, though the language of the canon law makes it evident that Luther's other contention is also correct, viz., that the _pallium_ was originally bestowed gratis. The sum required from the different archbishops varied with the wealth of their sees, and was a fixed sum in each case. The _Gravamina_ of 1521 complain that the price has been raised: "Although according to ancient ordinance the bishoprics of Mainz, Cologne, Salzburg, etc., were bound to pay or the _pallium_ about 10,000 gulden and no more, they can now scarcely get a _pallium_ from Rome for 20 or 24 thousand gulden." (Wrede, _op. cit._, II, 675.)

[66] The oath of allegiance to the pope was required before the pallium could be bestowed (_Dist. C, c._ I). The canon law describes this oath as one "of allegiance, obedience and unity" (X, I, 6, c. 4).

[67] See above, p. 86, note 2.

[68] cf. Luther to Spalatin, June 25, 1520 (Enders, II, 424; Smith, No. 271).

[69] i. e., The benefices are treated as though they were vacant.

[70] In the case of certain endowed benefices the right to nominate the incumbent was vested in individuals, usually of the nobility, and was hereditary in their family, This is the so-called _jus patronum_, or "right of patronage." The complaint that this right is disregarded is frequent in the _Gravamina_ of 1521.

[71] _Commendation_ was one of the practices by which the pope evaded the provision of the canon law which prescribed that the same man should not hold two livings with the cure of souls. The man who received an office in _commendam_ was not required to fulfil the duties attached to the position and when a living or an abbacy was granted in this way during the incumbency of another, the recipient received its entire income during a subsequent vacancy. The practice was most common in the case of abbacies. At the Diet of Worms (1521), Duke George of Saxony, an outspoken opponent of Luther, was as emphatic in his protest against this practice as Luther himself (Wrede, _op. cit._, II, 665); his protest was incorporated in the _Gravamina_ (_ibid._, 672), and reappears in the Appendix (_ibid._, 708).

[72] A monk who deserted his monastery was known as an "apostate."

[73] i. e., Offices which cannot be united in the hands of one man. See e. g., note 3, p. 91.

[74] A gloss is a note explanatory of a word or passage of doubtful meaning. The glosses are the earliest form of commentary on the Bible. The glosses of the canon law are the more or less authoritative comments of the teachers, and date from the time when the study of the canon law became a part of the theological curriculum. Their aim is chiefly to show how the law applies to practical cases which may arise. The so-called _glossa ordinaria_ had in Luther's time an authority almost equal to that of the _corpus juris_ itself. Cf. _Cath. Encyc._, VI, pp. 588 f.

[75] The thing which was bought was, of course, the dispensation, or permission to avail oneself of the gloss.

[76] _Dataria_ is the name for that department of the curia which had to deal with the granting of dispensations and the disposal of benefices. _Datarius_ is the title of the official who presided over this department.

[77] See above, p. 88, note 2. For a catalogue of papal appointments bestowed upon two "courtesans," Johannes Zink und Johannes Ingenwinkel, see Schulte, _Die Fugger in Rom_, I, pp. 282, 291 ff. Between 1513 and 1521, Zink received 56 appointments, and Ingenwinkel received, between 1496 and 1521, no fewer than 106.

[78] See above, p. 87, note 1.

[79] So Albrecht of Mainz bore the title of "administrator" of Halberstadt.

[80] The name of this practice was "regression" (_regressus_).

[81] The complaint was made at Worms (1521) that it was impossible for a German to secure a clear title to a benefice at Rome unless he applied for it in the name of an Italian, to whom he was obliged to pay a percentage of the income, a yearly pension, for a fixed sum of money for the use of his name (Wrede, _op. cit._, II, 712).

[82] _Simony_--the sin of Simon Magus (Acts 8:18-20)--the sin committed by the sale or the purchase of an office or position which is normally conferred by a ritual act of the Church. In the ancient and earlier mediaeval Church the use of money to secure preferment was held to invalidate the title of the guilty party to the position thus secured, and the acceptance of money for such a purpose was an offence punishable by deposition and degradation. The "heresy of Simon" was conceived to be the greatest of all heresies. The traffic in Church offices, which became a flagrant abuse from the time of John XXII (1316-1334), would have been regarded in earlier days as the most atrocious simony.

[83] The _reservatio mentalis_ or _in pectore_ is the natural consequence of the papal theory that the right of appointment to all Church offices of every grade belongs to the pope (see above, p. 86, note 3). According to the theory of the canonists (Lancelotti, _Institutiones juris canonici. Lib. I, Tit._ XXVII) this right is exercised either _per petitionem alterius_, i. e., by confirmation of the election, appointment, etc., of others, or _proprio motu_, i. e., "on his own motion." In ordinary cases the exercise of the appointing power was limited by rules, which though bitterly complained of (see above, pp. 86 ff, and notes), were generally understood, but the theory allowed any given case to be made an exception to the rules. Of such a case it was said that it was "reserved in the heart of the Pope," and the appointment was then made "on his own motion." Hutten says of this _reservatio in pectore_ that "it is an easy, agile and slippery thing, and bears no comparison to any other form of cheating" (Ed. Booking, IV, 215).

[84] For a similar instance quoted at Worms (1521), see Wrede, _op. cit._, II, 710.

[85] The three chief centers of foreign commerce in the XV and the early XVI Century. The annual fairs (_Jahrmarkt_), held at stated times in various cities, brought great numbers of merchants together from widely distant points, and were the times when the greater part of the wholesale business for the year was done.;

[86] Built by Innocent VIII (1454-1490).

[87] See above, p. 93, note 2.

[88] The Church law forbade the taking of interest on loans of money.

[89] During the Middle Ages all questions touching marriage and divorce, including, therefore, the question of the legitimacy of children, were governed by the laws of the Church, on the theory that marriage was a sacrament.

[90] i. e., By buying dispensations.

[91] The sums paid or special dispensations were so called.

[92] The toll which the "robber-barons" of the Rhine levied upon merchants passing through their domains.

[93] _Ja wend das blat umb szo indistu es_--The translators have adopted the interpretation of O. Clemen, _L's. Werke_, I, 383.

[94] The Fuggers of Augsburg were the greatest of the German capitalists in the XVI Century. They were international bankers, "the Rothschilds of the XVI Century." Their control of large capital enabled them to advance large sums of money to the territorial rulers, who were in a chronic state of need. In return for these favors they received monopolistic concessions by which their capital was further increased. The spiritual, as well as the temporal lords, availed themselves regularly of the services of this accommodating firm. They were the pope's financial representatives in Germany. On their connection with the indulgence against which Luther protested, see Vol. I, p. 21; on their relations with the papacy, see Schulte, _Die Fugger in Rom_, 2 Vols., Leipzig, 1904.

[95] Certificates entitling the holder to choose his own confessor and authorizing the confessor to absolve him from certain classes of "reserved" sins; referred to in the XCV Theses as _confessionalia_. Cf. Vol. I, p. 22.

[96] Certificates granting their possessor permission to eat milk, eggs, butter and cheese on fast days.

[97] The word is used here in the broad sense, and means dispensations of all sorts, including those just mentioned, relating to penance.

[98] Equivalent to "carrying coals to Newcastle."

[99] The _Campo di Fiore_, a Roman market-place, restored and adorned at great expense by Eugenius IV (1431-1447), and his successors.

[100] A part of the Vatican palace notorious as the banqueting-hall of Alexander VI (1402-1503), turned by Julius II (1503-1513) into a museum for the housing of his wonderful and expensive collection of ancient works of art. Luther is hinting that the indulgence money has been spent on these objects rather than on the maintenance of the Church. Cf. Clemen, I, 384, note 15.

[101] i. e., The offices and positions in Rome which were for sale. See Benrath, p. 88, note 18; p. 95, note 36.

[102] See above, p. 84, note 1.

[103] The passage is chapter 31, _Filiis vel nepotibus_. It provides that in case the income of endowments bequeathed to the Church is misused, and appeals to the bishop and archbishop fail to correct the misuse, the heirs of the testator may appeal to the royal courts. Luther wishes this principle applied to the annates.

[104] See above, pp. 91 f.

[105] See above, p. 91.

[106] See above, p. 94.

[107] i. e.. Promises to bestow on certain persons livings not yet vacant. Complaint of the evils arising out of the practice was continually heard from the year 1416. For the complaints made at Worms (1521), see Wrede, _op. cit._, II, 710.

[108] See above, pp. 86 f.

[109] See above, pp. 92 f.

[110] See above, p. 93.

[111] See above, p. 89.

[112] Rules for the transaction of papal business, including such matters as appointments and the like. At Worms (1521) the Estates complain that these rules are made to the advantage of the "courtesans" and the disadvantage of the Germans. (Wrede, _op. cit._, II, pp. 675 f.)

[113] The local Church authorities, here equivalent to "the bishops." On use of term see _Realencyk._, XIV, 424.

[114] The sign of the episcopal office; as regards archbishops, the _pallium_; see above, p. 8q, and note.

[115] See above, p. 87, note 1.

[116] The first of the ecumenical councils (A. D. 325). The decree to which Luther here refers is canon IV of that Council. Cf. Kohler, _L. und die Kg._, pp. 139 ff.

[117] The primate is the ranking archbishop of a country.

[118] "Exemption" was the practice by which monastic houses were withdrawn from the jurisdiction of the bishops and made directly subject to the pope. The practice seems to have originated in the X Century with the famous monastery of Cluny (918), but it was almost universal in the case of the houses of the mendicant orders. The bishops made it a constant subject of complaint, and the Lateran Council (Dec. 19, 1516) passed a decree abolishing all monastic exemptions, though the decree does not seem to have been effective. See _Creighton_, History of the Papacy, V, 266.

[119] i. e., Antichrist. See above, p. 73, note 2.

[120] The papal interference in the conduct of the local Church courts was as flagrant as in the appointments, of which Luther has heretofore spoken. At Worms (1521) it was complained that cases were cited to Rome as a court of first instance, and the demand was made that a regular course of appeals should be re-established. Wrede, _op. cit._, II, 672, 718.

[121] The reference is Canon V of the Council of Sardica (A. D. 343), incorporated in the canon law as a canon of Nicaea (_Pt. II, qu. 6, c. 5_). See Kohler, _L. und die Kg._, 151.

[122] i. e., Appealed to Rome for decision. This is the subject of the first of the 102 _Gravamina_ of 1521 (Wrede, _op. cit._, II, 672).

[123] The judges in the bishops' courts. The complaint is that they interfere with the administration of justice by citing into their courts cases which properly belong in the lay courts, and enforce their verdicts (usually fines) by means of ecclesiastical censures. The charges against these courts are specified in the _Gravamina_ of 1521, Nos. 73-100 (Wrede, _op. cit._, II, 694-703).

[124] The _signatura gratiae_ and the _signatura justitiae_ were the bureaus through which the pope regulated those matters of administration which belonged to his own special prerogative.

[125] See above, pp. 88 f.

[126] See above, p. 88, note 3.

[127] See above, p. 94.

[128] i. e., The cases in which a priest was forbidden to give absolution. The reference here is to cases in which only the pope could absolve. Cf. _The XCV Theses_, Vol. I, p. 30.

[129] A papal bull published annually at Rome on Holy Thursday. It was directed against heretics, but to the condemnation of the heretics and their heresies was added a list of offences which could receive absolution only from the pope, or by his authorisation. In 1522 Luther translated this bull into German as a New Year present for the pope (_Weimar Ed._, VIII, 691). On Luther's earlier utterances concerning it, see Kohler, _L. u. die Kg._, pp. 59 2.

[130] The breve is a papal decree, of equal authority with the bull, but differing from it in form, and usually dealing with matters of smaller importance.

[131] Cf. Luther's earlier statement to the same effect in _A Discussion of Confession_, Vol. I, pp. 96 f.

[132] See above, p. 99.

[133] The Fifth Lateran Council (1512-17).

[134] See above, p. 90, note 1.

[135] In the canon law, _Decretal. Greg. lib. i, tit. 6, cap. 4_. The decretal forbids the bestowing of the pallium (see above, p. 89, note 3) on an archbishop elect, until he shall first have sworn allegiance to the Holy See.

[136] The induction of Church officials into office. The term was used particularly of the greater offices--those of bishop and abbot. These offices carried with them the enjoyment of certain incomes, and the possession of certain temporal powers. For this reason the right of investiture was a bone of contention between popes and emperors during the Middle Ages.

[137] Especially in the time of the Emperors Henry IV and V (1056-1125).

[138] The German Empire was regarded during the Middle Ages as a continuation of the Roman Empire. (See below, p. 153.) The right to crown an emperor was held to be the prerogative of the pope; until the pope bestowed the imperial crown, the emperor bore the title, "King of the Romans."

[139] In the canon law, _Decretal. Greg. lib. i, tit. 33, cap. 6._

[140] In the treatise, _Resolutio Lutheriana super propositione XIII, de potestate papae_ (1520). _Weimar Ed._, II, pp. 217 ff.; _Erl. Ed., op. var. arg._, Ill, pp. 293 ff.

[141] See p. 70.

[142] cf. _The Papacy at Rome_, Vol. I, pp. 357 f.

[143] A decree of Pope Clement V of 1313, incorporated subsequently in the canon law, _Clement, lib. ii, tit. 11, cap. 2._

[144] A forged document of the VIII Century, professing to come from the hand of the Emperor Constantine (306-337). The Donation conveyed to the pope title to the city of Rome (the capital had been removed to Constantinople), certain lands in Italy and "the islands of the sea." It was used by the popes of the Middle Ages to support their claims to worldly power, and its genuineness was not disputed. In 1440, however, Laurentius Valla, an Italian humanist, published a work in which he proved that the Donation was a forgery. This work was republished in Germany by Ulrich von Hutten in 1517, and seems to have come to Luther's attention in the early part of 1520, just before the composition of the present treatise (C. Enders II, 332). Luther subsequently (1537) issued an annotated translation of the text of the Donation (_Erl. Ed._, XXV, pp. 176 ff.).

[145] The papal claim to temporal sovereignty over this little kingdom, which comprised the island of Sicily and certain territories in Southern Italy, goes back to the XI Century, and was steadily asserted during the whole of the later Middle Ages. It was one of the questions at issue in the conflict between the Emperor Frederick II (1200-1260) and the popes, and played an important part in the history of the stormy times which followed the all of the Hohenstaufen. The popes claimed the right to award the kingdom to a ruler who would swear allegiance to the Holy See. The right to the kingdom was at this time contested between the royal houses of France and of Spain, of which latter house the Emperor Charles V was the head.

[146] The popes claimed temporal sovereignty over a strip of territory in Italy, beginning at Rome and stretching in a northeasterly direction across the peninsula to a point on the Adriatic south of Venice, including the cities and lands which Luther mentions. This formed the so-called "States of the Church." The attempt to consolidate the States and make the papal sovereignty effective involved Popes Alexander VI (1492-1503) and Julius II (1503-1513) in war and entangled them in political alliances with the European powers and petty Italian states. It resulted at last in actual war between Pope Clement VII and the Emperor Charles V (1526-1527). See Cambridge _Modern History_, I, 104-143; 219-252, and literature cited pp. 706-713; 727 f.

[147] A free translation of the Vulgate, _Nemo militans Deo_.

[148] The kissing of the pope's feet was a part of the "adoration" which he claimed as his right. See above, p. 108.

[149] The three paragraphs enclosed in brackets were added by Luther to the 2d edition; see Introduction, p. 59.

[150] The holy places of Rome had long been favorite objects of pilgrimage, and the practice had been zealously fostered by the popes through the institution of the "golden" or "jubilee years." Cf. Vol. I, p. 18, and below, p. 114.

[151] Cf. the Italian proverb, "God is everywhere except at Rome; there He has a vicar."

[152] Cf. Hutten's saying in _Vadiscus_: "Three things there are which those who go to Rome usually bring home with them, a bad conscience, a ruined stomach and an empty purse." (Ed. Bocking, IV, p. 169.)

[153] The "golden" or "jubilee years" were the years when special rewards were attached to worship at the shrines of Rome. The custom was instituted by Boniface VIII in 1300, and it was the intention to make every hundredth year a jubilee. In 1343 the interval between jubilees was fixed at fifty, in 1389 at thirty-three, in 1473 at twenty-five years. Cf. Vol. I, p. 18.

[154] Cf. the statements in the _Treatise on Baptism_ and the _Discussion of Confession_, Vol. I, pp. 68 ff., 98.

[155] The houses, or monasteries, of the mendicant or "begging" orders--the "friars." The members of these orders were sworn to support themselves on the alms of the faithful.

[156] The three leading mendicant orders were the Franciscan (the Minorites, or "little brothers"), founded by St. Francis of Assisi (died 1226), the Dominican (the "preaching brothers"), founded by St. Dominic (died 1221), and the Augustinian Hermits, to which Luther himself belonged, and which claimed foundation by St. Augustine (died 430).

[157] The interference of the friars in the duties of the parish clergy was a continual subject of complaint through this period.

[158] By the middle of the XV Century there were eight distinct sects within the Franciscan order alone (See _Realencyk._, VI, pp. 212 ff.), and Luther had himself taken part in a vigorous dispute between two parties in the Augustinian order.

[159] St. Agnes the Martyr, put to death in the beginning of the IV Century, one of the favorite saints of the Middle Ages. See Schafer, _L. als Kirchenhistoriker_, p. 235.

[160] One of the most famous of the German convents, founded in 936.

[161] The celebrated Church Father (died 420). The passages referred to are in _Migne_, XXII, 656, and XXVI, 562.

[162] Or "community" (_Gemeine_). Cf. _The Papacy at Rome_, Vol. I. p. 345, note 4. See also _Dass eine christl. Gemeine Recht und Macht habe_, etc. _Weimar Ed._ XI, pp. 408 ff.

[163] Or "congregation." See note 2.

[164] i. e.. At a time later than that of the Apostles.

[165] The first absolute prohibition of marriage to the clergy is contained in a decree of Pope Siricius and dated 385. See H. C. Lea, _History of Sacerdotal Celibacy_, 3d ed. (1907), I, pp. 59 ff.

[166] The priests of the Greek Church are required to marry, and the controversy over celibacy was involved in the division between the Greek and Roman Churches.

[167] Cf. Hutten's _Vadiscus_ (Bocking, IV, 199).

[168] i. e., Lie in Roman appointment.

[169] i. e., The ministry in the congregation. See above, p. 119.

[170] _Quantum ragilitas humana permittit_. A qualification of the vow.

[171] i. e., Celibacy. _Non promitto castitatem_.

[172] _Fragilitas humana non permittit caste vivere_.

[173] _Angelica fortitudo at coelestis virtus_.

[174] The court-jester was allowed unusual freedom of speech. See Prefatory Letter above, p. 62.

[175] The laws governing marriage were entirely the laws of the Church. The canon law prohibited marriage of blood-relatives as far as the seventh degree of consanguinity. In 1204 the prohibition was restricted to the first our degrees; lawful marriage within these degrees was possible only by dispensation, which was not all too difficult to secure, especially by those who were willing to pay for it (see above, p. 96). The relation of god-parents to god-children was also held to establish a "spiritual consanguinity" which might serve as a bar to lawful marriage. See Benrath, p. 103, note 74, and in the Babylonian Captivity, below, p. 265.

[176] This Luther actually did. When he burned the papal bull of excommunication (Dec. 10, 1520) a copy of the canon law was also given to the flames.

[177] i. e., The marriage of the clergy.

[178] On this sort of reserved cases see Discussion of Confession, Vol. I, pp. 96 ff.

[179] "Irregularity" is the condition of any member of a monastic order who has violated the prescriptions of the order and been deprived, in consequence, of the benefits enjoyed by those who live under the _regula_, viz., the rule of the order.

[180] The three kinds of masses are really but one thing, viz., masses for the dead, celebrated on certain fixed days in each year, in consideration of the enjoyment of certain incomes, received either out of bequeathed endowments or from the heirs of the supposed beneficiaries.

[181] i. e., Even when the mass is decently said.

[182] See above, p. 72, note 1.

[183] See above, p. 104.

[184] _Das geistliche Unrecht_.

[185] The _Treatise concerning the Ban_, above, pp. 33 ff.

[186] i. e., To those who teach and enforce the canon law.

[187] Luther means the saint's-days and minor religious holidays. See also the _Discourse on Good Works_, Vol. I, pp. 240 f.

[188] Or "congregation."

[189] i. e., City-council.

[190] _Kirchweihen_, i. e., the anniversary celebration of the consecration of a church. These days had become feast days for the parish, and were observed in anything but a spiritual fashion.

[191] i. e., Occasions for drunkenness, gain and gambling.

[192] See above, pp. 96 f.

[193] See above, p. 98, note 2.

[194] Letters entitling their holder to the benefits of the masses founded by the sodalities or confraternities. See Benrath, p. 103.

[195] See above, p. 98, and Vol. I, p. 22.

[196] The pun is untranslatable,--_Netz, Gesetz solt ich sagen_.

[197] What the pope sold was release from the "snares" and "nets," viz., dispensation.

[198] i. e., Even into the law of the church.

[199] _Die wilden Kapellen und Feldkirchen_, i. e., churches which are built in the country, where there are no congregations.

[200] A little town in East Prussia, where was displayed a sacramental wafer, said to have been miraculously preserved from a fire which destroyed the church in 1383. It was alleged that at certain times this wafer exuded drops of blood, reverenced as the blood of Christ, and many miracles were said to have been performed by it. Wilsnack early became a favorite resort for pilgrims. In 1412 the archbishop of Prague, at the instigation of John Hus, forbade the Bohemians to go there. Despite the protests of the Universities of Leipzig and Erfurt, Pope Eugenius IV in 1446 granted special indulgences for this pilgrimage, and the popularity of the shrine was undiminished until the time of the Reformation. Cf. _Realencyk_, xxi, pp. 347 ff.

[201] In Mecklenburg, where another relic of "the Holy Blood" was displayed after 1491. C. Benrath, pp. 104 f.

[202] The "Holy Coat of Trier" was believed by the credulous to be the seamless coat of Christ, which the soldiers did not rend. It was first exhibited in 1512, but was said to have been presented to the cathedral church of Trier by the Empress Helena, mother of Constantine the Great.

[203] Pilgrimage to the Grimmenthal in Meiningen began in 1499. An image of the Virgin, declared to have been miraculously created, was displayed there, and was alleged to work wonderful cures, especially of syphilis.

[204] The "Fair Virgin (_die schone Maria_) of Regensburg" was an image of the Virgin similar to that exhibited in the Grimmenthal. The shrine was opened March 25, 1519, and within a month 50,000 pilgrims are said to have worshipped there. (_Weimar Ed._, VI, 447, note 1). For another explanation see Benrath, p. 105.

[205] The pilgrimages were a source of large revenue, derived from the sale of medals which were worn as amulets, the fees for masses at the shrines, and the free-will offerings of the pilgrims. A large part of this revenue accrued to the bishop of the diocese, though the popes never overlooked the profits which the sale of indulgences or worship at these shrines could produce. In the _Gravamina_ of 1521 complaint is made that the bishops demand at least 25 to 33 per cent, of the offerings made at shrines of pilgrimage (Wrede, _op. cit._, II, 687).

[206] i. e., Every bishop.

[207] The possession of a saint gave a church a certain reputation and distinction, which was sufficiently coveted to make local Church authorities willing to pay roundly for the canonisation of a departed bishop or other local dignitary. Cf. Hutten's _Vadiscus_ (Bocking, IV, 232).

[208] Archbishop of Florence (died 1450). He was canonised, May 31, 1523, by Pope Hadrian VI. When Luther wrote this the process of canonisation had already begun.

[209] _Indulta_, i. e., grants of special privilege.

[210] "Lead," the leaden seal attached to the bull; "hide", the parchment on which it is written; "the string," the ribbon or silken cord from which the seals depend; "wax," the seal holding the cord to the parchment.

[211] Franciscans, Dominicans, Augustinians, Carmelites and Servites.

[212] _Botschaten_, interpreted by _Benrath_ (p. 105), Clemen (I, 406, note) and Weimar Ed. (VI, 406, note 1) as a reference to the _stationarii_. They were wandering beggars who, for an alms, would enroll the contributor in the list of beneficiaries of their patron saint, an alleged insurance against disease, accident, etc. They were classified according to the names of their patron saints, St. Anthony, St. Hubert, St. Valentine, etc. Protests against their operations were raised at the Diets of Worms (1521) and Nurnberg (1523). Included in these protests are the _terminarii_, i.e., the collectors of alms sent out by the mendicant orders. See Wrede, _op. cit._, II, 678, 688, III, 651, and Benrath, loc. cit.

[213] _Wallbruder_, the professional pilgrims who spent their lives in wandering from one place of pilgrimage to another and subsisted on the alms of the faithful.

[214] i. e., If the plan above proposed were adopted.

[215] See above, p. 129, note 1.

[216] See _Treatise on the New Testament_, Vol. I, pp. 308 ff.

[217] In the _Babylonian Captivity_ (below, pp. 291 f.) Luther definitely excludes penance from the number of sacraments, but see also p. 177.

[218] The sodalities ("fraternities," "confraternities"), still an important institution in the Roman Church, flourished especially in the XVI Century. They are associations for devotional purposes. The members of the sodalities are obligated to the recitation of certain prayers and the attendance upon certain masses at stipulated times. By virtue of membership in the association each member is believed to participate in the benefits accruing from these "good works" of all the members. In the case of most of the sodalities membership entitled the member to the enjoyment of certain indulgences. In 1520 Wittenberg boasted of 20 such fraternities, Cologne of 80, Hamburg of more than 100 (Realencyk., Ill, 437). In 1519 Degenhard Peffinger, of Wittenberg, was a member of 8 such fraternities in his home city, and of 27 in other places. For Luther's view of the sodalities see above, pp. 8, 26 ff. On the whole subject see Benrath, pp. 106 f.; Kolde in _Realencyk._, III, pp. 434 ff.; Lea, _Hist. of Conf. and Indulg_, III, pp. 470 ff.

[219] See above, p. 98, note 2.

[220] See above, p. 128, note 5.

[221] The excesses committed at the feasts of the religious societies were often a public scandal. See Lea, _Hist, of Conf. and Indulg_, III, pp. 437 ff.

[222] "Faculties" were extraordinary powers, usually for the granting of indulgences and of absolution in "reserved cases" (see above, p. 105, note 3). They were bestowed by the pope and could be revoked by him at any time. Sometimes they were given to local Church officials, but were usually held by the legates or commissaries sent from Rome. Complaints were made at the Diets of Worms (1520) and Nurnberg (1523) that the papal commissaries and legates interfered with the ordinary methods of ecclesiastical jurisdiction and appointment. See Weede, _op. cit._, II, 673, III, 653.

[223] Wladislav I forced the Sultan to sue for peace in 1443. At the instigation of the papal legate, Cardinal Caesarini, who represented that the treaty had not been approved by the pope, and absolved the king from the fulfilment of its conditions, he renewed the war in 1444. At the battle of Varna, Nov. 10th, 1444, the Hungarians were decisively defeated, and Wladislav and Caesarini both killed. See Creighton, _Hist. of the Papacy_, III, 67.

[224] John Hus and Jerome of Prague were convicted of heresy by the Council of Constance and burned at the stake, the former July 6th, 1415, the latter May 30th, 1416. Hus had come to Constance under the safe-conduct of the Emperor Sigismund. Luther is in error when he assumes that Jerome had a similar safe-conduct. In September, 1415, the Council passed a decree which asserted that "neither by natural, divine or human law was any promise to be observed to the prejudice of the catholic faith." On the whole matter of the safe-conduct and its violation see Lea, _Hist. of the Inquisition in the M.A._, II, pp. 453 ff.

[225] The League of Cambray, negotiated in 1508 for war against Venice. In 1510 Venice made terms with the pope and detached him from the alliance, and the result was war between the pope and the King of France. See Cambridge _Modern History_, I, pp. 130 ii., and literature there cited.

[226] i. e. The Hussites. After the martyrdom of Hus his followers maintained for a time a strong organisation in Bohemia, and resisted with arms all attempts to force them into conformity with the Roman Church. The Council of Basel succeeded (1434) in reconciling the more moderate party among the Bohemians (the Calixtines) by allowing the administration of the cup to the laity. The more extreme party, however, refused to subscribe the _Compactata_ of Basel. Though they soon ceased to be a actor in the political situation, they remained outside the Church and perpetuated the teachings of Hus in sectarian organisations. The most important of these, the so-called Bohemian Brethren, had extended into Poland and Prussia before Luther's time. See _Realencyk._, Ill, 465-467.

[227] See above, p. 140, note 1.

[228] See Kohler, _L. und die Kirchengesch._, 139, 151.

[229] The Archbishop of Prague was primate of the Church in Bohemia.

[230] The dioceses of these bishops were contiguous to that of the Archbishop of Prague.

[231] Bishop of Carthage, 240-258 A. D.

[232] _Lass man ihn ein gut jar ha ben_, literally, "Bid him good-day."

[233] One of the chief points of controversy between the Roman Church and the Hussites. The Roman Church administered to the laity only the bread, the Hussites used both elements. See below, pp. 178 f.

[234] Luther had not yet reached the conviction that the administration of the cup to the laity was a necessity, but see the argument in _the Babylonian Captivity_, below, pp. 178 ff.

[235] The Bohemian Brethren, who are here distinguished from the Hussites, Cf. _Realencyk._, Ill, 452, 49.

[236] St. Thomas Aquinas, the great Dominican theologian of the XIII. Century (1225-74), whose influence is still dominant in Roman theology.

[237] The view of the sacramental presence adopted by William of Occam. For Luther's own view at this time, see below, pp. 187 ff.

[238] i. e., If they did not believe in the real presence of the body and blood of Christ in the Lord's Supper.

[239] Places for training youths in Greek glory.

[240] The philosophy of Aristotle dominated the mediaeval universities. It not only provided the forms in which theological and religious truth came to expression, but it was the basis of all scientific study in every department. The man who did not know Aristotle was an ignoramus.

[241] Or, "I have read him." Luther's _lesen_ allows of either interpretation.

[242] Duns Scotus, died 1308. In the XV and XVI Centuries he was regarded as the rival of Thomas Aquinas for first place among the theological teachers of the Church.

[243] i. e., In the universities.

[244] See above, pp. 94 f.

[245] i. e., "The chamber of his heart." Boniface VIII (1294-1303) had decreed, _Romanus pontiex jura omnia in scrinio pectoris sui censetur habere_, "the Roman pontiff has all laws in the chamber of his heart." This decree was received into the canon law (_c._ I, de const. In VIto (I, 2)).

[246] _Doctores decretorum_, "Doctor of Decrees," an academic degree occasionally given to professors of Canon Law; _doctor scrinii papalis_, "Doctor of the Papal Heart."

[247] The introduction of Roman law into Germany, as the accepted law of the empire, had begun in the XII Century. With the decay of the feudal system and the increasing desire of the rulers to provide their government with some effective legal system, its application became more widespread, until by the end of the XV Century it was the accepted system of the empire. The attempt to apply this ancient law to conditions utterly different from those of the time when it was formulated, and the continual conflict between the Roman law, the feudal customs and the remnants of Germanic legal ideas, naturally gave rise to a state of affairs which Luther could justly speak of as "a wilderness."

[248] "Sentences" (_Sententiae, libri sententiarum_) was the title of the text-books in theology. Theological instruction was largely by way of comment on the most famous book of Sentences, that of Peter Lombard.

[249] Cf. Vol. I, p. 7.

[250] i. e., Doctors.

[251] The head-dress of the doctors.

[252] See above, p. 118, note 2.

[253] i. e., The monasteries and nunneries.

[254] i. e.. The name of Christian.

[255] This section did not appear in the first edition; see Introduction, p. 59.

[256] Charles the Great, King of the Franks, was crowned Roman Emperor by Pope Leo III in the year 800 A. D. He was a German, but regarded himself successor to the line of emperors who had ruled at Rome. The fiction was fostered by the popes, and the German kings, after receiving the papal coronation, were called Roman Emperors. From this came the name of the German Empire of the Middle Ages, "the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation." The popes of the later Middle Ages claimed that the bestowal of the imperial dignity lay in the power of the pope, and Pope Clement V (1313) even claimed that in the event of a vacancy the pope was the possessor of the imperial power (cf. above, p. 109). On the whole subject see Bryce, _Holy Roman Empire_, 2d ed. (1904), and literature there cited.

[257] The city of Rome was sacked by the Visigoths in 410.

[258] Luther is characteristically careless about his chronology. By the "Turkish Empire" he means the Mohammedan power.

[259] _So sol man die Deutschen teuschen und mit teuschen teuschenn_, i.e., made Germans (_Deutsche_) by cheating (_teuschen_) them.

[260] See _Cambridge Mediaeval History_, I (1911), pp. 244 f.

[261] Such a law as Luther here suggests was proposed to the Diet of Worms (1521). Text in Wrede, _Reischstagsakten_, II, 335-341.

[262] Cf. Luther's _Sermon von Kaubandlung und Wucher_, of 1524. (_Weim. Ed. XV_, pp. 293)

[263] Spices were one of the chief articles of foreign commerce in the XVI Century. The discovery of the cape-route to India had given the Portuguese a practical monopoly of this trade. A comparative statement of the cost of spices for a period of years was reported to the Diet of Nurnberg (1523). See Wrede, _op. cit._, III, 576.

[264] The _Zinskauf_ or _Rentenkauf_ was a means or evading the prohibition of usury. The buyer purchased an annuity, but the purchase price was not regarded as a loan, or it could not be recalled, and the annual payments could not therefore be called interest.

[265] The practice was legalised by the Lateran Council, 1512.

[266] The XVI Century was the hey-day of the great trading-companies, among which the Fuggers of Augsburg (see above, p. 97, note 5) easily took first place. The effort of these companies was directed toward securing monopolies in the staple articles of commerce, and their ability to finance large enterprises made it possible for them to gain practical control of the home markets. The sharp rise in the cost of living which took place on the first half of the XVI Century was laid at their door. The Diet of Cologne (1512) had passed a stringent law against monopolies which had, however, failed to suppress them. The Diet of Worms (1521) debated the subject (Wrede, _Reichstagsakten_ II, pp. 355 iff.) "in somewhat heated language" (_ibid._, 842), but failed to agree upon methods of suppression. The subject was discussed again at the Diet of Nurnberg (1523) and various remedies were proposed (ibid., Ill, 556-599).

[267] The profits of the trading-companies were enormous. The 9 per cent, annually of the Welser (Ehrenberg, _Zeitalter der Fugger_, I, 195), pales into insignificance beside the 1634 per cent, by which the fortune of the Fuggers grew in twenty-one years (Schulte, _Die Fugger in Rom_, I, 3). In 1511 a certain Bartholomew Rem invested 900 gulden in the Hochstetter company of Augsburg; by 1517 he claimed 33,000 gulden profit. The company was willing to settle at 26,000, and the resulting litigation caused the figures to become public (Wrede, _op. cit._, II, 842, note 4; III, pp. 574 ff.). On Luther's view of capitalism see Eck, _Introduction to the Sermon von Kaushandlungund Wucher_, in _Berl. Ed._, VII, 494-513.

[268] The Diets of Augsburg (1500) and Cologne (1512) had passed edicts against drunkenness. A committee of the Diet of Worms (1521) recommended that these earlier edicts be reaffirmed (Wrede, _op. cit._, II, pp. 343 f.), but the Diet adjourned without acting on the recommendation (ibid., 737)

[269] _Sie wollen ausbuben, so sich's vielmehr hineinbubt_.

[270] Cf. Muller, _Luther's theol. Quellen_, 1912, ch. I.

[271] In the _Confitendi Ratio_ Luther had set the age for men at eighteen to twenty, or women at fifteen to sixteen years. See Vol. I, p. 100.

[272] Translated in this edition, Vol. I, pp. 184 ff; see especially pp. 266 ff.

[273] These sentences did not appear in the first edition.

[274] See _Letter to Staupitz_, Vol. I, p. 43.

[275] This "little song" is the _Prelude on the Babylonian Captivity of the Church_. See below, pp. 170 ff.

A Prelude On The Babylonian Captivity Of The Church

A PRELUDE ON THE BABYLONIAN CAPTIVITY OF THE CHURCH

1520

INTRODUCTION

In the _Open Letter to the Christian Nobility_ Luther overthrew the three walls behind which Rome sat entrenched in her spiritual-temporal power; in the _Babylonian Captivity of the Church_ he enters and takes her central stronghold and sanctuary--the sacramental system by which she accompanied and controlled her members from the cradle to the grave; only then could he set forth, in language of almost lyrical rapture, the _Liberty of a Christian Man_.

The first of these three great reformatory treatises of the year 1520, as they have been called, closed with the words: "I know another little song about Rome, and if their ears itch to hear it I will sing it for them, and pitch it in a high key. Dost thou take my meaning, beloved Rome?" (See above, p. 164.) That some ears were itching to hear his little song was brought home to Luther especially by two writings, the one appearing in the summer of 1520, the other published in the previous autumn, but not reaching Wittenberg until some months later.

The former came from the pen of Augustin Alveld, that "celebrated Romanist of Leipzig," against whom Luther had culminated in _The Papacy at Rome_, promising further disclosures if Alveld "came again." (See Vol. I, p. 393.) He came again, this time with a _Tractatus de communione sub utraque specie_,--date of dedication, June 23, 1520. "The Leipzig ass has set up a fresh braying against me, full of blasphemies"; thus Luther describes it in a letter to Spalatin, July 22, 1520. (Enders, _Luther's Briewechsel_, II, no. 328.)

The other work was the anonymous tract of a "certain Italian friar of Cremona," who has only recently been identified as Isidore Isolani, a Dominican hailing from Milan, who taught theology in various Italian cities, wrote a number of controversial works and died in 1528. (See Fr. Lauchert, _Die italienischen literarischen Gegner Luthers_, Freiburg, 1912.) The title of his tract is, _Revocatio Martini Lutheri Augustiniani ad sanctam Sedem_; its date, Cremona, November 20, 1520, according to Enders, which is a mistake for November 22,1519. Its beginning and close, which have epistolary character, are printed in Enders, II, no. 366, and one paragraph from each is translated in Smith, _Luther's Correspondence_, I, no. 199.

These two treatises may be regarded as the immediate occasion for the writing of the _Babylonian Captivity_, which is, however, in no sense a direct reply to either of them. "I will not reply to Alveld," Luther writes on August 5 to Spalatin, "but he will be the occasion of my publishing something by which the vipers will be more irritated than ever." (Enders, II, no. 335; Smith, I, no. 283.) Indeed, he had promised some such work more than half a year before, in a letter to Spalatin of December 18, 1519: "There is no reason why you or any one else should expect from me a treatise on the other sacraments [besides baptism, the Lord's supper, and penance] until I am taught by what text I can prove that they are sacraments. I regard none of the others as a sacrament, for there is no sacrament save where there is a direct divine promise, exercising our faith. We can have no intercourse with God except by the word of Him promising, and by the faith of man receiving the promise. _At another time you shall hear more about their fables of the seven sacraments._" (Enders, II, no. 254; Smith, I, no. 206.)

Thus the _Prelude_ grows under his hand and assumes the form of an elaborate examination of the whole sacramental system of the Church. He makes short work of his two opponents, and after a few pages of delicious irony, of which Erasmus was suspected in some quarters of being the author, he turns his back on them and addresses himself to a positive and constructive treatment of his larger theme, lenient toward all non-essentials, but inexorable with respect to everything truly essential, that is, scriptural. The _Captivity_ thus represents the culmination of Luther's reformatory thinking on the theological side, as the _Nobility_ does on the national, and the _Liberty_ on the religious side. It sums up and carries forward all of his previous writings on the sacraments, just as, nine years later, the _Catechisms_ gathered up and moulded into classic form his writings on catechetical subjects. Passage after passage, often whole pages, from the _Resolutiones disp._, the _Treatise on Baptism_, the _Conitendi Ratio_, the _Treatise on the New Testament_, the _Treatise on the Blessed Sacrament_, are transferred bodily to this new and definitive work, and find in it the goal toward which they had been consciously or unconsciously tending. The reader is referred to a fine comparative study in Kostlin's _Theology of Luther_ (English trans.), I, 388-409. The title is a reminiscence from the _Resolutiones super prop, xiii._, of 1519,--"absit ista plus quam babylonica captivitas!" The sense in which the work is called a "prelude" is explained on page 176; the theologian in Luther could not deny the musician, he goes into battle singing and comes back with the stanza of a hymn upon his lips.

The _Captivity_ marks Luther's final and irreparable break with the Church of Rome, and it is not without a peculiar significance that in the same letter to Spalatin, of October 3d, in which he mentions the arrival in Leipzig of Eck armed with the papal bull, he announces the publication of his book on the _Babylonian Captivity of the Church_ for the following Saturday--October 6th. (Enders, II, no. 350; Smith, I, no. 303.)

While the _Nobility_, addressed to the German nation as such, was written in the language of the people, the _Captivity_, as becomes a theological treatise, is composed in Latin, just as later the Liberty, affecting the religious life of the individual, whether layman or theologian, is sent out in both German and Latin.

A translation into German appeared in the following year--the work of the Franciscan, Thomas Murner (on whom see Theod. v. Liebenau, _Der Franziskaner Thomas Murner_, Freiburg, 1913). Luther calls the Franciscan his "venomous foe" and accuses him of making the translation in order to bring him into disrepute. This charge Luther makes in his answer to Henry VIII's _Assertio septem sacramentorum adversus Mart. Lutherum_ (1521), the royal theologian's reply to the _Babylonian Captivity_, for which he won from the pope the proud title of "Defender of the Faith."

The translation which follows is based on the Latin text as given in Clemen's "student-edition"--_Luthers Werke in Auswahl_ (Bonn, 1912-3), I, 426-512, which reproduces, though by no means slavishly, the text of the _Weimar Edition_ (Vol. VI), which, together with the _Erlangen Edition_ (_opera var. arg., V_), has been compared. The German _St. Louis Edition_ (Vol. XIX) has been consulted, and especially the admirable German rendering of Kawerau in the Berlin Edition (Vol. II) as well as the careful literal translation of Lemme, _Die drei grossen Reormationsschriten Luthers vom Jahre 1520_, 2. ed. (Gotha, 1884). Like the last mentioned, Wace and Buchheim's English translation (London, 1896) is incomplete, and besides is not always accurate; the _Captivity_ is not contained in Cole's _Select Works_. The catalogue of the British Museum notes no early English translation. Kostlin-Kawerau's (1903) and Berger's (1895) lives should be consulted; the former for the historical setting and full analysis, the latter for a fine appreciation of this as of the other two reformatory treatises of this year. For the theological development, beside Kostlin's work mentioned above, and Tschackert, _Entstehung der luth. und re. Kirchenlehre_ (1910), compare the exhaustive article Sakramente, by Kattenbusch, in _Prot. Realencyklopadie_, 3. ed., XVII, 349-81. The treatise is here Englished in its entirety, including those portions of the section on marriage which are frequently omitted. The homeless paragraph on page 260, whose proper location is not found even in the _Weimar Edition_ nor in Clemen, we have placed in a foot-note, following the example of Kawerau.

Albert T. W. Steinhaeuser

ALBERT T. W. STEINHAEUSER.

Allentown. PA.

The Babylonian Captivity Of The Church

THE BABYLONIAN CAPTIVITY OF THE CHURCH

1520

JESUS

Martin Luther, Augustinian,

to his friend,

Herman Tulich[1],

Greeting

Willy nilly, I am compelled to become every day more learned, with so many and such able masters vying with one another to improve my mind. Some two years ago I wrote a little book on indulgences[2], which I now deeply regret having published; for at the time I was still sunk in a mighty superstitious veneration for the Roman tyranny and held that indulgences should not be altogether rejected, seeing they were approved by the common consent of men. Nor was this to be wondered at, for I was then engaged single-handed in my Sisyphean task. Since then, however, through the kindness of Sylvester and the friars[3], who so strenuously defended indulgences, I have come to see that they are nothing but an imposture of the Roman sycophants by which they play havoc with men's faith and fortunes. Would to God I might prevail upon the book-sellers and upon all my readers to burn up the whole of my writings on indulgences and to substitute for them this proposition:

Indulgences Are A Knavish Trick Of The Roman Sycophants

INDULGENCES ARE A KNAVISH TRICK OF THE ROMAN SYCOPHANTS.

Next, Eck and Emser, with their fellows, undertook to instruct me concerning the primacy of the pope. Here too, not to prove ungrateful to such learned folk, I acknowledge how greatly I have profited by their labors. For, while denying the divine authority of the papacy, I had yet admitted its human authority[4]. But after hearing and reading the subtle subtleties of these coxcombs with which they adroitly prop their idol--for in these matters my mind is not altogether unteachable--I now know of a certainty that the papacy is the kingdom of Babylon[5] and the power of Nimrod the mighty hunter[6]. Once more, therefore, that all may all out to my friends' advantage, I beg both booksellers and readers to burn what I have published on that subject and to hold to this proposition: THE PAPACY IS THE MIGHTY HUNTING OF THE ROMAN BISHOP. This follows from the arguments of Eck, Emser and the Leipzig lecturer[7] on the Holy Scriptures.

Now they are putting me to school again and teaching me about communion in both kinds and other weighty subjects. And I must all to with might and main, so as not to hear these my pedagogues without profit. A certain Italian friar of Cremona[8] has written a "Revocation of Martin Luther to the Holy See"--that is, a revocation in which not I revoke anything (as the words declare) but he revokes me. That is the kind of Latin the Italians are now beginning to write[9]. Another friar, a German of Leipzig, that same lecturer, you know, on the whole canon of the Scriptures, has written a book against me concerning the sacrament in both kinds, and is planning, I understand, still greater and more marvelous things. The Italian was canny enough not to set down his name, fearing perhaps the fate of Cajetan and Sylvester[10]. But the Leipzig man, as becomes a fierce and valiant German, boasts on his ample title-page of his name, his career, his saintliness, his scholarship, his office, glory, honor, ay, almost of his very clogs[11]. Here I shall doubtless gain no little information, since indeed his dedicatory epistle is addressed to the Son of God Himself. On so familiar a footing are these saints with Christ Who reigns in heaven! Moreover, methinks I hear three magpies chattering in this book; the first in good Latin, the second in better Greek, the third in purest Hebrew[12]. What think you, my Herman, is there for me to do but to prick up my ears? The thing emanates from Leipzig, from the Observance of the Holy Cross[13].

Fool that I was, I had hitherto thought it would be well if a general council decided that the sacrament be administered to the laity in both kinds[14]. The more than learned friar would set me right, and declares that neither Christ nor the apostles commanded or commended the administration of both kinds to the laity; it was, therefore, left to the judgment of the Church what to do or not to do in this matter, and the Church must be obeyed. These are his words.

You will perhaps ask, what madness has entered into the man, or against whom he is writing, since I have not condemned the use of one kind, but have left the decision about the use of both kinds to the judgment of the Church--the very thing he attempts to assert and which he turns against me. My answer is, that this sort of argument is common to all those who write against Luther; they assert the very things they assail, for they set up a man of straw whom they may attack. Thus Sylvester and Eck and Emser, thus the theologians of Cologne and Louvain[15]; and if this friar had not been of the same kidney he would never have written against Luther.

Yet in one respect this man has been happier than his fellows. For in undertaking to prove that the use of both kinds is neither commanded nor commended, but left to the will of the Church, he brings forward passages of Scripture to prove that by the command of Christ one kind only was appointed for the laity. So that it is true, according to this new interpreter of the Scriptures, that one kind was not commanded, and at the same time was commanded, by Christ! This novel sort of argument is, as you know, the particular forte of the Leipzig dialecticians. Did not Emser in his earlier book[16] profess to write of me in a friendly spirit, and then, after I had convicted him of filthy envy and foul lying, did he not openly acknowledge in his later book[17], written to refute my arguments, that he had written in both a friendly and an unfriendly spirit? A sweet fellow, forsooth, as you know.

But hearken to our distinguished distinguisher of "kinds," for whom the will of the Church and a command of Christ, and a command of Christ and no command of Christ, are all one and the same! How ingeniously he proves that only one kind is to be given to the laity, by the command of Christ, that is, by the will of the Church. He puts it in capital letters, thus: THE INFALLIBLE FOUNDATION. Thereupon he treats John vi with incredible wisdom, in which passage Christ speaks of the bread from heaven and the bread of life, which is He Himself. The learned fellow not only refers these words to the sacrament of the altar, but because Christ says, "I am the living bread," [John 6:35, 41, 51] and not, "I am the living cup," he actually concludes that we have in this passage the institution of the sacrament in only one kind for the laity. But there follow the words,--"My flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed," [John 6:55] and, "Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood" [John 6:53]; and when it dawned upon the good friar that these words speak undeniably or both kinds and against one kind--presto! how happily and learnedly he slips out of the quandary by asserting that in these words Christ means to say only that whoever receives the one kind receives under it both flesh and blood. This he puts or the "infallible foundation" of a structure well worthy of the holy and heavenly Observance.

Now prithee, herefrom learn with me that Christ, in John vi, enjoins the sacrament in one kind, yet in such wise that His commanding it means leaving it to the will of the Church; and further, that Christ is speaking in this chapter only of the laity and not of the priests. For to the latter the living bread from heaven does not pertain, but presumably the deadly bread from hell! And how is it with the deacons and subdeacons, who are neither laymen nor priests?[18] According to this brilliant writer, they ought to use neither the one kind nor both kinds! You see, dear Tulich, this novel and observant method of treating Scripture.

But learn this, too,--that Christ is speaking in John vi of the sacrament of the altar; although He Himself teaches that His words refer to faith in the Word made flesh, for He says, "This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent." [John 6:29] But our Leipzig professor of the Scriptures must be permitted to prove anything he pleases from any Scripture passage whatsoever. For he is an Anaxagorian, or rather an Aristotelian[19] theologian, for whom nouns and verbs, interchanged, mean the same thing and any thing. So aptly does he cite Scripture proof-texts throughout the whole of his book, that if he set out to prove the presence of Christ in the sacrament, he would not hesitate to commence thus: "Here beginneth the book of the Revelation of St. John the Divine." All his quotations are as apt as this one would be, and the wiseacre imagines he is adorning his drivel with the multitude of his quotations. The rest I pass over, lest you should smother in the filth of this vile cloaca.

In conclusion, he brings forward I Corinthians xi, where Paul says he received from the Lord, and delivered to the Corinthians, the use of both the bread and the cup [1 Cor. 11:23]. Here again our distinguisher of kinds, treating the Scriptures with his usual brilliance, teaches that Paul did not deliver, but permitted both kinds. Do you ask where he gets his proof? Out of his own head, as he did in the case of John vi. For it does not behoove this lecturer to give a reason for his assertions; he belongs to the order of those who teach and prove all things by their visions[20]. Accordingly we are here taught that the Apostle, in this passage, addressed not the whole Corinthian congregation, but the laity alone--but then he "permitted" nothing at all to the clergy, and they are deprived of the sacrament altogether!--and further, that, according to a new kind of grammar, "I have received from the Lord" means "It is permitted by the Lord," and "I have delivered it to you" means "I have permitted it to you." I pray you, mark this well. For by this method, not only the Church, but every passing knave will be at liberty, according to this magister, to turn all the commands, institutions and ordinances of Christ and the apostles into a mere "permission."

I perceive, therefore, that this man is driven by an angel of Satan, and that he and his partners seek but to make a name or themselves through me, as men who were worthy to cross swords with Luther. But their hopes shall be dashed: I shall ignore them and not mention their names from henceforth even for ever. This one reply shall suffice me for all their books. If they be worthy of it, I pray Christ in His mercy to bring them to a sound mind; if not, I pray that they may never leave off writing such books, and that the enemies of the truth may never deserve to read any other. It is a popular and true saying,

This I know of a truth--whenever with filth I contended, Victor or vanquished, alike, came I defiled from the fray.

And, since I perceive that they have an abundance of leisure and of writing-paper, I shall see to it that they may have ample opportunity for writing. I shall run on before, and while they are celebrating a glorious victory over one of my so-called heresies, I shall be meanwhile devising a new one. For I too am desirous that these gallant leaders in battle should win to themselves many titles and decorations. Therefore, while they complain that I laud communion in both kinds, and are happily engrossed in this most important and worthy matter, I will go yet one step farther and undertake to show that all those who deny communion in both kinds to the laity are wicked men. And the more conveniently to do this, I will compose a prelude on the captivity of the Roman Church. In due time I shall have a great deal more to say, when the learned papists have disposed of this book.

I take this course, lest any pious reader who may chance upon this book, should be offended at my dealing with such filthy matters, and should justly complain of finding in it nothing to cultivate and instruct his mind or even to furnish good or learned thought. For you know how impatient my friends are because I waste my time on the sordid fictions of these men, which, they say, are amply refuted in the reading; they look for greater things from me, which Satan seeks in this way to hinder. I have at length resolved to follow their counsel and to leave to those hornets the pleasant business of wrangling and hurling invectives.

Of that friar of Cremona I will say nothing. He is an unlearned man and a simpleton, who attempts with a few rhetorical passages to recall me to the Holy See, from which I am not as yet aware of having departed, nor has any one proved it to me. He is chiefly concerned in those silly passages with showing that I ought to be moved by the vow of my order and by the act that the empire has been transferred to us Germans[21]. He seems thus to have set out to write, not my "revocation," but rather the praises of the French people and the Roman pontiff. Let him attest his loyalty in his little book; it is the best he could do. He does not deserve to be harshly treated, for methinks he was not prompted by malice; nor yet to be learnedly refuted, for all his chatter is sheer ignorance and simplicity[22].

At the outset I must deny that there are seven sacraments, and hold for the present[23] to but three--baptism, penance and the bread[24]. These three have been subjected to a miserable captivity by the Roman curia, and the Church has been deprived of all her liberty. To be sure, if I desired to use the term in its scriptural sense, I should allow but a single sacrament[25], with three sacramental signs; but of this I shall treat more fully at the proper time.

The Sacrament Of The Bread

THE SACRAMENT OF THE BREAD

Let me tell you what progress I have made in my studies on the administration of this sacrament. For when I published my treatise on the Eucharist[26], I clung to the common usage, being in no wise concerned with the question of the right or wrong of the papacy. But now, challenged and attacked, nay, forcibly thrust into the arena, I shall freely speak my mind, let all the papists laugh or weep together.

[Sidenote: The First Captivity: the Withholding of the Cup from the Laity]

In the first place, John vi is to be entirely excluded from this discussion, since it does not refer in a single syllable to the sacrament. For not only was the sacrament not yet instituted, but the whole context plainly shows that Christ is speaking of faith in the Word made flesh, as I have said above[27]. For He says, "My words are spirit, and they are life," [John 6:63] which shows that He is speaking of a spiritual eating, whereby whoever eats has life, whereas the Jews understood Him to be speaking of bodily eating and therefore disputed with Him. But no eating can give life save the eating which is by faith, for that is the truly spiritual and living eating. As Augustine also says: "Why make ready teeth and stomach? Believe, and thou hast eaten."[28] For the sacramental eating does not give life, since many eat unworthily. Therefore, He cannot be understood as speaking of the sacrament in this passage.

These words have indeed been wrongly applied to the sacrament, as in the decretal _Dudum_[29] and often elsewhere. But it is one thing to misapply the Scriptures, it is quite another to understand them in their proper meaning. But if Christ in this passage enjoined the sacramental eating, then by saying, "Except ye eat my flesh and drink my blood, ye have no life in you," [John 6:53] He would condemn all infants, invalids and those absent or in any wise hindered from the sacramental eating, however strong their faith might be. Thus Augustine, in the second book of his _Contra Julianum_[30], proves from Innocent that even infants eat the flesh and drink the blood of Christ, without the sacrament; that is, they partake of them through the faith of the Church. Let this then be accepted as proved,--John vi does not belong here. For this reason I have elsewhere[31] written that the Bohemians have no right to rely on this passage in support of their use of the sacrament in both kinds.

Now there are two passages that do clearly bear upon this matter--the Gospel narratives of the institution of the Lord's Supper, and Paul in I Corinthians xi. These let us examine.

Matthew, Mark and Luke agree that Christ gave the whole sacrament to all the disciples [Matt. 26, Mark 14, Luke 22], and it is certain that Paul delivered both kinds [1 Cor. 11]. No one has ever had the temerity to assert the contrary. Further, Matthew reports that Christ said not of the bread, "Eat ye all of it," [Matt. 26:27] but of the cup, "Drink ye all of it"; and Mark likewise says not, "They all ate of it," but, "They all drank of it." [Mark 14:23] Both Matthew and Mark attach the note of universality to the cup, not to the bread; as though the Spirit saw this schism coming, by which some would be forbidden to partake of the cup, which Christ desired should be common to all. How furiously, think you, would they rave against us, if they had found the word "all" attached to the bread instead of the cup! They would not leave us a loophole to escape, they would cry out upon us and set us down as heretics, they would damn us or schismatics. But now, since it stands on our side and against them, they will not be bound by any force of logic--these men of the most free will[32], who change and change again even the things that be God's, and throw everything into confusion.

But imagine me standing over against them and interrogating my lords the papists. In the Lord's Supper, I say, the whole sacrament, or communion in both kinds, is given only to the priests or else it is given also to the laity. If it is given only to the priests, as they would have it, then it is not right to give it to the laity in either kind; for it must not be rashly given to any to whom Christ did not give it when He instituted it. For if we permit one institution of Christ to be changed, we make all of His laws invalid, and every one will boldly claim that he is not bound by any law or institution of His. For a single exception, especially in the Scriptures, invalidates the whole. But if it is given also to the laity, then it inevitably follows that it ought not to be withheld from them in either form. And if any do withhold it from them when they desire it, they act impiously and contrary to the work, example and institution of Christ.

I confess that I am conquered by this to me unanswerable argument, and that I have neither read nor heard nor found anything to advance against it. For here the word and example of Christ stand firm, when He says, not by way of permission but of command, "Drink ye all of it." [Matt.26:27] For if all are to drink, and the words cannot be understood as addressed to the priests alone, then it is certainly an impious act to withhold the cup from laymen who desire it, even though an angel from heaven were to do it. For when they say that the distribution of both kinds was left to the judgment of the Church, they make this assertion without giving any reason or it and put it forth without any authority; it is ignored just as readily as it is proved, and does not hold against an opponent who confronts us[33] with the word and work of Christ. Such an one must be refuted with a word of Christ, but this we[34] do not possess.

But if one kind may be withheld from the laity, then with equal right and reason a portion of baptism and penance might also be taken from them by this same authority of the Church. Therefore, just as baptism and absolution must be administered in their entirety, so the sacrament of the bread must be given in its entirety to all laymen, if they desire it. I am amazed to find them asserting that the priests may never receive only the one kind, in the mass, on pain of committing a mortal sin; and that for no other reason, as they unanimously say, than that both kinds constitute the one complete sacrament, which may not be divided. I pray them to tell me why it may be divided in the case of the laity, and why to them alone the whole sacrament may not be given. Do they not acknowledge, by their own testimony, either that both kinds are to be given to the laity, or that it is not a valid sacrament when only one kind is given to them? How can the one kind be a complete sacrament or the laity and not a complete sacrament for the priests? Why do they flaunt the authority of the Church and the power of the pope in my face? These do not make void the Word of God and the testimony of the truth.

But further, if the Church can withhold the wine from the laity, it can also withhold the bread from them; it could, therefore, withhold the entire sacrament of the altar from the laity and completely annul Christ's institution so far as they are concerned. I ask, by what authority? But if the Church cannot withhold the bread, or both kinds, neither can it withhold the wine. This cannot possibly be gainsaid; for the Church's power must be the same over either kind as over both kinds, and if she has no power over both kinds, she has none over either kind. I am curious to hear what the Roman sycophants will have to say to this.

What carries most weight with me, however, and quite decides me is this. Christ says: "This is my blood, which is shed for you and for many for the remission of sins." [Matt. 26:28] Here we see very plainly that the blood is given to all those for whose sins it was shed. But who will dare to say it was not shed for the laity? Do you not see whom He addresses when He gives the cup? Does He not give it to all? Does He not say that it is shed or all? "For you," He says--well: we will let these be the priests--"and for many"--these cannot be priests; and yet He says, "Drink ye all of it." [Matt. 26:27] I too could easily trifle here and with my words make a mockery of Christ's words, as my dear trifler[34] does; but they who rely on the Scriptures in opposing us, must be refuted by the Scriptures. This is what has prevented me from condemning the Bohemians, who, be they wicked men or good, certainly have the word and act of Christ on their side, while we have neither, but only that hollow device of men--"the Church has appointed it." It was not the Church that appointed these things, but the tyrants of the churches, without the consent of the Church, which is the people of God.

But where in all the world is the necessity, where the religious duty, where the practical use, of denying both kinds, i. e., the visible sign, to the laity, when every one concedes to them the grace[35] of the sacrament without the sign? If they concede the grace, which is the greater, why not the sign, which is the lesser? For in every sacrament the sign as such is of far less importance than the thing signified. What then is to prevent them from conceding the lesser, when they concede the greater? I can see but one reason; it has come about by the permission of an angry God in order to give occasion for a schism in the Church, to bring home to us how, having long ago lost the grace of the sacrament, we contend for the sign, which is the lesser, against that which is the most important and the chief thing; just as some men for the sake of ceremonies contend against love. Nay, this monstrous perversion seems to date from the time when we began for the sake of the riches of this world to rage against Christian love. Thus God would show us, by this terrible sign, how we esteem signs more than the things they signify. How preposterous would it be to admit that the faith of baptism is granted the candidate or baptism, and yet to deny him the sign of this faith, namely, the water!

Finally, Paul stands invincible and stops every mouth, when he says in I Corinthians xi, "I have received from the Lord what I also delivered unto you." [1 Cor. 11:23] He does not say, "I permitted unto you," as that friar lyingly asserts[36]. Nor is it true that Paul delivered both kinds on account of the contention in the Corinthian congregation. For, first, the text shows that their contention was not about both kinds, but about the contempt and envy among rich and poor, as it is clearly stated: "One is hungry, and another is drunken, and ye put to shame them that have not." [1 Cor. 11:21] Again, Paul is not speaking of the time when he first delivered the sacrament to them, for he says not, "I _receive_ of the Lord and _give_ unto you," but, "I received and delivered"--namely, when he first began to preach among them, a long while before this contention. This shows that he delivered both kinds to them; and "delivered" means the same as "commanded," for elsewhere he uses the word in this sense. Consequently there is nothing in the friar's fuming about permission; it is a hotch-potch without Scripture, reason or sense. His opponents do not ask what he has dreamed, but what the Scriptures decree in this matter; and out of the Scriptures he cannot adduce one jot or tittle in support of his dreams, while they can bring forward mighty thunderbolts in support of their faith.

Come hither then, ye popish flatterers, one and all! Fall to and defend yourselves against the charge of godlessness, tyranny, lese-majesty against the Gospel, and the crime of slandering your brethren,--ye that decry as heretics those who will not be wise after the vaporings of your own brains, in the face of such patent and potent words of Scripture. If any are to be called heretics and schismatics, it is not the Bohemians nor the Greeks, for they take their stand upon the Gospel; but you Romans are the heretics and godless schismatics, for you presume upon your own fictions and fly in the face of the clear Scriptures of God. Parry that stroke, if you can!

But what could be more ridiculous, and more worthy of this friar's brain, than his saying that the Apostle wrote these words and gave this permission, not to the Church universal, but to a particular church, that is, the Corinthian? Where does he get his proof? Out of his one storehouse, his own impious head. If the Church universal receives, reads and follows this epistle in all points as written for itself, why should it not do the same with this portion of it? If we admit that any epistle, or any part of any epistle, of Paul does not apply to the Church universal, then the whole authority of Paul falls to the ground. Then the Corinthians will say that what he teaches about faith in the epistle to the Romans does not apply to them. What greater blasphemy and madness can be imagined than this! God forbid that there should be one jot or tittle in all of Paul which the whole Church universal is not bound to follow and keep! Not so did the Fathers hold, down to these perilous times, in which Paul foretold there should be blasphemers and blind and insensate men [2 Tim. 3:2], of whom this friar is one, nay the chief.

However, suppose we grant the truth of this intolerable madness. If Paul gave his permission to a particular church, then, even from your own point of view, the Greeks and Bohemians are in the right, for they are particular churches; hence it is sufficient that they do not act contrary to Paul, who at least gave permission. Moreover, Paul could not permit anything contrary to Christ's institution. Therefore I cast in thy teeth, O Rome, and in the teeth of all thy sycophants, these sayings of Christ and Paul, on behalf of the Greeks and the Bohemians. Nor canst thou prove that thou hast received any authority to change them, much less to accuse others of heresy or disregarding thy arrogance; rather dost thou deserve to be charged with the crime of godlessness and despotism.

Furthermore, Cyprian, who alone is strong enough to hold all the Romanists at bay, bears witness, in the fifth book of his treatise _Of the Fallen_, that it was a wide-spread custom in his church to administer both kinds to the laity, and even to children[37], yea to give the body of the Lord into their hands; of which he cites many instances. He inveighs, or example, against certain members of the congregation as follows: "The sacrilegious man is angered at the priests because he does not forthwith receive the body of the Lord with unclean hands, or drink the blood of the Lord with defiled lips." He is speaking, as you see, of laymen, and irreverent laymen, who desired to receive the body and the blood from the priests. Dost thou find anything to snarl at here, thou wretched flatterer? Say that even this holy martyr, a Church Father preeminent for his apostolic spirit, was a heretic and used that permission in a particular church.

In the same place, Cyprian narrates an incident that came under his own observation. He describes at length how a deacon was administering the cup to a little girl, who drew away from him, whereupon he poured the blood of the Lord into her mouth. We read the same of St. Donatus, whose broken chalice this wretched flatterer so lightly disposes of. "I read of a broken chalice," he says, "but I do not read that the blood was given."[38] It is no wonder! He that finds what he pleases in the Scriptures will also read what he pleases in the histories. But will the authority of the Church be established, or will heretics be refuted, in this way? Enough of this! I did not undertake this work to reply to him who is not worth replying to, but to bring the truth of the matter to light.

I conclude, then, that it is wicked and despotic to deny both kinds to the laity, and that this is not in the power of any angel, much less of any pope or council. Nor does the Council of Constance give me pause, for if its authority carries weight, why does not that of the Council of Basel also carry weight? For the latter council decided, on the contrary, after much disputing, that the Bohemians might use both kinds, as the extant records and documents of the council prove. And to that council this ignorant flatterer refers in support of his dream; in such wisdom does his whole treatise abound[39].

The first captivity of this sacrament, therefore, concerns its substance or completeness, of which we have been deprived by the despotism of Rome. Not that they sin against Christ, who use the one kind, for Christ did not command the use of either kind, but let it to every one's free will, when He said: "As oft as ye do this, do it in remembrance of me." [1 Cor. 11:25] But they sin who forbid the giving of both kinds to such as desire to exercise this free will. The fault lies not with the laity, but with the priests. The sacrament does not belong to the priests, but to all, and the priests are not lords but ministers, in duty bound to administer both kinds to those who desire them, and as oft as they desire them. If they wrest this right from the laity and forcibly withhold it, they are tyrants; but the laity are without fault, whether they lack one kind or both kinds; they must meanwhile be sustained by their faith and by their desire for the complete sacrament. Just as the priests, being ministers, are bound to administer baptism and absolution to whoever seeks them, because he has a right to them; but if they do not administer them, he that seeks them has at least the full merit of his faith, while they will be accused before Christ as wicked servants. In like manner the holy Fathers of old who dwelt in the desert did not receive the sacrament in any form for many years together[40].

Therefore I do not urge that both kinds be seized by force, as though we were bound to this form by a rigorous command; but I instruct men's consciences that they may endure the Roman tyranny, well knowing they have been deprived of their rightful share in the sacrament because of their own sin. This only do I desire,--that no one justify the tyranny of Rome, as though it did well to forbid one of the two kinds to the laity; we ought rather to abhor it, withhold our consent, and endure it just as we should do if we were held captive by the Turk and not permitted to use either kind. That is what I meant by saying[41] it seemed well to me that this captivity should be ended by the decree of a general council, our Christian liberty restored to us out of the hands of the Roman tyrant, and every one let free to seek and receive this sacrament, just as he is free to receive baptism and penance. But now they compel us, by the same tyranny, to receive the one kind year after year; so utterly lost is the liberty which Christ has given us. This is but the due reward of our godless ingratitude.

[Sidenote: The Second Captivity: Transubstantiation]

The second captivity of this sacrament is less grievous so far as the conscience is concerned, yet the very gravest danger threatens the man who would attack it, to say nothing of condemning it. Here I shall be called a Wyclifite[42] and a heretic a thousand times over. But what of that? Since the Roman bishop has ceased to be a bishop and become a tyrant, I fear none of his decrees, for I know that it is not in his power, nor even in that of a general council, to make new articles of faith.

Years ago, when I was delving into scholastic theology, the Cardinal of Cambray[43] gave me food for thought, in his comments on the fourth book of the Sentences[44], where he argues with great acumen that to hold that real bread and real wine, and not their accidents only[45], are present on the altar, is much more probable and requires fewer unnecessary miracles--if only the Church had not decreed otherwise. When I learned later what church it was that had decreed this--namely, the Church of Thomas[46], i. e., of Aristotle--I waxed bolder, and after floating in a sea of doubt, at last found rest for my conscience in the above view--namely, that it is real bread and real wine, in which Christ's real flesh and blood are present, not otherwise and not less really than they assume to be the case under their accidents. I reached this conclusion because I saw that the opinions of the Thomists, though approved by pope and council, remain but opinions and do not become articles of faith, even though an angel from heaven were to decree otherwise [Gal. 1:8]. For what is asserted without Scripture for an approved revelation, may be held as an opinion, but need not be believed. But this opinion of Thomas hangs so completely in the air, devoid of Scripture and reason, that he seems here to have forgotten both his philosophy and his logic. For Aristotle treats so very differently from St. Thomas of subject and accidents, that methinks this great man is to be pitied, not only for drawing his opinions in matters of faith from Aristotle, but for attempting to base them on him without understanding his meaning--an unfortunate superstructure upon an unfortunate foundation.

I therefore permit every man to hold either of these views, as he chooses. My one concern at present is to remove all scruples of conscience, so that no one may fear to become guilty of heresy if he should believe in the presence of real bread and real wine on the altar, and that every one may feel at liberty to ponder, hold and believe either one view or the other, without endangering his salvation. However, I shall now more fully set forth my own view.

In the first place, I do not intend to listen or attach the least importance to those who will cry out that this teaching of mine is Wyclifite, Hussite, heretical, and contrary to the decision of the Church, for they are the very persons whom I have convicted of manifold heresies in the matter of indulgences, the freedom of the will and the grace of God, good works and sin, etc. If Wyclif was once a heretic, they are heretics ten times over, and it is a pleasure to be suspected and accused by such heretics and perverse sophists, whom to please were the height of godlessness. Besides, the only way in which they can prove their opinions and disprove those of others, is by saying, "That is Wyclifite, Hussite, heretical!" They have this feeble retort always on their tongue, and they have nothing else. If you demand a Scripture passage, they say, "This is our opinion, and the decision of the Church--that is, of ourselves!" Thus these men, "reprobate concerning the faith" [2 Tim. 3:8] and untrustworthy, have the effrontery to set their own fancies before us in the name of the Church as articles of faith.

But there are good grounds for my view, and this above all,--no violence is to be done to the words of God, whether by man or angel; but they are to be retained in their simplest meaning wherever possible, and to be understood in by their grammatical and literal sense unless the context plainly forbids; lest we give our adversaries occasion to make a mockery of all the Scriptures. Thus Origen was repudiated, in olden times, because he despised the grammatical sense and turned the trees, and all things else written concerning Paradise, into allegories; for it might therefrom be concluded that God did not create trees. Even so here, when the Evangelists plainly write that Christ took bread and brake it [Matt. 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19; Acts 2:46; 1 Cor. 11:23], and the book of Acts and Paul, in their turn, call it bread, we have to think of real bread, and real wine, just as we do of a real cup; or even they do not maintain that the cup is transubstantiated. But since it is not necessary to assume a transubstantiation wrought by Divine power, it is to be regarded as a figment of the human mind, or it rests neither on Scripture nor on reason, as we shall see.

Therefore it is an absurd and unheard-of juggling with words, to understand "bread" to mean "the form, or accidents of bread," and "wine" to mean "the form, or accidents of wine." Why do they not also understand all other things to mean their forms, or accidents? And even if this might be done with all other things, it would yet not be right thus to emasculate the words of God and arbitrarily to empty them of their meaning.

Moreover, the Church had the true faith for more than twelve hundred years, during which time the holy Fathers never once mentioned this transubstantiation--forsooth, a monstrous word for a monstrous idea!--until the pseudophilosophy of Aristotle became rampant in the Church, these last three hundred years, during which many other things have been wrongly defined; as for example, that the Divine essence neither is begotten nor begets; that the soul is the substantial form of the human body, and the like assertions, which are made without reason or sense, as the Cardinal of Cambray himself admits.

Perhaps they will say that the danger of idolatry demands that bread and wine be not really present. How ridiculous! The laymen have never become familiar with their fine-spun philosophy of substance and accidents, and could not grasp it if it were taught them. Besides, there is the same danger in the case of the accidents which remain and which they see, as in the case of the substance which they do not see. For if they do not adore the accidents, but Christ hidden under them, why should they adore the bread, which they do not see?

But why could not Christ include His body in the substance of the bread just as well as in the accidents? The two substances of fire and iron are so mingled in the heated iron that every part is both iron and fire. Why could not much rather Christ's body be thus contained in every part of the substance of the bread?

What will they say? We believe that in His birth Christ came forth out of the unopened womb of His mother. Let them say here too that the flesh of the Virgin was meanwhile annihilated, or as they would more aptly say, transubstantiated, so that Christ, after being enfolded in its accidents, finally came forth through the accidents! The same thing will have to be said of the shut door and of the closed mouth of the sepulchre, through which He went in and out without disturbing them. Hence has risen that hotch-potch of a philosophy of constant quantity distinct from the substance, until it has come to such a pass that they themselves no longer know what are accidents and what is substance. For who has ever proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that heat, color, cold, light, weight or shape are mere accidents? Finally, they have been driven to the fancy that a new substance is created by God or their accidents on the altar--all on account of Aristotle, who says, "It is the essence of an accident to be in something," and endless other monstrosities, of all which they would be rid if they simply permitted real bread to be present. And I rejoice greatly that the simple faith of this sacrament is still to be found at least among the common people; for as they do not understand, neither do they dispute, whether accidents are present or substance[47] but believe with a simple faith that Christ's body and blood are truly contained in whatever is there, and leave to those who have nothing else to do the business of disputing about that which contains them.

But perhaps they will say: From Aristotle we learn that in an affirmative proposition subject and predicate must be identical, or, to set down the beast's own words, in the sixth book of his _Metaphysics_: "An affirmative proposition demands the agreement of subject and predicate," which they interpret as above. Hence, when it is said, "This is my body," the subject cannot be identical with the bread, but must be identical with the body of Christ. What shall we say when Aristotle and the doctrines of men are made to be the arbiters of these lofty and divine matters? Why do we not put by such curiosity, and cling simply to the word of Christ, willing to remain in ignorance of what here takes place, and content with this, that the real body of Christ is present by virtue of the words?[48] Or is it necessary to comprehend the manner of the divine working in every detail?

But what do they say to Aristotle's assigning a subject to whatever is predicated of the attributes, although he holds that the substance is the chief subject? Hence for him, "this white," "this large," etc., are subjects of which something is predicated. If that is correct, I ask: If a transubstantiation must be assumed in order that Christ's body be not predicated of the bread, why not also a transaccidentation in order that it be not predicated of the accidents? For the same danger remains if one understands the subject to be "this white" or "this round"[49] is my body, and for the same reason that a transubstantiation is assumed, a transaccidentation must also be assumed, because of this identity of subject and predicate.

Let us not, however, dabble too much in philosophy. Does not Christ appear to have admirably anticipated such curiosity by saying of the wine, not, "_Hoc est sanguis meus_," but "_Hie est sanguis mens_" [Matt. 26:28]? And yet more clearly, by bringing in the word "cup," when He said, "This cup is the new testament in my blood." [1 Cor. 11:25] Does it not seem as though He desired to keep us in a simple faith, so that we might but believe His blood to be in the cup? For my part, if I cannot fathom how the bread is the body of Christ, I will take my reason captive to the obedience of Christ [2 Cor. 10:5], and clinging simply to His word, firmly believe not only that the body of Christ is in the bread, but that the bread is the body of Christ. For in this I am borne out by the words, "He took bread, and giving thanks, He brake it and said, Take, eat; this [i. e., this bread which He took and brake] is my body." [1 Cor. 11:23] And Paul says: "The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?" [1 Cor. 10:16] He says not, in the bread, but the bread itself, is the communion of the body of Christ. What matters it if philosophy cannot fathom this? The Holy Spirit is greater than Aristotle. Does philosophy fathom that transubstantiation of theirs, of which they themselves admit that here all philosophy breaks down? But the agreement of the pronoun "this" with "body," in Greek and Latin, is owing to the fact that in these languages the two words are of the same gender. But in the Hebrew language, which has no neuter gender, "this" agrees with "bread," so that it would be proper to say, "_Hie est corpus meum_." This is proved also by the use of language and by common sense; the subject, forsooth, points to the bread, not to the body, when He says, "_Hoc est corpus meum_," "_Das ist mein Leib_,"--i. e., This bread is my body.

Therefore it is with the sacrament even as it is with Christ. In order that the Godhead may dwell in Him, it is not necessary that the human nature be transubstantiated and the Godhead be contained under its accidents; but both natures are there in their entirety, and it is truly said, "This man is God," and "This God is man." Even though philosophy cannot grasp this, faith grasps it, and the authority of God's Word is greater than the grasp of our intellect. Even so, in order that the real body and the real blood of Christ may be present in the sacrament, it is not necessary that the bread and wine be transubstantiated and Christ be contained under their accidents; but both remain there together, and it is truly said, "This bread is my body, this wine is my blood," [Matt. 26:26] and _vice versa_. Thus I will for the nonce understand it, or the honor of the holy words of God, which I will not suffer any petty human arguments to override or wrest to meanings foreign to them. At the same time, I permit other men to follow the other opinion, which is laid down in the decree _Firmiter_[50]; only let them not press us to accept their opinions as articles of faith, as I said above.

[Sidenote: The Third Captivity: The Mass a Good Work and a Sacrifice]

The third captivity of this sacrament is that most wicked abuse of all, in consequence of which there is to-day no more generally accepted and firmly believed opinion in the Church than this,--that the mass is a good work and a sacrifice. And this abuse has brought an endless host of others in its train, so that the faith of this sacrament has Sacrifice become utterly extinct and the holy sacrament has been turned into a veritable air, tavern, and place of merchandise. Hence participations[51], brotherhoods[52], intercessions, merits, anniversaries, memorial days, and the like wares are bought and sold, traded and bartered in the Church, and from this priests and monks derive their whole living.

I am attacking a difficult matter, and one perhaps impossible to abate, since it has become so firmly entrenched through century-long custom and the common consent of men that it would be necessary to abolish most of the books now in vogue, to alter well-nigh the whole external form of the churches, and to introduce, or rather re-introduce, a totally different kind of ceremonies. But my Christ lives; and we must be careful to give more heed to the Word of God than to all the thoughts of men and of angels. I will perform the duties of my office, and uncover the acts in the case; I will give the truth as I have received it, freely and without malice [Matt. 10:8]. For the rest let every man look to his own salvation; I will faithfully do my part that none may cast on me the blame for his lack of faith and knowledge of the truth, when we appear before the judgment-seat of Christ.

[Sidenote: The Word of Christ, which is the Testament]

In the first place, in order to attain safely and fortunately to a true and unbiased knowledge of this sacrament, we must above all else be careful to put aside whatever has been added by the zeal and devotion of men to the original, simple institution of this sacrament,--such things as vestments, ornaments, chants, prayers, organs, candles, and the whole pageantry of outward things[53]; we must turn our eyes and hearts simply to the institution of Christ and to this alone, and set naught before us but the very word of Christ by which He instituted this sacrament, made it perfect, and committed it to us. For in that word, and in that word alone, reside the power, the nature, and the whole substance of the mass. All else is the work of man, added to the word of Christ; and the mass can be held and remain a mass just as well without it. Now the words of Christ, in which He instituted this sacrament, are these:

"And whilst they were at supper, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake: and gave to His disciples, and said: Take ye and eat. This is my body, which shall be given for you. And taking the chalice. He gave thanks, and gave to them, saying: Drink ye all of this. This is the chalice, the new testament in my blood, which shall be shed for you and for many unto remission of sins. This do for the commemoration of me." [Matt. 26:26; 1 Cor. 11:24 f.; Luke 22:20]

These words the Apostle also delivers and more fully expounds in i Cor. xi [1 Cor. 11:23 ff.]. On them we must lean and build as on a firm foundation, if we would not be carried about with every wind of doctrine, even as we have hitherto been carried about by the wicked doctrines of men, who turn aside the truth [Titus 1:14]. For in these words nothing is omitted that pertains to the completeness, the use and the blessing of this sacrament; and nothing is included that is superfluous and not necessary for us to know. Whoever sets them aside and meditates or teaches concerning the mass, will teach monstrous and wicked doctrines, as they have done who made of the sacrament an _opus operatum_[56] and a sacrifice.

Therefore let this stand at the outset as our infallibly certain proposition,--the mass, or sacrament of the altar, is Christ's testament which He left behind Him at His death, to be distributed among His believers. For that is the meaning of His word,--"This is the chalice, the new testament in my blood." [Luke 22:20] Let this truth stand, I say, as the immovable foundation on which we shall base all that we have to say, or we are going to overthrow, as you will see, all the godless opinions of men imported into this most precious sacrament. Christ, Who is the Truth, saith truly that this is the new testament in His blood, which is shed for us. Not without reason do I dwell on this sentence; the matter is of no small moment, and must be most deeply impressed upon us.

Let us enquire, therefore, what a testament is, and we shall learn at the same time what the mass is, what its use and blessing, and what its abuse. A testament, as every one knows, is a promise made by one about to die, in which he designates his bequest and appoints his heirs. Therefore a testament involves, first, the death of the testator, and secondly, the promise of the bequest and the naming of the heir. Thus St. Paul discusses at length the nature of a testament in Romans iv, Galatians iii and iv, and Hebrews ix. The same thing is also clearly seen in these words of Christ. Christ testifies concerning His death when He says: "This is my body, which shall be given; this is my blood, which shall be shed." [Luke 22:19 f.] He designates the bequest when He says: "Unto remission of sins." And He appoints the heirs when He says: "For you, and for many"--i. e., for such as accept and believe the promise of the testator; or here it is faith that makes men heirs, as we shall see.

You see, therefore, that what we call the mass is the promise of remission of sins made to us by God; and such a promise as has been confirmed by the death of the Son of God. For the one difference between a promise and a testament is that a testament is a promise which implies the death of him who makes it. A testator is a man making a promise who is about to die; whilst he that makes a promise is, if I may so put it, a testator who is not about to die. This testament of Christ was forshadowed in all the promises of God from the beginning of the world; nay, whatever value those olden promises possessed was altogether derived from this new promise that was to come in Christ. Hence the words "covenant" and "testament of the Lord" occur so frequently in the Scriptures, which words signified that God would one day die. For where there is a testament, the death of the testator must needs follow (Hebrews ix). Now God made a testament: therefore it was necessary that He should die [Heb. 9:16]. But God could not die unless He became man. Thus both the incarnation and the death of Christ are briefly comprehended in this one word "testament."

From the above it will at once be seen what is the right and what the wrong use of the mass, what is the worthy and what the unworthy preparation for it. If the mass is a promise, as has been said, it is to be approached, not with any work or strength or merit, but with faith alone. For where there is the word of God Who makes the promise, there must be the faith of man who takes it. It is plain, therefore, that the first step in our salvation is faith, which clings to the word of the promise made by God, Who without any effort on our part, in free and unmerited mercy makes a beginning and offers us the word of His promise. For He sent His Word, and by it healed them [Ps. 107:20]. He did not accept our work and thus heal us. God's Word is the beginning of all; on it follows faith, and on faith charity; then charity works every good work, for it worketh no ill, nay, it is the fulfilling of the law [Rom. 13:10]. In no other way can man come to God and deal with Him than through faith; that is, not man, by any work of his, but God, by His promise, is the author of salvation, so that all things depend on the word of His power, and are upheld and preserved by it [Heb. 1:3], with which word He begat us, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of His creatures [Jas. 1:18].

Thus, in order to raise up Adam after the all, God gave him this promise, addressing the serpent: "I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel." [Gen. 3:15] In this word of promise Adam, with them that were his, was carried as it were in God's bosom, and by faith in it he was preserved, patiently waiting for the woman who should crush the serpent's head, as God had promised. And in that faith and expectation he died, not knowing when or in what guise she would come, yet never doubting that she would come. For such a promise, being the truth of God, preserves, even in hell, those who believe it and wait for it. After this came another promise, made to Noah--to last until the time of Abraham--when a bow was set as a sign in the clouds [Gen. 9:12], by faith in which Noah and his descendants found a gracious God. After that He promised Abraham that all nations should be blessed in his seed [Gen. 12:3]; and this is Abraham's bosom, into which his posterity was carried [Luke 16:22]. Then to Moses and the children of Israel, and especially to David, He gave the plain promise of Christ [Deut. 18:18], thereby at last making clear what was meant by the promise to them of old time [2 Sam. 7:6]. And so it came finally to the most complete promise of the new testament, in which with plain words life and salvation are freely promised, and granted to such as believe the promise. And He distinguished this testament by a particular mark from the old, calling it the "new testament." [Luke 22:20] For the old testament, which He gave by Moses, was a promise not of remission of sins or of eternal things, but of temporal,--namely, the land of Canaan,--by which no man was renewed in his spirit, to lay hold on the heavenly inheritance. Therefore it was also necessary that dumb beasts should be slain, as types of Christ, that by their blood the testament might be confirmed; so that the testament was even as the blood, and the promise even as the sacrifice. But here He says: "The new testament in my blood" [Luke 22:20]--not in another's, but in His own, and by this blood grace is promised, through the Spirit, unto the remission of sins, that we may obtain the inheritance.

The mass, according to its substance, is, therefore, nothing else than the aforesaid words of Christ--"Take and eat" [1 Cor. 11:24]; as if He said: "Behold, O sinful man and condemned, out of pure and unmerited love wherewith I love thee, and by the will of the Father of all mercies, I promise thee in these words, or ever thou canst desire or deserve them, the forgiveness of all thy sins and life everlasting. And, that thou mayest be most certainly assured of this my irrevocable promise, I give my body and shed my blood, thus by my very death confirming this promise, and leaving thee my body and blood as a sign and memorial of this same promise. As oft, therefore, as thou partakest of them, remember me, and praise, magnify, and give thanks or my love and largess toward thee."

Herefrom you will see that nothing else is needed for a worthy holding of mass than a faith that confidently relies on this promise, believes Christ to be true in these words of His, and doubts not that these infinite blessings have been bestowed upon it. Hard on this faith there follows, of itself, a most sweet stirring of the heart, whereby the spirit of man is enlarged and waxes at--that is love, given by the Holy Spirit through faith in Christ--so that he is drawn unto Christ, that gracious and good Testator, and made quite another and a new man. Who would not shed tears of gladness, nay well-nigh faint for the joy he hath toward Christ, if he believed with unshaken faith that this inestimable promise of Christ belonged to him! How could one help loving so great a Benefactor, who offers, promises and grants, all unbidden, such great riches, and this eternal inheritance, to one unworthy and deserving of somewhat far different?

Therefore, it is our one misfortune, that we have many masses in the world, and yet none or but the fewest of us recognize, consider and receive these promises and riches that are offered, although verily we should do nothing else in the mass with greater zeal (yea, it demands all our zeal) than set before our eyes, meditate, and ponder these words, these promises of Christ, which truly are the mass itself, in order to exercise, nourish, increase, and strengthen our faith by such daily remembrance. For this is what He commands, saying, "This do in remembrance of me." [1 Cor. 11:24]

This should be done by the preachers of the Gospel, in order that this promise might be faithfully impressed upon the people and commended to them, to the awakening of faith in the same. But how many are there now who know that the mass is the promise of Christ? I will say nothing of those godless preachers of fables, who teach human traditions instead of this promise. And even if they teach these words of Christ, they do not teach them as a promise or testament, and, therefore, not to the awakening of faith.

O the pity of it! Under this captivity, they take every precaution that no layman should hear these words of Christ, as if they were too sacred to be delivered to the common people. So mad are we[57] priests that we arrogantly claim that the so-called words of consecration may be said by ourselves alone, as secret words, yet so that they do not profit even us, or we too fail to regard them as promises or as a testament, for the strengthening of faith. Instead of believing them, we reverence them with I know not what superstitious and godless fancies. This misery of ours, what is it but a device of Satan to remove every trace of the mass out of the Church? although he is meanwhile at work filing every nook and corner on earth with masses, that is, abuses and mockeries of God's testament, and burdening the world more and more heavily with grievous sins of idolatry, to its deeper condemnation. For what worse idolatry can there be than to abuse God's promises with perverse opinions and to neglect or extinguish faith in them?

For God does not deal, nor has He ever dealt, with man otherwise than through a word of promise, as I have said[58]; again, we cannot deal with God otherwise than through faith in the word of His promise. He does not desire works, nor has He need of them; we deal with men and with ourselves on the basis of works. But He has need of this,--that we deem Him true to His promises, wait patiently for Him, and thus worship Him with faith, hope and love. Thus He obtains His glory among us, since it is not of ourselves who run, but of Him who showeth mercy [Ps. 115:1], promiseth and giveth, that we have and hold every blessing [Rom. 9:16]. That is the true worship and service of God which we must perform in the mass. But if the words of promise are not proclaimed, what exercise of faith can there be? And without faith, who can have hope or love? Without faith, hope and love, what service can there be? There is no doubt, therefore, that in our day all priests and monks, together with all their bishops and superiors, are idolaters and in a most perilous state, by reason of this ignorance, abuse and mockery of the mass, or sacrament, or testament of God.

For any one can easily see that these two--the promise and faith--must go together. For without the promise there is nothing to believe, while without faith the promise, remains without effect; for it is established and fulfilled through faith. From this every one will readily gather that the mass, which is nothing else than the promise, is approached and observed only in this faith, without which whatever prayers, preparations, works, signs of the cross, or genuflections are brought to it, are incitements to impiety rather than exercises of piety; for they who come thus prepared are wont to imagine themselves on that account justly entitled to approach the altar, when in reality they are less prepared than at any other time and in any other work, by reason of the unbelief which they bring with them. How many priests will you find every day offering the sacrifice of the mass, who accuse themselves of a horrible crime if they--wretched men!--commit a trifling, blunder, such as putting on the wrong robe or forgetting to wash their hands or stumbling over their prayers; but that they neither regard nor believe the mass itself, namely, the divine promise--this causes them not the slightest qualms of conscience. O worthless religion of this our age, the most godless and thankless of all ages!

Hence the only worthy preparation and proper use of the mass is faith in the mass, that is to say, in the divine promise. Whoever, therefore, is minded to approach the altar and to receive the sacrament, let him beware of appearing empty before the Lord God [Ex. 23:15; 34:20]. But he will appear empty unless he has faith in the mass, or this new testament. What godless work that he could commit would be a more grievous crime against the truth of God, than this unbelief of his, by which, as much as in him lies, he convicts God of being a liar and a maker of empty promises? The safest course, therefore, will be to go to mass in the same spirit in which you would go to hear any other promise of God; that is, not to be ready to perform and bring many works, but to believe and receive all that is there promised, or proclaimed by the priest as having been promised to you. If you do not go in this spirit, beware of going at all; you will surely go to your condemnation.

I was right then in saying[59] that the whole power of the mass consists in the words of Christ, in which He testifies that the remission of sins is bestowed on all those who believe that His body is given and His blood shed for them. For this reason nothing is more important for those who go to hear mass than diligently and in full faith to ponder these words. Unless they do this, all else that they do is in vain.

[Sidenote: The External Sign, which is the Sacrament]

But while the mass is the word of Christ, it is also true that God is wont to add to well-nigh every promise of His a certain sign as a mark or memorial of His promise, so that we may thereby the more faithfully hold to His promise and be the more forcibly admonished by it. Thus, to his promise to Noah that He would not again destroy the world by a flood, He added His bow in the clouds, to show that He would be mindful of His covenant [Gen. 9:13]. And after promising Abraham the inheritance in his seed, He gave him the sign of circumcision as the seal of his righteousness by faith. Thus, to Gideon He granted the sign of the dry and the wet fleece, to confirm His promise of victory over the Midianites [Judges 6:36 ff.]. And to Ahaz He offered a sign through Isaiah concerning his victory over the kings of Syria and Samaria, to strengthen his faith in the promise [Isa. 7:10 ff.]. And many such signs of the promises of God do we find in the Scriptures.

Thus also to the mass, that crown of all His promises. He adds His body and blood in the bread and wine, as a memorial sign of this great promise; as He says, "This do in remembrance of me." [1 Cor. 11:24] Even so in baptism He adds to the words of the promise, the sign of immersion in water. We learn from this that in every promise of God two things are presented to us--the word and the sign--so that we are to understand the word to be the testament, but the sign to be the sacrament. Thus, in the mass, the word of Christ is the testament, and the bread and wine are the sacrament. And as there is greater power in the word than in the sign, so there is greater power in the testament than in the sacrament; for a man can have and use the word, or testament, apart from the sign, or sacrament. "Believe," says Augustine, "and thou hast eaten."[60] But what does one believe save the word of promise? Therefore I can hold mass every day, yea, every hour, for I can set the words of Christ before me, and with them refresh and strengthen my faith, as often as I choose. That is a truly spiritual eating and drinking.[61]

Here you may see what great things our theologians of the Sentences[62] have produced. That which is the principal and chief thing, namely, the testament and word of promise, is not treated by one of them; thus they have obliterated faith and the whole power of the mass. But the second part of the mass,--the sign, or sacrament,[63]--this alone do they discuss, yet in such a manner that here too they teach not faith but their preparations and _opera operata_, participations and fruits[64], as though these were the mass, until they have fallen to babbling of transubstantiation and endless other metaphysical quibbles, and have destroyed the proper understanding and use of both sacrament and testament, altogether abolished faith, and caused Christ's people to forget their God, as the prophet says, days without number [Jer. 2:32]. But do you let the others tell over the manifold fruits of hearing mass, and turn hither your mind, and say and believe with the prophet, that God here prepares a table before you, against all those that afflict you, at which your soul may eat and grow fat [Ps. 23:5]. But your faith is fed only with the word of divine promise, for "not in bread alone doth man live, but in every word that proceedeth from the mouth of God." [Deut. 8:3; Matt. 4:4] Hence, in the mass you must above all things pay closest heed to the word of promise, as to your rich banquet, green pasture, and sacred refreshment; you must esteem this word higher than all else, trust in it above all things, and cling firmly to it even through the midst of death and all sins. By thus doing you will attain not merely to those tiny drops and crumbs of "fruits of the mass," which some have superstitiously imagined, but to the very fountainhead of life, which is faith in the word, from which every blessing flows; as it is said in John iv: "He that believeth in me, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water" [John 7:38]; and again: "He that shall drink of the water that I will give him, it shall become in him a fountain of living water, springing up into life everlasting." [John 4:14][65]

Now there are two things that commonly tempt us to lose the fruits of the mass: first, the fact that we are sinners and unworthy of such great things because of our exceeding vileness; and, secondly, the act that, even if we were worthy, these things are so high that our faint-hearted nature dare not aspire to them or ever hope to attain to them. For to have God for our Father, to be His sons and heirs of all His goods--these are the great blessings that come to us through the forgiveness of sins and life everlasting. And who that regarded them aright must not rather stand aghast before them than desire to possess them? Against this twofold faintness of ours we must lay hold on the word of Christ and fix our gaze on it much more firmly than on those thoughts of our weakness. For "great are the works of the Lord [Ps. 111:2]; wrought out according to all His wills, who is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think." [Eph. 3:20] If they did not surpass our worthiness, our grasp and all our thoughts, they would not be divine. Thus Christ also encourages us when He says: "Fear not, little flock, for it hath pleased your Father to give you a kingdom." [Luke 17:32] For it is just this overflowing goodness of the incomprehensible God, lavished upon us through Christ, that moves us to love Him again with our whole heart above all things, to be drawn to Him with all confidence, to despise all things else, and be ready to suffer all things for Him; wherefore this sacrament is well styled "a fount of love."

Let us take an illustration of this from every day life[66]. If a thousand _gulden_ were bequeathed by a rich lord to a beggar or an unworthy and wicked servant, it is certain that he would boldly claim and take them regardless of his unworthiness and the greatness of the bequest. And if any one should seek to oppose him by casting in his teeth his unworthiness and the large amount of the legacy, what do you suppose he would say? He would say, forsooth: "What is that to you? What I accept, I accept not on my merits or by any right that I may personally have to it; I know that I am unworthy and receive more than I have deserved, nay, I have deserved the very opposite. But I claim it because it is so written in the will, and on the score of another's goodness. If it was not an unworthy thing for him to bequeath so great a sum to an unworthy person, why should I reuse to accept it because of my unworthiness? Nay, the more unworthy I am, the more reason have I to accept this other man's gracious gift." With such thoughts we need to fortify the consciences of men against all qualms and scruples, that they may lay hold on the promise of Christ with unwavering faith, and take the greatest care to approach the sacrament, not trusting in their confession, prayer and preparation, but rather despairing of these and with a proud confidence in Christ Who gives the promise. For, as we have said again and again, the word of promise must here reign supreme in a pure and unalloyed faith, and such faith is the one and all-sufficient preparation.

[Sidenote: The Mass Converted into a Good Work]

Hence we see how angry God is with us, in that he has permitted godless teachers to conceal the words of this testament from us, and thereby, as much as in them lay, to extinguish faith. And the inevitable result of this extinguishing of faith is even now plainly to be seen--namely, the most godless superstition of works. For when faith dies and the word of faith is silent, works and the traditions of works immediately crowd into their place. By them we have been carried away out of our own land, as in a Babylonian captivity, and despoiled of all our precious possessions. This has been the fate of the mass; it has been converted by the teaching of godless men into a good work, which they themselves call an _opus operatum_[67] and by which they presumptuously imagine themselves all-powerful with God. Thereupon they proceeded to the very height of madness, and having invented the lie that the mass works _ex opere operate_[68], they asserted further that it is none the less profitable to others, even if it be harmful to the wicked priest celebrating it. On such a foundation of sand they base their applications, participations, sodalities, anniversaries and numberless other money-making schemes.

These lures are so powerful, widespread and firmly entrenched that you will scarcely be able to prevail against them unless you keep before you with unremitting care the real meaning of the mass, and bear well in mind what has been said above. We have seen that the mass is nothing else than the divine promise or testament of Christ, sealed with the sacrament of His body and blood. If that is true, you will understand that it cannot possibly be a work, and that there is nothing to do in it, nor can it be dealt with in any other way than by faith alone. And faith is not a work, but the mistress and the life of all works[69]. Where in all the world is there a man so foolish as to regard a promise made to him, or a testament given to him, as a good work which by his acceptance of it he renders to the testator? What heir will imagine he is doing his departed father a kindness by accepting the terms of the will and the inheritance bequeathed to him? What godless audacity is it, therefore, when we who are to receive the testament of God come as those who would perform a good work or Him! This ignorance of the testament, this captivity of the sacrament--are they not too sad for tears? When we ought to be grateful for benefits received, we come in our pride to give that which we ought to take, mocking with unheard-of perversity the mercy of the Giver by giving as a work the thing we receive as a gift; so that the testator, instead of being the dispenser of His own goods, becomes the recipient of ours. Out upon such godless doings!

Who has ever been so mad as to regard baptism as a good work, or to believe that by being baptised he was performing a work which he might offer to God or himself and communicate to others? I, therefore, there is no good work that can be communicated to others in this one sacrament or testament, neither will there be any in the mass, since it too is nothing else than a testament and sacrament. Hence it is a manifest and wicked error to offer or apply masses for sins, or satisfactions, for the dead, or for any necessity whatsoever of one's own or of others. You will readily see the obvious truth of this if you but hold firmly that the mass is a divine promise, which can profit no one, be applied to no one, intercede or no one, and be communicated to no one, save him alone who believes with a faith of his own. Who can receive or apply, in behalf of another, the promise of God, which demands the personal faith of every individual? Can I give to another what God has promised, even if he does not believe? Can I believe for another, or cause another to believe? But this is what I must do if I am able to apply and communicate the mass to others; for there are but two things in the mass--the promise of God, and the faith of man which takes that which the promise offers. But if it is true that I can do this, then I can also hear and believe the Gospel for others, I can be baptised for another, I can be absolved from sins for another, I can also partake of the sacrament of the altar for another, and--to run the gamut of their sacraments also--I can marry a wife for another, be ordained for another, receive confirmation and extreme unction for another! In fine, why did not Abraham believe for all the Jews? Why was faith in the promise made to Abraham demanded of every individual Jew?

Therefore, let this irrefutable truth stand fast. Where there is a divine promise every one must stand upon his own feet, every one's personal faith is demanded, every one will give an account for himself and will bear his own burden [Gal. 6:5], as it is said in the last chapter of Mark: "He that believeth and is baptised, shall be saved; but he that believeth not, shall be damned." [Mark 16:16] Even so every one may derive a blessing from the mass for himself alone and only by his own faith, and no one can commune for any other; just as the priest cannot administer the sacrament to any one in another's stead, but administers the same sacrament to each individual by himself. For in consecrating and administering, the priests are our ministers, through whom we do not offer a good work or commune (in the active), but receive the promises and the sign and are communed (in the passive). That has remained to this day the custom among the laity, for they are not said to do good, but to receive it. But the priests have departed into godless ways; out of the sacrament and testament of God, the source of blessings to be received, they have made a good work which they may communicate and offer to others.

But you will say: How is this? Will you not overturn the practice and teaching of all the churches and monasteries, by virtue of which they have flourished these many centuries? For the mass is the foundation of their anniversaries, intercessions, applications, communications, etc.--that is to say, of their at income. I answer: This is the very thing that has constrained me to write of the captivity of the Church, for in this manner the adorable testament of God has been subjected to the bondage of a godless traffic, through the opinions and traditions of wicked men, who, passing over the Word of God, have put forth the thoughts of their own hearts and misled the whole world. What do I care for the number and influence of those who are in this error? The truth is mightier than they all. If you are able to gainsay Christ, according to Whom the mass is a testament and sacrament, then I will admit that they are in the right. Or if you can bring yourself to say that that man is doing a good work, who receives the benefit of the testament, or who uses this sacrament of promise in order to receive it, then I will gladly condemn my teachings. But since you can do neither, why do you hesitate to turn your back on the multitude who go after evil, and to give God the glory and confess His truth? Which is, indeed, that all priests today are perversely mistaken, who regard the mass as a work whereby they may relieve their own necessities and those of others, dead or alive. I am uttering unheard-of and startling things; but if you will consider the meaning of the mass, you will realize that I have spoken the truth. The fault lies with our utter supineness, in which we have become blind to the wrath of God that is raging against us.

[Sidenote: The Prayers Distinguished from the Mass]

I am ready, however, to admit that the prayers which we pour out before God when we are gathered together to partake of the mass, are good works or benefits, which we impart, apply and communicate to one another, and which we offer for one another; as James teaches us to pray for one another that we may be saved [Jas. 5:16], and as Paul, in I Timothy ii, commands that supplications, prayers and intercessions be made for all men, for kings, and for all that are in high station [1 Tim. 2:1 f.]. These are not the mass, but works of the mass--if the prayers of heart and lips may be called works--for they flow from the faith that is kindled or increased in the sacrament. For the mass, being the promise of God, is not fulfilled by praying, but only by believing; but when we believe, we shall also pray and perform every good work. But what priest of them all offers the sacrifice of the mass in this sense and believes that he is offering up naught but the prayers? They all imagine themselves to be offering up Christ Himself, as all-sufficient sacrifice, to God the Father, and to be performing a good work for all whom they have the intention to benefit. For they put their trust in the work which the mass accomplishes, and they do not ascribe this work to prayer. Thus, gradually, the error has grown, until they have come to ascribe to the sacrament what belongs to the prayers, and to offer to God what should be received as a benefit.

It is necessary, therefore, to make a sharp distinction between the testament or sacrament itself and the prayers which are there offered; and no less necessary to bear in mind that the prayers avail nothing, either for him who offers them or for those for whom they are offered, unless the sacrament be first received in faith, so that it is faith that offers the prayers, for it alone is heard, as James teaches in his first chapter [Jas. 1:6 f.]. So great is the difference between prayer and the mass. The prayer may be extended to as many persons as one desires; but the mass is received by none but the person who believes for himself, and only in proportion to his faith. It cannot be given either to God or to men; but God alone gives it, by the ministration of the priest, to such men as receive it by faith alone, without any works or merits. For no one would dare to make the mad assertion that a ragged beggar does a good work when he comes to receive a gift from a rich man. But the mass is, as has been said[70], the gift and promise of God, offered to all men by the hand of the priest. It is certain, therefore, that the mass is not a work which may be communicated to others, but it is the object, as it is called, of faith, for the strengthening and nourishing of the personal faith of each individual.

[Sidenote: The Most Dangerous Error of All: the Mass a Sacrifice]

But there is yet another stumbling-block that must be removed, and this is much greater and the most dangerous of all. It is the common belief that the mass is a sacrifice, which is offered to God. Even the words of the canon[71] tend in this direction, when they speak of "these gifts," "these offerings," "this holy sacrifice," and farther on, of "this oblation." Prayer also is made, in so many words, "that the sacrifice may be accepted even as the sacrifice of Abel," etc., and hence Christ is termed the "Sacrifice of the altar." In addition to this there are the sayings of the holy Fathers, the great number of examples, and the constant usage and custom of all the world.

To all of this, firmly entrenched as it is, we must resolutely oppose the words and example of Christ. For unless we hold fast to the truth, that the mass is the promise or testament of Christ, as the words clearly say, we shall lose the whole Gospel and all our comfort. Let us permit nothing to prevail against these words, even though an angel from heaven should teach otherwise [Gal. 1:8]. For there is nothing said in them of a work or a sacrifice. Moreover, we have also the example of Christ on our side. For at the Last Supper, when He instituted this sacrament and established this testament, Christ did not offer Himself to God the Father, nor did He perform a good work on behalf of others, but He set this testament before each of them that sat at table with Him and offered him the sign. Now, the more closely our mass resembles that first mass of all, which Christ performed at the Last Supper, the more Christian will it be. But Christ's mass was most simple, without the pageantry of vestments, genuflections, chants and other ceremonies. Indeed, if it were necessary to offer the mass as a sacrifice, then Christ's institution of it was not complete.

Not that any one should revile the Church universal for embellishing and amplifying the mass with many additional rites and ceremonies. But this is what we contend for; no one should be deceived by the glamour of the ceremonies and entangled in the multitude of pompous forms, and thus lose the simplicity of the mass itself, and indeed practice a sort of transubstantiation--losing sight of the simple substance of the mass and clinging to the manifold accidents of outward pomp. For whatever has been added to the word and example of Christ, is an accident of the mass, and ought to be regarded just as we regard the so-called monstrances and corporal cloths in which the host itself is contained[72]. Therefore, as distributing a testament, or accepting a promise, differs diametrically from offering a sacrifice, so it is a contradiction in terms to call the mass a sacrifice; for the former is something that we receive, while the latter is something that we offer. The same thing cannot be received and offered at the same time, nor can it be both given and taken by the same person; just as little as our prayer can be the same as that which our prayer obtains, or the act of praying the same as the act of receiving the answer to our prayer.

What shall we say, then, of the canon of the mass[73] and the sayings of the Fathers? First of all, if there were nothing at all to be said against them, it would yet be the safer course to reject them all rather than admit that the mass is a work or a sacrifice, lest we deny the word of Christ and overthrow faith together with the mass. Nevertheless, not to reject altogether the canons and the Fathers, we shall say the following: The Apostle instructs us in I Corinthians xi that it was customary for Christ's believers, when they came together to mass, to bring with them meat and drink, which they called "collections" and distributed among all who were in want [1 Cor. 11:20 ff.], after the example of the apostles in Acts iv [Acts 4:34 f.]. From this store was Acts taken the portion of bread and wine that was consecrated for use in the sacrament[74]. And since all this store of meat and drink was sanctified by the word and by prayer [1 Tim. 4:5], being "lifted up" according to the Hebrew rite of which we read in Moses [Lev. 8:27], the words and the rite of this lifting up, or for offering, have come down to us, although the custom of collecting that which was offered, or lifted up, has fallen long since into disuse. Thus, in Isaiah xxxvii, Hezekiah commanded Isaiah to lift up his prayer in the sight of God for the remnant [Isa. 37:4]. The Psalmist sings: "Lift up your hands to the holy places" [Ps. 134:2]; and: "To Thee will I lift up my hands." [Ps. 63:4] And in I Timothy ii we read: "Lifting up pure hands in every place." [1 Tim. 2:8] For this reason the words "sacrifice" and "oblation" must be taken to refer, not to the sacrament and testament, but to these collections, whence also the word "collect" has come down to us, as meaning the prayers said in the mass.

The same thing is indicated when the priest elevates the bread and the chalice immediately after the consecration, whereby he shows that he is not offering anything to God, for he does not say a single word here about a victim or an oblation. But this elevation is either a survival of that Hebrew rite of lifting up what was received with thanksgiving and returned to God, or else it is an admonition to us, to provoke us to faith in this testament which the priest has set forth and exhibited in the words of Christ, so that now he shows us also the sign of the testament. Thus the oblation of the bread properly accompanies the demonstrative this in the words, "This is my body," by which sign the priest addresses us gathered about him; and in like manner the oblation of the chalice accompanies the demonstrative this in the words, "This chalice is the new testament, etc." For it is faith that the priest ought to awaken in us by this act of elevation. And would to God that, as he elevates the sign, or sacrament, openly before our eyes, he might also sound in our ears the words of the testament with a loud, clear voice, and in the language of the people, whatever it may be, in order that faith may be the more effectively awakened. For why may mass be said in Greek and Latin and Hebrew, and not also in German or in any other language?[75]

[Sidenote: Fraternal Advice to the Priests]

Let the priests, therefore, who in these corrupt and perilous times offer the sacrifice of the mass, take heed, first, that the words of the greater and the lesser canon[76] together with the collects, which smack too strongly of sacrifice, be not referred by them to the sacrament, but to the bread and wine which they consecrate, or to the prayers which they say. For the bread and wine are offered at the first, in order that they may be blessed and thus sanctified by the Word and by prayer; but after they have been blessed and consecrated, they are no longer offered, but received as a gift from God. And let the priest bear in mind that the Gospel is to be set above all canons and collects devised by men; and the Gospel does not sanction the calling of the mass a sacrifice, as has been shown.

Further, when a priest celebrates a public mass, he should determine to do naught else through the mass than to commune himself and others; yet he may at the same time offer prayers for himself and for others, but he must beware lest he presume to offer the mass. But let him that holds a private mass[77] determine to commune himself. The private mass does not differ in the least from the ordinary communion which any layman receives at the hand of the priest, and has no greater effect, apart from the special prayers and the act that the priest consecrates the elements for himself and administers them to himself. So far as the blessing[78] of the mass and sacrament is concerned, we are all of us on an equal footing, whether we be priests or laymen.

If a priest be requested by others to celebrate so-called votive masses[79], let him beware of accepting a reward for the mass, or of presuming to offer a votive sacrifice; he should be at pains to refer all to the prayers which he offers for the dead or the living, saying within himself, "I will go and partake of the sacrament for myself alone, and while partaking I will say a prayer for this one and that." Thus he will take his reward--to buy him food and clothing--not for the mass, but for the prayers. And let him not be disturbed because all the world holds and practices the contrary. You have the most sure Gospel, and relying on this you may well despise the opinions of men. But if you despise me and insist upon offering the mass and not the prayers alone, know that I have faithfully warned you and will be without blame on the day of judgment; you will have to bear your sin alone. I have said what I was bound to say as brother to brother for his soul's salvation; yours will be the gain if you observe it, yours the loss if you neglect it. And if some should even condemn what I have said, I reply in the words of Paul: "But evil men and seducers shall grow worse and worse: erring and driving into error." [2 Tim. 3:13]

From the above every one will readily understand what there is in that oft quoted saying of Gregory's[80]: "A mass celebrated by a wicked priest is not to be considered of less effect than one celebrated by any godly priest, and St. Peter's mass would not have been better than Judas the traitor's, if they had offered the sacrifice of the mass." Which saying has served many as a cloak to cover their godless doings, and because of it they have invented the distinction between _opus operati_ and _opus operantis_[81], so as to be free to lead wicked lives themselves and yet to benefit other men. But Gregory speaks truth; only they misunderstand and pervert his words. For it is true beyond a question, that the testament or sacrament is given and received through the ministration of wicked priests no less completely than through the ministration of the most saintly. For who has any doubt that the Gospel is preached by the ungodly? Now the mass is part of the Gospel, nay, its sum and substance; for what is the whole Gospel but the good tidings of the forgiveness of sins? But whatever can be said of the forgiveness of sins and the mercy of God, is all briefly comprehended in the word of this testament. Wherefore the popular sermons ought to be naught else than expositions of the mass, that is, a setting forth of the divine promise of this testament; that would be to teach faith and truly to edify the Church. But in our day the expounders of the mass play with the allegories of human rites and play the fool with the people.

Therefore, just as a wicked priest may baptise, that is, apply the word of promise and the sign of the water to a candidate for baptism, so he may also set forth the promise of this sacrament and administer it to those who partake, and even himself partake, like Judas the traitor, at the Lord's Supper. It still remains always the same sacrament and testament, which works in the believer its own work, in the unbeliever a "strange work." [Isa. 28:21] But when it comes to offering a sacrifice the case is quite different. For not the mass but the prayers are offered to God, and therefore it is as plain as day that the offerings of a wicked priest avail nothing, but, as Gregory says again, when an unworthy intercessor is chosen, the heart of the judge is moved to greater displeasure. We must, therefore, not confound these two--the mass and the prayers, the sacrament and the work, the testament and the sacrifice; for the one comes from God to us, through the ministration of the priest, and demands our faith, the other proceeds from our faith to God, through the priest, and demands His answer. The former descends, the latter ascends. Therefore the former does not necessarily require a worthy and godly minister, but the latter does indeed require such an one, because God heareth not sinners [John 9:31]. He knows how to send down blessings through evildoers, but He does not accept the work of any evildoer, as He showed in the case of Cain [Gen. 4:5], and as it is said in Proverbs xv, "The victims of the wicked are abominable to the Lord" [Prov. 15:8]; and in Romans xiv, "All that is not of faith is sin." [Rom. 14:23]

[Sidenote: Worthy Communicants]

But in order to make an end of this first part, we must take up one remaining point against which an opponent might arise. From all that has been said we conclude that the mass was provided only for such as have a sad, afflicted, disturbed, perplexed and erring conscience, and that they alone commune worthily. For, since the word of divine promise in this sacrament sets forth the remission of sins, that man may fearlessly draw near, whoever he be, whose sins distress him, either with remorse or past or with temptation to future wrongdoing. For this testament of Christ is the one remedy against sins, past, present and future, if you but cling to it with unwavering faith and believe that what the words of the testament declare is freely granted to you. But if you do not believe this, you will never, nowhere, and by no works or efforts of your own, find peace of conscience. For faith alone sets the conscience at peace, and unbelief alone keeps the conscience troubled.

The Sacrament Of Baptism

THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM

Blessed be God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Who according to the riches of His mercy hath preserved in His Church this sacrament at least, untouched and untainted by the ordinances of men, and hath made it free unto all nations and every estate of mankind, nor suffered it to be oppressed by the filthy and godless monsters of greed and superstition. For He desired that by it little children, incapable of greed and superstition, might be initiated and sanctified in the simple faith of His Word; for whom even to-day baptism hath its chief blessing. But if this sacrament were to be given to such as had arrived at man's estate, methinks it could not possibly have retained its power and its glory against the tyranny of greed and superstition which has everywhere laid waste things divine. Doubtless the wisdom of the flesh would here too have devised its preparations and worthinesses, its reservations, restrictions, and I know not what other snares for taking money, until water fetched as high a price as parchment[82] does now.

But Satan, though he could not quench the power of baptism in little children, nevertheless succeeded in quenching it in all adults, so that there are scarce any who call to mind their baptism and still fewer who glory in it; so many other ways have they discovered of ridding themselves of their sins and of reaching heaven. The source of these false opinions is that dangerous saying of St. Jerome's[83]--either unhappily phrased or wrongly interpreted--in which he terms penance "the second plank" after the shipwreck; as if baptism were not penance. Accordingly, when men fall into sin, they despair of "the first plank," which is the ship, as though it had gone under, and fasten all their faith on the second plank, that is, penance. This has produced those endless burdens of vows, religious works, satisfactions, pilgrimages, indulgences, and sects[84], whence has arisen that flood of books, questions, opinions and human traditions, which the world cannot contain; so that this tyranny plays worse havoc with the Church of God than any tyrant ever did with the Jewish people or with any other nation under heaven.

It was the duty of the pontiffs to abate this evil, and with all diligence to lead Christians to the true understanding of baptism, so that they might know what manner of men they are and how it becomes Christians to live. But instead of this, their work is now to lead the people as far astray as possible from their baptism, to immerse all men in the flood of their oppression, and to cause the people of Christ, as the prophet says, to forget Him days without number [Jer. 2:32]. O unhappy, all who bear the name of priest to-day! They not only do not know nor do what becometh priests, but they are ignorant of what they ought to know and do. They fulfil the saying in Isaiah lvi: "His watch-men are all blind, they are all ignorant: the shepherds themselves knew no understanding; all have declined into their own way, every one after his own gain." [Isa. 56:10]

[Sidenote: The First Part of Baptism: The Divine Promise]

Now, the first thing in baptism to be considered is the divine promise, which says: "He that believeth and is baptised shall be saved." This promise must be set far above all the glitter of works, vows, religious orders, and whatever man has added thereto; for on it all our salvation depends [Mark 16:16]. But we must so consider it as to exercise our faith therein and in nowise doubt that we are saved when we are baptised. For unless this faith be present or be conferred in baptism, baptism will profit us nothing, nay, it becomes a hindrance to us, not only in the moment of its reception, but all the days of our life; for such unbelief accuses God's promise of being a lie, and this is the blackest of all sins. If we set ourselves to this exercise of faith, we shall at once perceive how difficult it is to believe this promise of God. For our human weakness, conscious of its sins, finds nothing more difficult to believe than that it is saved or will be saved; and yet unless it does believe this, it cannot be saved, because it does not believe the truth of God that promiseth salvation.

This message should have been untiringly impressed upon the people and this promise dinned without ceasing in their ears; their baptism should have been called again and again to their mind, and faith constantly awakened and nourished. For, just as the truth of this divine promise, once pronounced over us, continues unto death, so our faith in the same ought never to cease, but to be nourished and strengthened until death, by the continual remembrance of this promise made to us in baptism. Therefore, when we rise from sins, or repent, we do but return to the power and the faith of baptism from whence we fell, and find our way back to the promise then made to us, from which we departed when we sinned. For the truth of the promise once made remains steadfast, ever ready to receive us back with open arms when we return. This, if I mistake not, is the real meaning of the obscure saying, that baptism is the beginning and foundation of all the sacraments, without which none of the others may be received.

It will, therefore, be no small gain or a penitent to lay hold before all else on the memory of his baptism, confidently to call to mind the promise of God, which he has forsaken, and to plead it with His Lord, rejoicing that he is baptised and therefore is yet within the fortress of salvation, and abhorring his wicked ingratitude in falling away from its faith and truth. His soul will find wondrous comfort, and will be encouraged to hope or mercy, when he considers that the divine promise which God made to him and which cannot possibly lie, still stands unbroken and unchanged, yea, unchangeable by any sins; as Paul says in 1I Timothy ii, "If we believe not. He continueth faithful, He cannot deny Himself." [2 Tim. 2:13] Ay, this truth of God will sustain him, so that if all else should sink in ruins, this truth, if he believe it, will not ail him. For in it he has a shield against all assaults of the enemy, an answer to the sins that disturb his conscience, an antidote for the dread of death and judgment, and a comfort in every temptation,--namely, this one truth,--and he can say, "God is faithful that promised [Heb. 10:23], Whose sign I have received in my baptism. If God be for me, who is against me?" [Rom. 8:31]

The children of Israel, whenever they repented of their sins, turned their thoughts first of all to the exodus from Egypt, and, remembering this, returned to God Who had brought them out. This memory and this refuge were many times impressed upon them by Moses, and afterward repeated by David. How much rather ought we to call to mind our exodus from Egypt, and, remembering, turn back again to Him Who led us forth through the washing of regeneration [Titus 3:5], which we are bidden remember for this very purpose. And this we can do most fittingly in the sacrament of bread and wine. Indeed, in olden times these three sacraments--penance, baptism and the bread--were all celebrated at the same service, and one supplemented and assisted the other. We read also of a certain holy virgin who in every time of temptation made baptism her sole defence, saying simply, "I am a Christian"; and straight-way the adversary led from her, or he knew the power of her baptism and of her faith which clung to the truth of God's promise[85].

Lo, how rich therefore is a Christian, or one who is baptised! Even if he would, he cannot lose his salvation, however much he sin, unless he will not believe. For no sin can condemn him save unbelief alone. All other sins,--if faith in God's promise made in baptism return or remain,--all other sins, I say, are immediately blotted out through that same faith, or rather through the truth of God, because He cannot deny Himself if you but confess Him and cling believing to Him that promises. But as for contrition, confession of sins, and satisfaction[86],--with all those carefully thought-out exercises of men,--if you turn your attention to them and neglect this truth of God, they will suddenly fail you and leave you more wretched than before. For whatever is done without faith in the truth of God, is vanity of vanities and vexation of spirit [Eccl. 1:2, 14].

Again, how perilous, nay, how false it is to suppose that penance is the second plank after the shipwreck! How harmful an error it is to believe that the power of baptism is broken, and the ship has foundered, because we have sinned! Nay; that one, solid and unsinkable ship remains, and is never broken up into floating timbers; it carries all those who are brought to the harbor of salvation; it is the truth of God giving us its promise in the sacraments. Many, indeed, rashly leap overboard and perish in the waves; these are they who depart from faith in the promise and plunge into sin. But the ship herself remains intact and holds her steady course; and if one be able somehow to return to the ship, it is not on any plank but in the good ship herself that he is borne to life. Such an one is he who through faith returns to the sure promise of God that abideth forever. Therefore Peter, in his second epistle, rebukes them that sin, because they have forgotten that they were purged from their old sins [2 Peter 1:9]; in which words he doubtless chides their ingratitude or the baptism they had received and their wicked unbelief.

What is the good, then, of making many books on baptism and yet not teaching this faith in the promise? All the sacraments were instituted for the purpose of nourishing faith, but these godless men so completely pass over this faith that they even assert a man dare not be certain of the forgiveness of sins, that is, of the grace of the sacraments. With such wicked teachings they delude the world, and not only take captive but altogether destroy the sacrament of baptism, in which the chief glory of our conscience consists. Meanwhile they madly rage against the miserable souls of men with their contritions, anxious confessions, circumstances[87], satisfactions, works and endless other absurdities. Read, therefore, with great caution the Master of the Sentences[88] in his fourth book, or, better yet, despise him together with all his commentators, who at their best write only of the material and form[87] of the sacraments, that is, they treat of the dead and death-dealing letter of the sacraments, but pass over in utter silence the spirit, life and use, that is, the truth of the divine promise and our faith.

Beware, therefore, lest the external pomp of works and the deceits of human traditions mislead you, so that you may not wrong the divine truth and your faith. If you would be saved, you must begin with the faith of the sacraments, without any works whatever; but on faith the works will follow: only do not think lightly of faith, which is a work, and of all works the most excellent and the most difficult to do. Through it alone you will be saved, even if you should be compelled to do without any other works. For it is a work of God, not of man, as Paul teaches [Eph. 2:8]. The other works He works through us and with our help, but this one He works in us and without our help.

From this we can clearly see the difference, in baptism, between man the minister and God the Doer. For man baptises and does not baptise: he baptises, for he performs the work, immersing the person to be baptised; he does not baptise, for in that act he officiates not by his own authority, but in the stead of God. Hence, we ought to receive baptism at the hands of a man just as if Christ Himself, nay, God Himself, were baptising us with His own hands. For it is not man's baptism, but Christ's and God's baptism, which we receive by the hand of a man; just as every other created thing that we make use of by the hand of another, is God's alone. Therefore beware of dividing baptism in such a way as to ascribe the outward part to man and the inward part to God. Ascribe both to God alone, and look upon the person administering it as the instrument in God's hands, by which the Lord sitting in heaven thrusts you under the water with His own hands, and speaking by the mouth of His minister promises you, on earth with a human voice, the forgiveness of your sins.

This the words themselves indicate, when the priest says: "I baptise thee in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen"--and not: "I baptise thee in my own name." It is as though he said: "What I do, I do not by my own authority, but in the name and stead of God, so that you should regard it just as if our Lord Himself had done it in a visible manner. The Doer and the minister are different persons, but the work of both is the same work, or, rather, it is the work of the Doer alone, through my ministry." For I hold that "in the name of" refers to the person of the Doer, so that the name of the Lord is not only to be uttered and invoked while the work is being done, but the work itself is to be done not as one's own work, but in the name and stead of another. In this sense Christ says, "Many shall come in my name," [Matt. 24:5] and in Romans i it is said, "By whom we have received grace and apostleship for obedience to the faith, in all nations, for His name." [Rom. 1:5]

This view I heartily endorse; for there is much of comfort and a mighty aid to faith in the knowledge that one has been baptised not by man, but by the Triune God Himself through a man acting among us in His name. This will dispose of that fruitless quarrel about the "form"[90] of baptism, as these words are called. The Greeks say: "May the servant of Christ be baptised," while the Latins say: "I baptise." Others again, pedantic triflers, condemn the use of the words, "I baptise thee in the name of Jesus Christ"[91]--although it is certain that the Apostles used this formula in baptising, as we read in the Acts of the Apostles--and would allow no other form to be valid than this: "I baptise thee in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." But their contention is in vain, for they bring no proof, but merely assert their own dreams. Baptism truly saves in whatever way it is administered, if only it be not administered in the name of man but of God. Nay, I have no doubt that if one received baptism in the name of the Lord, even though the wicked minister should not give it in the name of the Lord, he would yet be truly baptised in the name of the Lord. For the effect of baptism depends not so much on the faith or use of him that confers it as on the faith or use of him that receives it; of which we have an illustration in the case of the play-actor who was baptised in jest[92]. Such anxious disputings and questionings are aroused in us by those who ascribe nothing to faith and everything to works and forms, whereas we owe everything to faith alone and nothing to forms, and faith makes us free in spirit from all those scruples and fancies.

[Sidenote: The Second Part of Baptism: The Sign, or Sacrament]

The second part of baptism is the sign, or sacrament, which is that immersion into water whence also it derives its name; for the Greek _baptizo_ means I immerse, and _baptisma_ means immersion. For, as has been said[93], signs are added to the divine promises to represent that which the words signify, for, as they now say, that which the sacrament "effectively signifies." We shall see how much of truth there is in this. The great majority have supposed that there is some hidden spiritual power in the word or in the water, which works the grace of God in the soul of the recipient. Others deny this and hold that there is no power in the sacraments, but that grace is given by God alone, Who according to His covenant aids the sacraments He has instituted[94]. Yet all are agreed that the sacraments are effective signs of grace, and they reach this conclusion by this one argument: If the sacraments of the New Law merely "signified," it would not be apparent in what respect they surpassed the sacraments of the Old Law. Hence they have been driven to attribute such great power to the sacraments of the New Law that in their opinion they benefit even such men as are in mortal sins, and that they do not require faith or grace; it is sufficient not to oppose a "bar," that is, an actual intention to sin again.

But these views must be carefully avoided and shunned, because they are godless and infidel, being contrary to faith and to the nature of the sacraments. For it is an error to hold that the sacraments of the New Law differ from those of the Old Law in the efficacy of their "signifying." The "signifying" of both is equally efficacious. The same God Who now saves me by baptism saved Abel by his sacrifice, Noah by the bow, Abraham by circumcision, and all the others by their respective signs. So far as the "signifying" is concerned, there is no difference between a sacrament of the Old Law and one of the New; provided that by the Old Law you mean that which God wrought among the patriarchs and other fathers in the days of the law. But those signs which were given to the patriarchs and fathers must be sharply distinguished from the legal types which Moses instituted in his law, such as the priestly rites concerning robes, vessels, meats, dwellings, and the like. Between these and the sacraments of the New Law there is a vast difference, but no less between them and those signs that God from time to time gave to the fathers living judges under the law, such as the sign of Gideon's fleece [Judges 6:36], Manoah's sacrifice [Judges 13:19], or the sign which Isaiah offered to Ahaz, in Isaiah vii [Isa. 7:10]; for to these signs God attached a certain promise which required faith in Him.

This, then, is the difference between the legal types and the new and old signs--the former have not attached to them any word of promise requiring faith. Hence they are not signs of justification, for they are not sacraments of the faith that alone justifies, but only sacraments of works; their whole power and nature consisted in works, not in faith, and he that observed them fulfilled them, even if he did it without faith. But our signs, or sacraments, as well as those of the fathers, have attached to them a word of promise, which requires faith, and they cannot be fulfilled by any other work. Hence they are signs or sacraments of justification, for they are the sacraments of justifying faith and not of works. Their whole efficacy, therefore, consists in faith itself, not in the doing of a work; for whoever believes them fulfils them, even if he should not do a single work. Whence has arisen the saying, "Not the sacrament but the faith of the sacrament justifies." Thus circumcision did not justify Abraham and his seed, and yet the Apostle calls it the seal of the righteousness of faith [Rom. 4:11], because faith in the promise, to which circumcision was added, justified him and fulfilled that which circumcision signified. For faith was the spiritual circumcision of the foreskin of the heart [Deut. 10:16; Jer. 4:4], which was symbolised by the literal circumcision of the flesh. And in the same manner it was obviously not Abel's sacrifice that justified him, but it was his faith, by which he offered himself wholly to God and which was symbolised by the outward sacrifice.

Even so it is not baptism that justifies or benefits anyone, but it is faith in the word of promise, to which baptism is added. This faith justifies, and fulfils that which baptism signifies. For faith is the submersion of the old man and the emerging of the new. Therefore it cannot be that the new sacraments differ from the old, for both have the divine promise and the same spirit of faith; although they do differ vastly from the olden types on account of the word of promise, which is the one decisive point of difference. Even so, to-day, the outward show of vestments, holy places, meats and of all the endless ceremonies has doubtless a fine symbolical meaning, which is to be spiritually fulfilled; and yet because there is no word of divine promise attached to these things, they can in nowise be compared with the signs of baptism and of the bread, nor do they in any way justify or benefit one, since they are fulfilled in the very observance, apart from faith. For while they are taking place or are being performed, they are being fulfilled; as the Apostle says of them, in Colossians ii, "Which are all to perish with the using, after the commandments and doctrines of men." [Col. 2:22] The sacraments, on the contrary, are not fulfilled when they are observed, but when they are believed.

It cannot be true, therefore, that there is in the sacraments a power efficacious for justification, or that they are effective signs of grace[95]. All such assertions tend to destroy faith, and arise from ignorance of the divine promise. Unless you should call them effective in the sense that they certainly and efficaciously impart grace, where faith is unmistakably present. But it is not in this sense that efficacy is now ascribed to them; as witness the act that they are said to benefit all men, even the godless and unbelieving, provided they do not oppose a "bar"--as if such unbelief were not in itself the most obstinate and hostile of all bars to grace. So firmly bent are they on turning the sacrament into a command, and faith into a work. For if the sacrament confers grace on me because I receive it, then indeed I obtain grace by virtue of my work and not of faith; I lay hold not on the promise in the sacrament, but on the sign instituted and commanded by God. Do you not see, then, how completely the sacraments have been misunderstood by our sententious theologians?[96] They have taken no account, in their discussions on the sacraments, of either faith or the promise, but cling only to the sign and the use of the sign, and draw us away from faith to the work, from the word to the sign. Thus they have not only carried the sacraments captive (as I have said)[97], but have completely destroyed them, as far as they were able.

Therefore, let us open our eyes and learn to give more heed to the word than to the sign[98], and to faith than to the work, for the use of the sign, remembering that wherever there is a divine promise there faith is required, and that these two are so necessary to each other that neither can be efficacious apart from the other. For it is not possible to believe unless there be a promise, and the promise is not established unless it be believed. But where these two meet, they give a real and most certain efficacy to the sacraments. Hence, to seek the efficacy of the sacrament apart from the promise and apart from faith, is to labor in vain and to ind damnation. Thus Christ says: "He that believeth and is baptised, shall be saved; he that believe not shall be damned." [Mark 16:16] He shows us in this word that faith is so necessary a part of the sacrament that it can save even without the sacrament; for which reason He did not see it to say: "He that believeth not, _and is not baptised_. . ."

Baptism, then, signifies two things--death and resurrection; that is, full and complete justification. The minister's immersing the child in the water signifies death; his drawing it forth again signifies life. Thus Paul expounds it in Romans vi, "We are buried together with Christ by baptism into death; that as Christ is risen from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also may walk in newness of life." [Rom. 6:4] This death and resurrection we call the new creation, regeneration, and the spiritual birth. And this must not be understood only in a figurative sense, of the death of sin and the life of grace, as many understand it, but of actual death and resurrection. The significance of baptism is not an imaginary significance, and sin does not completely die, nor does grace completely rise, until the body of sin that we carry about in this life is destroyed; as the Apostle teaches in the same chapter [Rom. 6:6]. For as long as we are in the flesh, the desires of the flesh stir and are stirred. Wherefore, as soon as ever we begin to believe, we also begin to die to this world and to live unto God in the life to come; so that faith is truly a death and a resurrection, that is, it is that spiritual baptism in which we go under and come forth.

Hence it is indeed correct to say that baptism is a washing from sins, but that expression is too weak and mild to bring out the full significance of baptism, which is rather a symbol of death and resurrection. For this reason I would have the candidates for baptism completely immersed in the water, as the word[99] says and as the sacrament signifies. Not that I deem this necessary, but it were well to give to so perfect and complete a things a perfect and complete sign; thus it was also doubtless instituted by Christ. The sinner does not so much need to be washed as he needs to die, in order to be wholly renewed and made another creature, and to be conformed to the death and resurrection of Christ, with Whom, through baptism, he dies and rises again. Although you may properly say that Christ was washed clean of mortality when He died and rose again, yet that is a weaker way of putting it than if you said He was completely changed and renewed. In the same way it is far more forceful to say that baptism signifies our utter dying and rising to eternal life, than to say that it signifies merely our being washed clean from sins.

Here, again, you see that the sacrament of baptism, even in respect to its sign, is not the matter of a moment, but continues for all time. Although its administration is soon over, yet the thing it signifies[100] continues until we die, nay, until we rise at the last day. For as long as we live we are continually doing that which our baptism signifies,--we die and rise again. We die, that is, not only spiritually and in our affections, by renouncing the sins and vanities of this world, but we die in very truth, we begin to leave this bodily life and to lay hold on the life to come; so that there is, as they say, a real and even a bodily going out of this world to the Father.

We must, therefore, beware of those who have reduced the power of baptism to such a vanishing point as to say that the grace of God is indeed inpoured in baptism, but afterwards poured out again through sin, and that thereupon one must reach heaven by another way; as if baptism had then become entirely useless. Do not you hold to such a view, but know that baptism signifies your dying and living again, and therefore, whether it be by penance or by any other way, you can but return to the power of your baptism, and do afresh that which you were baptised to do and which your baptism signified. Never does baptism lose its power, unless you despair and refuse to return to its salvation. You may, indeed, or a season wander away from the sign, but that does not make the sign of none effect. You have, thus, been baptised once in the sacrament, but you must be constantly baptised again through faith, you must constantly die, you must constantly live again. Baptism swallowed up your whole body, and gave it forth again; even so that which baptism signifies[101] should swallow up your whole life in body and soul, and give it forth again at the last day, clad in robes of glory and immortality. We are, therefore, never without the sign of baptism nor yet without the thing it signifies; nay, we must be baptised ever more and more completely, until we perfectly fulfil the sign, at the last day.

Therefore, whatever we do in this life that avails for the mortifying of the flesh and the giving life to the spirit, belongs to baptism; and the sooner we depart this life the sooner do we fulfil our baptism, and the greater our sufferings the more closely do we conform to our baptism. Hence those were the Church's halcyon days, when the martyrs were being killed every day and accounted as sheep for the slaughter [Ps. 44:22; Rom. 8:36]; for then the power of baptism reigned supreme in the Church, which power we have to-day lost sight of amid the multitude of works and doctrines of men. For all our life should be baptism, and the fulfilling of the sign, or sacrament, of baptism; we have been set free from all else and wholly given over to baptism alone, that is, to death and resurrection.

[Sidenote: The Glorious Liberty of the Baptised]

This glorious liberty of ours, and this understanding of baptism have been carried captive in our day; and whom have we to thank for this but the Roman pontiff with his despotism? More than all others, it was his first duty, as chief shepherd, to preach and defend this liberty and this knowledge, as Paul says in I Corinthians: "Let a man so account of us as of the ministers of Christ, and the dispensers of the mysteries, or sacraments[101], of God." [1 Cor. 4:1] Instead of this, he seeks only to oppress us with his decrees and his laws, and to enslave and ensnare us in the tyranny of his power. By what right, in God's name, does the pope impose his laws upon us? to say nothing of his wicked and damnable neglect to teach these mysteries. Who gave him power to despoil us of this liberty, granted us in baptism? One thing only (as I have said)[103] has been enjoined upon us all the days of our life,--to be baptised; that is, to be put to death and to live again, through faith in Christ; and this faith alone should have been taught, especially by the chief shepherd. But now there is not a word said about faith, and the Church is laid waste with endless laws concerning works and ceremonies; the power and right understanding of baptism are put by, and faith in Christ is prevented.

Therefore I say: Neither pope nor bishop nor any other man has the right to impose a single syllable of law upon a Christian man without his consent; and if he does, it is done in the spirit of tyranny. Therefore the prayers, fasts, donations, and whatever else the pope decrees and demands in all of his decretals, as numerous as they are iniquitous, he demands and decrees without any right whatever; and he sins against the liberty of the Church whenever he attempts any such thing. Hence it has come to pass that the churchmen of our day are indeed such vigorous defenders of the liberty of the Church, that is, of wood and stone, of land and rents--for "churchly" is nowadays the same as "spiritual"--yet with such fictions they not only take captive but utterly destroy the true liberty of the Church, and deal with us far worse than the Turk, in opposition to the word of the Apostle, "Be not made the bondslaves of men." [1 Cor. 7:23] For, verily, to be subjected to their statutes and tyrannical laws is to be made the bondslaves of men.

This impious and desperate tyranny is fostered by the pope's disciples, who here drag in and pervert that saying of Christ, "He that heareth you heareth me." [Luke 10:16] With puffed cheeks they blow up this saying to a great size in support of their traditions. Though Christ spake it to the apostles when they went forth to preach the Gospel, and though it applies solely to the Gospel, they pass over the Gospel and apply it only to their fables. He says in John x: "My sheep hear my voice, but the voice of a stranger they hear not" [John 10:27]; and to this end He left us the Gospel, that His voice might be uttered by the pontiffs. But they utter their own voice, and themselves desire to be heard. Moreover, the Apostle says that he was not sent to baptise but to preach the Gospel [1 Cor. 1:17]. Therefore, no one is bound to the traditions of the pope, nor does he need to give ear to him unless he teaches the Gospel and Christ, and the pope should teach nothing but faith without any restrictions. But since Christ says, "He that heareth you heareth me," [Luke 10:16] and does not say to Peter only, "He that heareth thee"; why does not the pope also hear others? In fine, where there is true faith, there must also be the word of faith. Why then does not an unbelieving pope now and then hear a believing servant of his, who has the word of faith? It is blindness, sheer blindness, that holds the popes in its power.

But others, more shameless still, arrogantly ascribe to the pope the power to make laws, on the basis of Matthew xvi, "Whatsoever thou shalt bind," [Matt. 16:19] etc., though Christ treats in this passage of binding and loosing sins, not of taking the whole Church captive and oppressing it with laws. So this tyranny treats everything with its own lying words and violently wrests and perverts the words of God. I admit indeed that Christians ought to bear this accursed tyranny just as they would bear any other violence of this world, according to Christ's word: "If one strike thee on thy right cheek, turn to him also the other." [Matt. 5:39] But this is my complaint,--that the godless pontiffs boastfully claim the right to do this, that they pretend to be seeking the Church's welfare with this Babylon of theirs, and that they foist this fiction upon all mankind. For if they did these things, and we suffered their violence, well knowing, both of us, that it was godlessness and tyranny, then we might number it among the things that tend to the mortifying of this life and the fulfilling of our baptism, and might with a good conscience glory in the inflicted injury. But now they seek to deprive us of this consciousness of our liberty, and would have us believe that what they do is well done, and must not be censured or complained of as wrongdoing. Being wolves, they masquerade as shepherds; being anti-christs, they would be honored as Christ.

Solely in behalf of this freedom of conscience, I lift my voice and confidently cry: No laws may by any right be laid upon Christians, whether by men or angels, without their consent; for we are free from all things. And if any laws are laid upon us, we must bear them in such a way as to preserve the consciousness of our liberty, and know and certainly affirm that the making of such laws is an injustice, which we will bear and glory in, giving heed not to justify the tyrant nor yet to rebel against his tyranny. "For who is he," says Peter, "that will harm you, if ye be followers of that which is good?" [1 Pet. 3:13] "All things work together or good to the elect." [Rom. 8:28]

Nevertheless, since but few know this glory of baptism and the blessedness of Christian liberty, and cannot know them because of the tyranny of the pope, I for one will clear my skirts and salve my conscience by bringing this charge against the pope and all his papists: Unless they will abolish their laws and traditions, and restore to Christ's churches their liberty and have it taught among them, they are guilty of all the souls that perish under this miserable captivity, and the papacy is of a truth the kingdom of Babylon, yea, of very Antichrist! For who is "the man of sin" and "the son of perdition" [2 Thess. 2:3 f.] but he that with his doctrines and his laws increases sins and the perdition of souls in the Church, while he sitteth in the Church as if he were God? All this the papal tyranny has fulfilled, and more than fulfilled, these many centuries; it has extinguished faith, obscured the sacraments and oppressed the Gospel; but its own laws, which are not only impious and sacrilegious, but even barbarous and foolish, it has enjoined and multiplied world without end.

Behold, then, our miserable captivity; how the city doth sit solitary that was full of people! How the mistress of the Gentiles is become as a widow: the princess of provinces made tributary! There is none to comfort her, all her friends have despised her. [Lament. 1:1 f.] So many orders, so many rites, so many sects, so many professions, exertions and works, in which Christians are engaged, until they lose sight of their baptism, and for this swarm of locusts, cankerworms and caterpillars [Joel 1:4] not one of them is able to remember that he is baptised or what blessings his baptism brought him. We should be even as little children, newly baptised, who are engaged in no efforts and no works, but are free in every way, secure and saved solely through the glory of their baptism. For we are indeed little children, continually baptised anew in Christ.

[Sidenote: Infant Baptism]

In contradiction of what has been said, some will perhaps point to the baptism of infants, who do not grasp the promise of God and cannot have the faith of baptism; so that either faith is not necessary or else infant baptism is without effect. Here I say what all say: Infants are aided by the faith of others, namely, those who bring them to baptism[104]. For the Word of God is powerful, when it is uttered, to change even a godless heart, which is no less deaf and helpless than any infant. Even so the infant is changed, cleansed and renewed by inpoured faith, through the prayer of the Church that presents it for baptism and believes, to which prayer all things are possible [Mark 9:23]. Nor should I doubt that even a godless adult might be changed, in any of the sacraments, if the same Church prayed and presented him; as we read in the Gospel of the man sick of the palsy, who was healed through the faith of others [Matt. 9:1 ff.]. I should be ready to admit that in this sense the sacraments of the New Law are efficacious to confer grace, not only to those who do not, but even to those who do most obstinately, oppose a bar[105]. What obstacle will not the faith of the Church and the prayer of faith remove? Do we not believe that Stephen by this powerful means converted Paul the Apostle? But then the sacraments accomplish what they do not by their own power, but by the power of faith, without which they accomplish nothing at all, as has been said[106].

There remains the question, whether it is right to baptise an infant not yet born, with only a hand or a foot presenting. Here I will decide nothing hastily, and confess my ignorance. I am not sure whether the reason given by some is sufficient,--that the soul resides in its entirety in every part of the body; or it is not the soul but the body that is externally baptised with water. Nor do I share the view of others, that he who is not yet born cannot be born again, even though it has considerable force. I leave these matters to the teaching of the Spirit, and meanwhile permit every one to abound in his own sense [Rom. 14:15 (Vulg.)].

[Sidenote: Vows and the Baptismal Vow]

One thing I will add--and would to God I might persuade all to do it!--viz., completely to abolish or avoid all vows, be they vows to enter religious orders, to make pilgrimages or to do any works whatsoever, that we may remain in the liberty of our baptism, which is the most religious and rich in works. It is impossible to say how greatly that widespread delusion of vows lowers baptism and obscures the knowledge of Christian liberty; to say nothing now of the unspeakable and infinite peril of souls which that mania for making vows and that ill-advised rashness daily increase. O most godless pontiffs and unhappy pastors, who slumber on unheeding and indulge your evil lusts, without pity or this "affliction of Joseph," [Amos 6:4-6] so dreadful and fraught with peril!

Vows should either be abolished by a general edict, particularly such as are taken for life, and all men diligently recalled to the vows of baptism, or else everyone should be warned not to take a vow rashly, and no one encouraged to do so, nay, permission be given only with difficulty and reluctance. For we have vowed enough in baptism, nay, more than we can ever fulfil; if we give ourselves to the keeping of this one vow, we shall have all we can do. But now we compass earth and sea to make many proselytes [Matt. 23:15]; we fill the world with priests, monks and nuns, and imprison them all in life-long vows. You will find those who argue and decide that a work done in fulfilment of a vow ranks higher than one done without a vow, and is to be rewarded with I know not what great rewards in heaven. Blind and godless Pharisees, who measure righteousness and holiness by the greatness, number or other quality of the works! But God measures them by faith alone, and with Him there is no difference between works except that which is wrought by faith.

With such bombast these wicked men advertise their inventions and puff up human works, to lure on the unthinking populace, who are almost always led by the glitter of works to make shipwreck of their faith, to forget their baptism and do despite to their Christian liberty. For a vow is a kind of law or requirement; therefore, when vows are multiplied, laws and works are necessarily multiplied, and when this is done, faith is extinguished and the liberty of baptism taken captive. Others, not content with these wicked allurements, add yet this and say that entrance into a religious order is a new baptism[107], as it were, which may afterward be repeated as often as the purpose to live the religious life is renewed. Thus these "votaries" have appropriated to themselves all righteousness, salvation and glory, and let to those who are merely baptised nothing to compare with them. Nay, the Roman pontiff, that fountain and source of all superstitions, confirms, approves and adorns this mode of life with high-sounding bulls and dispensations, while no one deems baptism worthy of even a thought. And with such glittering pomp (as we have said)[108] they drive the easily led people of Christ into certain disaster, so that in their ingratitude toward baptism they presume to achieve greater things by their works than others achieve by their faith.

Therefore, God again shows Himself froward to the froward [Ps. 18:26], and to repay the makers of vows for their ingratitude and pride, causes them to break their vows or to keep them only with prodigious labor; to remain sunk in them, never coming to the knowledge of the grace of faith and baptism; to continue in their hypocrisy unto the end--since their spirit is not approved of God--and at last to become a laughing-stock to the whole world, ever ensuing righteousness and never attaining unto righteousness; so that they fulfil the word of Isaiah: "The land is full of idols." [Isa. 2:8]

I am indeed far from forbidding or discouraging any one who may desire to take a vow privately and of his own free choice; for I would not altogether despise and condemn vows. But I would most strongly advise against setting up and sanctioning the making of vows as a public mode of life. It is enough that every one should have the private right to take a vow at his peril; but to commend the vowing of vows as a public mode of life--this I hold to be most harmful to the Church and to simple souls. And I hold this, first, because it runs directly counter to the Christian life; for a vow is a certain ceremonial law and a human tradition or presumption, and from these the Christian has been set free through baptism. For a Christian is subject to no laws but the law of God. Again, there is no instance in Scripture of such a vow, especially of life-long chastity, obedience and poverty[109]. But whatever is without warrant of Scripture is hazardous and should by no means be commended to any one, much less established as a common and public mode of life, although whoever will must be permitted to make the venture at his own peril. For certain works are wrought by the Spirit in a few men, but they must not be made an example or a mode of life or all.

Moreover, I greatly fear that these modes of life of the religious orders belong to those things which the Apostle foretold: "They shall teach a life in hypocrisy, forbidding to marry, to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving." [1 Tim. 4:2 f.] Let no one retort by pointing to Sts. Bernard, Francis, Dominic and others, who founded or fostered monastic orders. Terrible and marvelous is God in His counsels toward the sons of men. He could keep Daniel, Ananias, Azarias and Misael holy at the court of the king of Babylon [Dan 1:6 ff.], that is, in the midst of godlessness; why could He not sanctify those men also in their perilous mode of living or guide them by the special operation of His Spirit, yet without desiring it to be an example to others? Besides, it is certain that none of them was saved through his vows and his "religious" life; they were saved through faith alone, by which all men are saved, and with which that splendid slavery of vows is more than anything else in conflict.

But every one may hold to his own view of this [Rom. 14:5]. I will return to my argument. Speaking now in behalf of the Church's liberty and the glory of baptism, I feel myself in duty bound publicly to set forth the counsel I have learned under the Spirit's guidance. I therefore counsel the magnates of the churches, first of all, to abolish all those vows, or at least not to approve and extol them. If they will not do this, then I counsel all men who would be assured of their salvation, to abstain from all vows, above all from the great and life-long vows; I give this counsel especially to all growing boys and youths. This I do, first, because this manner of life has no witness or warrant in the Scriptures, as I have said, but is puffed up solely by the bulls (and they truly are "bulls")[110] of human popes. And, secondly, because it greatly tends to hypocrisy, by reason of its outward show and its unusual character, which engender conceit and a contempt of the common Christian life. And if there were no other reason for abolishing these vows, this one were reason enough, namely, that through them, faith and baptism are slighted and works are exalted, which cannot be done without harmful results. For in the religious orders there is scarce one in many thousands, who is not more concerned about works than about faith, and on the basis of this madness they have even made distinctions among themselves, such as "the more strict" and "the more lax," as they call them[111].

Therefore I advise no one to enter any religious order or the priesthood--nay, I dissuade everyone--unless he be forearmed with this knowledge and understand that the works of monks and priests, be they never so holy and arduous, differ no whit in the sight of God from the works of the rustic toiling in the field or the woman going about her household tasks, but that all works are measured before Him by faith alone; as Jeremiah says: "O Lord, thine eyes are upon faith" [Jer. 5:3]; and Ecclesiasticus: "In every work of thine regard thy soul in faith: for this is the keeping of the commandments." [Eccles. 32:27] Nay, he should know that the menial housework of a maidservant or manservant is ofttimes more acceptable to God than all the fastings and other works of a monk or a priest, because the latter lacks faith. Since, therefore, vows seem to tend nowadays only to the glorification of works and to pride, it is to be feared that there is nowhere less of faith and of the Church than among the priests, monks and bishops, and that these men are in truth heathen or hypocrites, who imagine themselves to be the Church or the heart of the Church, and "spiritual," and the Church's leaders, when they are everything else but that. And it is to be feared that this is indeed "the people of the captivity," [Ps. 64:1 (Vulg.)] among whom all things freely given us in baptism are held captive, while "the people of the earth" are left behind in poverty and in small numbers, and, as is the lot of married folk, appear vile in their eyes[112].

[Sidenote: Papal Dispensations and their Inconsistency]

From what has been said we learn that the Roman pontiff is guilty of two glaring errors. In the first place, he grants dispensations from vows[113], and does it as though he alone of all Christians possessed this authority; such is the temerity and audacity of wicked men. If it be possible to grant a dispensation from a vow, then any brother may grant one to his neighbor or even to himself. But if one's neighbor cannot grant a dispensation, neither can the pope by any right. For whence has he his authority? From the power of the keys? But the keys belong to all, and avail only for sins (Matthew xviii) [Matt. 18:15 ff.][114]. Now they themselves claim that vows are "of divine right." Why then does the pope deceive and destroy the poor souls of men by granting dispensations in matters of divine right, in which no dispensations can be granted? He babbles indeed, in the section "Of vows and their redemption,"[115] of having the power to change vows, just as in the law the firstborn of an ass was changed or a sheep [Ex.13:13]--as if the firstborn of an ass, and the vow he commands to be everywhere and always offered, were one and the same thing, or as if when God decrees in His law that a sheep shall be changed or an ass, the pope, a mere man, may straightway claim the same power, not in his own law but in God's! It was not a pope, but an ass changed for a pope[116], that made this decretal; so egregiously senseless and godless is it.

The other error is this. The pope decrees, on the other hand, that marriage is dissolved if one party enter a monastery even without the consent of the other, provided the marriage be not yet consummated. Gramercy, what devil puts such monstrous things into the pope's mind! God commands men to keep faith and not break their word to one another, and again, to do good with that which is their own; for He hates "robbery in a holocaust," [Isa. 61:8] as he says by the mouth of Isaiah. But one spouse is bound by the marriage contract to keep faith with the other, and he is not his own. He cannot break his faith by any right, and whatever he does with himself is robbery if it be without the other's consent. Why does not one who is burdened with debts follow this same rule and obtain admission to an order, so as to be released from his debts and be free to break his word? O more than blind! Which is greater; the faith commanded by God or a vow devised and chosen by man? Thou art a shepherd of souls, O pope? And ye that teach such things are doctors of sacred theology? Why then do ye teach them? Because, forsooth, ye have decked out your vow as a better work than marriage, and do not exalt faith, which alone exalts all things, but ye exalt works, which are naught in the sight of God, or which are all alike so far as any merit is concerned[117].

I have no doubt, therefore, that neither men nor angels can grant a dispensation from vows, if they be proper vows. But I am not fully clear in my own mind whether all the things that men nowadays vow come under the head of vows. For instance, it is simply foolish and stupid for parents to dedicate their children, before birth or in early infancy, to "the religious life," or to perpetual chastity; nay, it is certain that this can by no means be termed a vow. It seems a mockery of God to vow things which it is not at all in one's power to keep. As to the triple vow of the monastic orders, the longer I consider it, the less I comprehend it, and I marvel whence the custom of exacting this vow has arisen. Still less do I understand at what age vows may be taken in order to be legal and valid. I am pleased to find them unanimously agreed that vows taken before the age of puberty are not valid. Nevertheless, they deceive many young children who are ignorant both of their age and of what they are vowing; they do not observe the age of puberty in receiving such children, who after making their profession are held captive and devoured by a troubled conscience, as though they had afterward given their consent. As if a vow which was invalid could afterward become valid with the lapse of time.

It seems absurd to me that the terms of a legal vow should be prescribed to others by those who cannot prescribe them for themselves. Nor do I see why a vow taken at eighteen years of age should be valid, and not one taken at ten or twelve years. It will not do to say that at eighteen a man feels his carnal desires. How is it when he scarcely feels them at twenty or thirty, or when he feels them more keenly at thirty than at twenty? Why do they not also set a certain age-limit or the vows of poverty and obedience? But at what age will you say a man should feel his greed and pride? Even the most spiritual hardly become aware of these emotions. Therefore, no vow will ever become binding and valid until we have become spiritual, and no longer have any need of vows. You see, these are uncertain and perilous matters, and it would therefore be a wholesome counsel to leave such lofty modes of living, unhampered by vows, to the Spirit alone, as they were of old, and by no means to change them into a rule binding or life. But let this suffice for the present concerning baptism and its liberty; in due time[118] I may treat of the vows at greater length. Of a truth they stand sorely in need of it.

The Sacrament Of Penance

THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE

We come in the third place to the sacrament of penance. On this subject I have already given no little offence by my published treatises and disputations[119], in which I have amply set forth my views. These I must now briefly rehearse, in order to unmask the tyranny that is rampant here no less than in the sacrament of the bread. For because these two sacraments furnish opportunity for gain and profit, the greed of the shepherds rages in them with incredible zeal against the flock of Christ; although baptism, too, has sadly declined among adults and become the servant of avarice, as we have just seen in our discussion of vows.

[Sidenote: The Abuse of Penance]

This is the first and chief abuse of this sacrament: They have utterly abolished the sacrament itself, so that there penance is not a vestige of it left. For they have overthrown both the word of divine promise and our faith, in which this as well as other sacraments consists. They have applied to their tyranny the word of promise which Christ spake in Matthew xvi, "Whatsoever thou shalt bind," etc. [Matt. 16:19], in Matthew xviii, "Whatsoever ye shall bind," [Matt. 18:18] etc., and in John, the last chapter, "Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them," [John 20:23] etc. In these words the faith of penitents is aroused, to the obtaining of remission of sins. But in all their writing, teaching and preaching their sole concern has been, not to teach Christians what is promised in these words or what they ought to believe and what great comfort they might find in them, but only to extend their own tyranny far and wide through force and violence, until it has come to such a pass that some of them have begun to command the very angels in heaven[120] and to boast in incredible mad wickedness of having in these words obtained the right to a heavenly and an earthly rule, and of possessing the power to bind even in heaven. Thus they say nothing of the saving faith of the people, but babble only of the despotic power of the pontiffs, whereas Christ speaks not at all of power, but only of faith.

For Christ hath not ordained principalities or powers or lordships, but ministries, in the Church; as we learn from the Apostle, who says: "Let a man so account of us as of the ministers of Christ, and the dispensers of the mysteries of God." [1 Cor. 4:1] Now when He said: "He that believeth and is baptised shall be saved," [Mark 16:16] He called forth the faith of those to be baptised, so that by this word of promise a man might be certain of being saved if he believed and was baptised. In that word there is no impartation of any power whatever, but only the institution of the ministry of those who baptise. Similarly, when He says here: "Whatsoever thou shalt bind," etc. [Matt. 16:19], He calls forth the faith of the penitent, so that by this word of promise he may be certain of being truly absolved in heaven, if he be absolved and believe. Here there is no mention at all of power, but of the ministry of him that absolves. It is a wonder these blind and overbearing men missed the opportunity of arrogating a despotic power to themselves from the promise of baptism. But if they do not do this in the case of baptism, why should they have presumed to do it in the case of the promise of penance? For in both there is a like ministry, a similar promise, and the same kind of sacrament. So that, if baptism does not belong to Peter alone, it is undeniably a wicked usurpation of power to claim the keys for the pope alone. Again, when Christ says: "Take, eat; this is my body, which is given or you. Take, drink; this is the chalice in my blood," etc. [1 Cor. 11:24 f.], He calls forth the faith of those who eat, so that through these words their conscience may be strengthened by faith and they may rest assured of receiving the forgiveness of sins, if they have eaten. Here, too, He says nothing of power, but only of a ministry.

Thus the promise of baptism remains in some sort, at least to infants; the promise of bread and the cup has been destroyed and made subservient to greed, faith becoming a work and the testament a sacrifice; while the promise of penance has fallen prey to the most oppressive despotism of all and serves to establish a more than temporal rule.

Not content with these things, this Babylon of ours has so completely extinguished faith that it insolently denies its necessity in this sacrament; nay, with the wickedness of Antichrist it calls it heresy if any one should assert its necessity. What more could this tyranny do that it has not done? [Isa. 5:4] Verily, by the rivers of Babylon we sit and weep, when we remember thee, O Zion. We hang our harps upon the willows in the midst thereof. [Ps. 137:1, 2] The Lord curse the barren willows of those streams! Amen.

Now let us see what they have put in the place of the promise and the faith which they have blotted out and overthrown. Three parts have they made of penance,--contrition, confession, and satisfaction; yet so as to destroy whatever of good there might be in any of them and to establish here also their covetousness and tyranny.

[Sidenote: I. Contrition.]

In the first place, they teach that contrition precedes faith in the promise; they hold it much too cheap[121], making it not a work of faith, but a merit; nay, they do not mention it at all. So deep are they sunk in works and in those instances of Scripture that show how many obtained grace by reason of their contrition and humility of heart; but they take no account of the faith which wrought such contrition and sorrow of heart, as it is written of the men of Nineveh in Jonah iii, "And the men of Nineveh believed in God: and they proclaimed a fast," [Jonah 3:5] etc. Others, again, more bold and wicked, have invented a so-called "attrition," which is converted into contrition by virtue of the power of the keys, of which they know nothing[122]. This attrition they grant to the wicked and unbelieving and thus abolish contrition altogether. O the intolerable wrath of God, that such things should be taught in the Church of Christ! Thus, with both faith and its work destroyed, we go on secure in the doctrines and opinions of men--yea, we go on to our destruction. A contrite heart is a precious thing, but it is found only where there is a lively faith in the promises and the threats of God. Such faith, intent on the immutable truth of God, startles and terrifies the conscience and thus renders it contrite, and afterwards, when it is contrite, raises it up, consoles and preserves it; so that the truth of God's threatening is the cause of contrition, and the truth of His promise the cause of consolation, if it be believed. By such faith a man merits the forgiveness of sins. Therefore faith should be taught and aroused before all else; and when faith is obtained, contrition and consolation will follow inevitably and of themselves.

Therefore, although there is something of truth in their teaching that contrition is to be attained by what they call the recollection and contemplation of sins, yet their teaching is perilous and perverse so long as they do not teach first of all the beginning and cause of contrition,--the immutable truth of God's threatening and promise, to the awakening of faith,--so that men may learn to pay more heed to the truth of God, whereby they are cast down and lifted up, than to the multitude of their sins, which will rather irritate and increase the sinful desires than lead to contrition, if they be regarded apart from the truth of God. I will say nothing now of the intolerable burden they have bound upon us with their demand that we should frame a contrition for every sin. That is impossible; we can know only the smaller part of our sins, and even our good works are found to be sins, according to Psalm cxliii, "Enter not into judgment with thy servant; for in thy sight shall no man living be justified." [Ps. 143:2] It is enough to lament the sins which at the present moment distress our conscience, as well as those which we can readily call to mind. Whoever is in this frame of mind is without doubt ready to grieve and fear for all his sins, and will do so whenever they are brought to his knowledge in the future.

Beware, then, of putting your trust in your own contrition and of ascribing the forgiveness of sins to your own sorrow. God does not have respect to you because of that, but because of the faith by which you have believed His threatenings and promises, and which wrought such sorrow within you. Thus we owe whatever of good there may be in our penance, not to our scrupulous enumeration of sins, but to the truth of God and to our faith. All other things are the works and fruits of this, which follow of their own accord, and do not make a man good, but are done by a man already made good through faith in the truth of God. Even so, "a smoke goeth up in His wrath, because He is angry and troubleth the mountains and kindleth them," [Ps. 18:8] as it is said in Psalm xviii. First comes the terror of His threatening, which burns up the wicked, then faith, accepting this, sends up the cloud of contrition, etc.

[Sidenote: 2. Confession]

Contrition, however, is less exposed to tyranny and gain than wholly given over to wickedness and pestilent teaching. But confession and satisfaction have become the chief workshop of greed and violence. Let us first take up confession. There is no doubt that confession is necessary and commanded of God. Thus we read in Matthew iii: "They were baptised of John in Jordan, confessing their sins." [Matt. 3:6] And in I John i: "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us." [1 John 1:9 f.] If the saints may not deny their sin, how much more ought those who are guilty of open and great sins[123] to make confession! But most effectively of all does Matthew xviii prove the institution of confession, in which passage Christ teaches that a sinning brother should be rebuked, haled before the Church, accused and, if he will not hear, excommunicated. But he hears when, heeding the rebuke, he acknowledges and confesses his sin. [Matt. 18:15]

[Sidenote: Private Confession]

[Sidenote: "Reserved Cases"]

Of private confession, which is now observed, I am heartily in favor, even though it cannot be proved from the Scriptures; it is useful and necessary, nor would I have it abolished--nay, I rejoice that it exists in the Church of Christ, for it is a cure without an equal for distressed consciences. For when we have laid bare our conscience to our brother and privately made known to him the evil that lurked within, we receive from our brother's lips the word of comfort spoken by God Himself; and, if we accept it in faith, we find peace in the mercy of God speaking to us through our brother. This alone do I abominate,--that this confession has been subjected to the despotism and extortion of the pontiffs. They reserve[124] to themselves even hidden sins, and command that they be made known to confessors named by them, only to trouble the consciences of men. They merely play the pontiff, while they utterly despise the true duties of pontiffs, which are to preach the Gospel and to care for the poor. Yea, the godless despots leave the great sins to the plain priests, and reserve to themselves those sins only which are of less consequence, such as those ridiculous and fictitious things in the bull _Coena domini_[125]. Nay, to make the wickedness of their error the more apparent, they not only do not reserve, but actually teach and approve, the sins against the service of God, against faith and the chief commandments; such as their running on pilgrimages, the perverse worship of the saints, the lying saints' legends, the various forms of trust in works and ceremonies, and the practicing of them, by all of which faith in God is extinguished and idolatry encouraged, as we see in our day. We have the same kind of priests to-day as Jereboam ordained of old in Dan and Beersheba [1 Kings 12:26 ff.],--ministers of the golden calves, men who are ignorant of the law of God, of faith and of whatever pertains to the feeding of Christ's sheep, and who inculcate in the people nothing but their own inventions with terror and violence.

Although my advice is that we bear this outrage of reserved cases, even as Christ bids us bear all the tyranny of men, and teaches us that we must obey these extortioners; nevertheless I deny that they have the right to make such reservations, nor do I believe they can bring one jot or tittle of proof that they have it. But I am going to prove the contrary. In the first place, Christ, speaking in Matthew xviii of open sins, says that if our brother shall hear us when we rebuke him, we have saved the soul of our brother, and that he is to be brought before the Church only if he refuse to hear us; so that his sin may be corrected among brethren. How much more will it be true of hidden sins, that they are forgiven if one brother freely makes confession to another? So that it is not necessary to tell it to the Church, that is, as these babblers interpret it, the prelate or priest. We have another proof of this in Christ's words in the same chapter: "Whatsoever you shall bind on earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven." [Matt. 18:18] For this is said to each and every Christian. Again, He says in the same place: "Again I say to you, that if two of you shall consent upon earth, concerning anything whatsoever that they shall ask, it shall be done to them by my Father who is in heaven." [Matt 18:19] Now, the brother who lays his hidden sins before his brother and craves pardon, certainly consents with his brother upon earth in the truth, which is Christ. Of which Christ says yet more clearly, confirming His preceding words: "Verily I say unto you, where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." [Matt. 18:20]

Hence, I have no doubt but that every one is absolved from his hidden sins when he has made confession, either of his own accord or after being rebuked, has sought pardon and amended his ways, privately before any brother, however much the violence of the pontiffs may rage against it; for Christ has given to every one of His believers the power to absolve even open sins. Add yet this little point: If any reservation of hidden sins were valid, so that one could not be saved unless they were forgiven, then a man's salvation would be prevented most of all by those aforementioned good works and idolatries, which are nowadays taught by the popes. But if these most grievous sins do not prevent one's salvation, how foolish it is to reserve those lighter sins! Verily, it is the foolishness and blindness of the pastors that produce these monstrous things in the Church. Therefore I would admonish these princes of Babylon and bishops of Bethaven [Hosea 4:15; 10:5] to refrain from reserving any cases whatsoever. Let them, moreover, permit all brothers and sisters freely to hear the confession of hidden sins, so that the sinner may make his sins known to whomever he will and seek pardon and comfort, that is, the word of Christ, by the mouth of his neighbor. For with these presumptions of theirs they only ensnare the consciences of the weak without necessity, establish their wicked despotism, and fatten their avarice on the sins and ruin of their brethren. Thus they stain their hands with the blood of souls, sons are devoured by their parents, Ephraim devours Juda, and Syria Israel with open mouth, as Isaiah saith [Isa 9:20].

[Sidenote: "Circumstances"]

To these evils they have added the "circumstances,"[126] and also the mothers, daughters, sisters, brothers- and sisters-in-law, branches and fruits of sins; since, forsooth, astute and idle men have worked out a kind of family tree of relationships and affinities even among sins--so prolific is wickedness coupled with ignorance. For this conceit, whatever rogue be its author, has like many another become a public law. Thus do the shepherds keep watch over the Church of Christ; whatever new work or superstition those stupid devotees may have dreamed of, they straightway drag to the light of day, deck out with indulgences and safeguard with bulls; so far are they from suppressing it and preserving to God's people the true faith and liberty. For what has our liberty to do with the tyranny of Babylon? My advice would be to ignore all circumstances utterly. With Christians there is only one circumstance,--that a brother has sinned. For there is no person to be compared with a Christian brother. And the observance of places, times, days, persons, and all other superstitious moonshine, only magnifies the things that are nothing, to the injury of those which are everything; as if aught could be greater or of more importance than the glory of Christian brotherhood! Thus they bind us to places, days and persons, that the name of brother may be lightly esteemed, and we may serve in bondage instead of being free--we to whom all days, places, persons, and all external things are one and the same.

[Sidenote: 3. Satisfaction]

How unworthily they have dealt with satisfaction, I have abundantly shown in the controversies concerning indulgences[127]. They have grossly abused it, to the ruin of Christians in body and soul. To begin with, they taught it in such a manner that the people never learned what satisfaction really is, namely, the renewal of a man's life. Then, they so continually harp on it and emphasize its necessity, that they leave no room for faith in Christ. With these scruples they torture poor consciences to death, and one runs to Rome, one to this place, another to that, this one to Chartreuse, that one to some other place, one scourges himself with rods, another ruins his body with fasts and vigils, and all cry with the same mad zeal, "Lo here is Christ! lo there!" [Luke 17:20 f.] believing that the kingdom of heaven, which is within us, will come with observation[128].

For these monstrous things we are indebted to thee, O Roman See, and thy murderous laws and ceremonies, with which thou hast corrupted all mankind, so that they think by works to make satisfaction or sin to God, Who can be satisfied only by the faith of a contrite heart! This faith thou not only keepest silent with this uproar of thine, but even oppressest, only so thy insatiable horseleech have those to whom it may say, "Bring, bring!" [Prov. 30:15] and may traffic in sins.

Some have gone even farther and have constructed those instruments for driving souls to despair,--their decrees that the penitent must rehearse all sins anew for which he neglected to make the imposed satisfaction. Yea, what would not they venture to do, who were born for the sole purpose of carrying all things into a tenfold captivity? Moreover, how many are possessed with the notion that they are in a saved state and are making satisfaction for their sins, if they but mumble over, word for word, the prayers the priest has imposed, even though they give never a thought meanwhile to amending their life! They believe that their life is changed in the one moment of contrition and confession, and it remains only to make satisfaction for their past sins. How should they know better, when they are not taught otherwise? No thought is given here to the mortifying of the flesh, no value is attached to the example of Christ, Who absolved the woman taken in adultery and said to her, "Go, and sin no more!" [John 8:11] thereby laying upon her the cross--the mortifying of her flesh. This perverse error is greatly encouraged by our absolving sinners before the satisfaction has been completed, so that they are more concerned about completing the satisfaction which lies before them, than they are about contrition, which they suppose to be past and over when they have made confession. Absolution ought rather to follow on the completion of satisfaction, as it did in the ancient Church, with the result that, after completing the work, penitents gave themselves with greater diligence to faith and the living of a new life.

But this must suffice in repetition of what I have more fully said on indulgences, and in general this must suffice for the present concerning the three sacraments, which have been treated, and yet not treated, in so many harmful books, theological as well as juristic. It remains to attempt some discussion of the other sacraments also, lest I seem to have rejected them without cause.

Confirmation

CONFIRMATION

I wonder what could have possessed them to make a sacrament of confirmation out of the laying on of hands, which Christ employed when He blessed young children [Mark 10:16], and the apostles when they imparted the Holy Spirit [Acts 8:17; Acts 19:6; Acts 6:6; Mark 16:18], ordained elders and cured the sick, as the Apostle writes to Timothy, "Lay hands suddenly on no man." [1 Tim. 5:22] Why have they not also turned the sacrament of the bread into confirmation? For it is written in Acts ix, "And when he had taken meat he was strengthened,"[129] and in Psalm civ, "And that bread may cheer[130] man's heart." [Ps. 104:15] Confirmation would thus include three sacraments--the bread, ordination, and confirmation itself. But if everything the apostles did is a sacrament, why have they not rather made preaching a sacrament?

I do not say this because I condemn the seven sacraments, but because I deny that they can be proved from the Scriptures. Would to God we had in the Church such a laying on of hands as there was in apostolic times, whether we called it confirmation or healing! But there is nothing left of it now but what we ourselves have invented to adorn the office of the bishops, that they may have at least something to do in the Church. For after they relinquished to their inferiors those arduous sacraments together with the Word, as being too common for themselves,--since, forsooth, whatever the divine Majesty has instituted must needs be despised of men!--it was no more than right that we should discover something easy and not too burdensome for such delicate and great heroes to do, and should by no means entrust it to the lower clergy as something common--for whatever human wisdom has decreed must needs be held in honor among men! Therefore, as are the priests, so let their ministry and duty be. For a bishop who does not preach the Gospel or care for souls [1 Cor. 8:4], what is he but an idol in the world, having but the name and appearance of a bishop?

But we seek, instead of this, sacraments that have been divinely instituted, among which we see no reason for numbering confirmation. For, in order that there be a sacrament, there is required above all things a word of divine promise, whereby faith may be trained. But we read nowhere that Christ ever gave a promise concerning confirmation, although He laid hands on many and included the laying on of hands among the signs in Mark xvi: "They shall lay their hands on the sick, and they shall recover." [Mark 16:18] Yet no one referred this to a sacrament, nor can this be done. Hence it is sufficient to regard confirmation as a certain churchly rite or sacramental ceremony, similar to other ceremonies, such as the blessing of holy water and the like. For if every other creature is sanctified by the word and by prayer [1 Tim. 4:4 f.], why should not much rather man be sanctified by the same means? Still, these things cannot be called sacraments of faith, because there is no divine promise connected with them, neither do they save; but sacraments do save those who believe the divine promise.

Marriage

MARRIAGE

Not only is marriage regarded as a sacrament without the least warrant of Scripture, but the very traditions which extol it as a sacrament have turned it into a farce. Let me explain.

We said[131] that there is in every sacrament a word of divine promise, to be believed by whoever receives the sign, and that the sign alone cannot be a sacrament. Now we read nowhere that the man who marries a wife receives any grace of God. Nay, there is not even a divinely instituted sign in marriage, for nowhere do we read that marriage was instituted by God to be a sign of anything. To be sure, whatever takes place in a visible manner may be regarded as a type or figure of something invisible; but types and figures are not sacraments in the sense in which we use this term. Furthermore, since marriage existed from the beginning of the world and is still found among unbelievers, it cannot possibly be called a sacrament of the New Law and the exclusive possession of the Church. The marriages of the ancients were no less sacred than are ours, nor are those of unbelievers less true marriages than those of believers, and yet they are not regarded as sacraments. Besides, there are even among believers married folk who are wicked and worse than any heathen; why should marriage be called a sacrament in their case and not among the heathen? Or are we going to prate so foolishly of baptism and the Church as to hold that marriage is a sacrament only in the Church, just as some make the mad claim that temporal power exists only in the Church? That is childish and foolish talk, by which we expose our ignorance and our arrogance to the ridicule of unbelievers.

But they will say: The Apostle writes in Ephesians v, "They shall be two in one flesh. This is a great sacrament." [Eph. 5:31 f.] Surely you are not going to contradict so plain a statement of the Apostle! I reply: This argument, like the others, betrays great shallowness and a negligent and thoughtless reading of Scripture. Nowhere in Holy Scripture is this word sacrament employed in the meaning to which we are accustomed; it has an entirely different meaning. For wherever it occurs it signifies not the sign of a sacred thing, but a sacred, secret, hidden thing. Thus Paul writes in i Corinthians iv, "Let a man so account of us as the ministers of Christ, and dispensers of the mysteries[132]--i. e., sacraments--of God." [1 Cor. 4:1] Where we have the word _sacrament_ the Greek text reads _mystery_, which word our version sometimes translates and sometimes retains in its Greek form. Thus our verse reads in the Greek: "They shall be two in one flesh; this is a great _mystery_." [Eph. 5:31] This explains how they came to find a sacrament of the New Law here--a thing they would never have done if they had read the word _mystery_, as it is in the Greek[133]. Thus Christ Himself is called a sacrament in I Timothy iii, "And evidently great is the sacrament--i. e., mystery--of godliness, which was manifested in the flesh, was justified in the spirit, appeared unto angels, hath been preached unto the Gentiles, is believed by the world, is taken up in glory."[1 Tim. 3:16][134] Why have they not drawn out of this passage an eighth sacrament of the New Law, since they have the clear authority of Paul? But if they restrained themselves here, where they had a most excellent opportunity to unearth a new sacrament, why are they so wanton in the former passage? It was their ignorance, forsooth, of both words and things; they clung to the mere sound of the words, nay, to their own fancies. For, having once arbitrarily taken the word sacrament to mean a sign, they straightway, without thought or scruple, made a sign of it every time they came upon it in the Sacred Scriptures. Such new meanings of words and such human customs they have also elsewhere dragged into Holy Writ, and conformed it to their dreams, making anything out of any passage whatsoever. Thus they continually chatter nonsense about the terms: good and evil works, sin, grace, righteousness, virtue, and wellnigh every one of the fundamental words and things. For they employ them all after their own arbitrary judgment, learned from the writings of men, to the detriment both of the truth of God and of our salvation.

Therefore, _sacrament_, or _mystery_, in Paul's writings, is that wisdom of the Spirit, hidden in a mystery [1 Cor. 2:7 ff.], as he says in i Corinthians ii, which is Christ, Who is for this very reason not known to the princes of this world, wherefore they also crucified Him, and Who still is to them foolishness, an offense, a stone of stumbling [1 Cor. 1:23; Rom. 9:33], and a sign which is spoken against [Luke 2:34]. The preachers he calls dispensers of these mysteries because they preach Christ, the power and the wisdom of God [1 Cor. 1:23 f.; 4:1], yet so that one cannot receive this unless one believe. Therefore, a sacrament is a mystery, or secret thing, which is set forth in words and is received by the faith of the heart. Such a sacrament is spoken of in the verse before us--"They shall be two in one flesh. This is a great sacrament"[Eph 5:31]--which they understand as spoken of marriage, whereas Paul wrote these words of Christ and the Church, and clearly explained his meaning by adding, "But I speak in Christ and in the Church." Ay, how well they agree with Paul! He declares he is setting forth a great sacrament in Christ and the Church, but they set it forth in a man and a woman! If such wantonness be permitted in the Sacred Scriptures, it is small wonder if one find there anything one please, even a hundred sacraments.

Christ and the Church are, therefore, a mystery, that is, a great and secret thing, which it was possible and proper[135] to represent by marriage as by a certain outward allegory, but that was no reason for their calling marriage a sacrament. The heavens are a type of the apostles, as Psalm xix declares; the sun is a type of Christ; the waters, of the peoples [Ps. 19:1 ff.]; but that does not make those things sacraments, for in every case there are lacking both the divine institution and the divine promise, which constitute a sacrament. Hence Paul, in Ephesians v, following his own mind[136], applies to Christ these words in Genesis ii about marriage, or else, following the general view,[136] he teaches that the spiritual marriage of Christ is also contained therein, saying: "As Christ cherisheth the Church: because we are members of his body, of his flesh and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they shall be two in one flesh. This is a great sacrament; I speak in Christ and in the Church." [Eph. 5:29 ff.] You see, he would have the whole passage apply to Christ, and is at pains to admonish the reader to find the sacrament in Christ and the Church, and not in marriage.[137]

Therefore we grant that marriage is a type of Christ and the Church, and a sacrament, yet not divinely instituted, but invented by men in the Church, carried away by their ignorance both of the word and of the thing. Which ignorance, since it does not conflict with the faith, is to be charitably borne with, just as many other practices of human weakness and ignorance are borne with in the Church, so long as they do not conflict with the faith and with the Word of God. But we are now dealing with the certainty and purity of the faith and the Scriptures; so that our faith be not exposed to ridicule, when after affirming that a certain thing is contained in the Sacred Scriptures and in the articles of our faith, we are refuted and shown that it is not contained therein, and, being found ignorant of our own affairs, become a stumbling-block to our opponents and to the weak; nay, that we destroy not the authority of the Holy Scriptures. For those things which have been delivered to us by God in the Sacred Scriptures must be sharply distinguished from those that have been invented by men in the Church, it matters not how eminent they be for saintliness and scholarship.

[Sidenote: Hindrances to Marriage]

So far concerning marriage itself. But what shall we say of the wicked laws of men by which this divinely ordained manner of life is ensnared and tossed to and fro? Good God! it is dreadful to contemplate the audacity of the Roman despots, who wantonly tear marriages asunder and again force them together. Prithee, is mankind given over to the wantonness of these men, for them to mock and in every way abuse and make of them whatever they please, for filthy lucre's sake?

There is circulating far and wide and enjoying a great reputation, a book whose contents have been poured together out of the cesspool of all human traditions, and whose title is "The Angelic Sum,[138]" though it ought rather to be "The More than Devilish Sum." Among endless other monstrosities, which are supposed to instruct the confessors, while they most mischievously confuse them, there are enumerated in this book eighteen hindrances to marriage[139]. If you will examine these with the just and unprejudiced eye of faith, you will see that they belong to those things which the Apostle foretold: "There shall be those that give heed to spirits of devils, speaking lies in hypocrisy, forbidding to marry." [1 Tim. 4:1 ff.] What is forbidding to marry if it is not this--to invent all those hindrances and set those snares, in order to prevent men from marrying or, if they be married, to annul their marriage? Who gave this power to men? Granted that they were holy men and impelled by godly zeal, why should another's holiness disturb my liberty? why should another's zeal take me captive? Let whoever will, be a saint and a zealot, and to his heart's content; only let him not bring harm upon another, and let him not rob me of my liberty!

Yet I am glad that those shameful laws have at length attained to their full measure of glory, which is this: the Romanists of our day have through them become merchants. What is it they sell? The shame of men and women--merchandise, forsooth, most worthy of such merchants, grown altogether filthy and obscene through greed and godlessness. For there is nowadays no hindrance that may not be legalised upon the intercession of mammon, so that these laws of men seem to have sprung into existence for the sole purpose of serving those grasping and robbing Nimrods as snares for taking money and as nets for catching souls, and in order that that "abomination" might stand "in the holy place," [Matt. 24:15] the Church of God, and openly sell to men the shame of either sex, or as the Scriptures say, "shame and nakedness," [Lev. 13:6 ff.] of which they had previously robbed them by means of their laws. O worthy trade for our pontiffs to ply, instead of the ministry of the Gospel, which in their greed and pride they despise, being delivered up to a reprobate sense with utter shame and infamy. [Rom. 1:28]

But what shall I say or do? If I enter into details, the treatise will grow to inordinate length, for everything is in such dire confusion one does not know where to begin, whither to go on, or where to leave off. I know that no state is well governed by means of laws. If the magistrate be wise, he will rule more prosperously by natural bent than by laws. If he be not wise, he will but further the evil by means of laws; for he will not know what use to make of the laws nor how to adapt them to the individual case. More stress ought, therefore, to be laid, in civil affairs, on putting good and wise men in office than on making laws; for such men will themselves be the very best laws, and will judge every variety of case with lively justice. And if there be knowledge of the divine law combined with natural wisdom, then written laws will be entirely superfluous and harmful. Above all, love needs no laws whatever[140].

Nevertheless I will say and do what I can. I admonish and pray all priests and brethren[141], when they encounter any hindrance from which the pope can grant dispensation and which is not expressly contained in the Scriptures, by all means to confirm[142] any marriage that may have been contracted[143] in any way contrary to the ecclesiastical or pontifical laws. But let them arm themselves with the divine law, which says, "What God hath joined together, let no man put asunder." [Matt. 19:6] For the joining together of a man and a woman is of divine law and is binding, however it may conflict with the laws of men; the laws of men must give way before it without hesitation. For if a man leaves father and mother and cleaves to his wife, how much more will he tread underfoot the silly and wicked laws of men[144] in order to cleave to his wife! And if pope, bishop or official[145] annul any marriage because it was contracted contrary to the laws of men, he is antichrist, he does violence to nature, and is guilty of lese-majesty toward God, because this word stands,--"What God hath joined together, let no man put asunder." [Matt. 19:6]

Besides this, no man had the right to frame such laws, and Christ has granted to Christians a liberty which is above all laws of men, especially where a law of God conflicts with them. Thus it is said in Mark ii, "The Son of man is lord also of the sabbath," [Mark 2:28] and, "The sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath." [Mark 2:27] Moreover, such laws were condemned beforehand by Paul, when he foretold that there would be men forbidding to marry [1 Tim. 4:3]. Here, therefore, those cruel hindrances arising from affinity, spiritual or legal relationship[146], and consanguinity must give way, so far as the Scriptures permit, in which the second degree of consanguinity alone is prohibited. Thus it is written in Leviticus xviii, in which chapter there are twelve persons a man is prohibited from marrying; namely, his mother, his mother-in-law, his full sister, his half-sister by either parent, his granddaughter, his father's or mother's sister, his daughter-in-law, his brother's wife, his wife's sister, his stepdaughter, and his uncle's wife. [Lev. 18:6 ff.] Here only the first degree of affinity and the second degree of consanguinity are forbidden; yet not without exception, as will appear on closer examination, for the brother's or sister's daughter, or the niece, is not included in the prohibition, although she is in the second degree. Therefore, if a marriage has been contracted outside of these degrees, it should by no means be annulled on account of the laws of men, since it is nowhere written in the Bible that any other degrees were prohibited by God. Marriage itself, as of divine institution, is incomparably superior to any laws; so that marriage should not be annulled for the sake of the laws, rather should the laws be broken for the sake of marriage.

That nonsense about conpaternities, conmaternities, confraternities, consororities, and confilieties must therefore be altogether abolished, when a marriage has been contracted. What was it but the superstition of men that invented those spiritual relationships?[147] If one may not marry the person one has baptised or stood sponsor for, what right has any Christian to marry any other Christian? Is the relationship that grows out of the external rite, or the sign, of the sacrament more intimate that that which grows out of the blessing[148] of the sacrament itself? Is not a Christian man brother to a Christian woman, and is not she his sister? Is not a baptised man the spiritual brother of a baptised woman? How foolish we are! If a man instruct his wife in the Gospel and in faith in Christ and thus become truly her father in Christ, would it not be right for her to remain his wife? Would not Paul have had the right to marry a maiden out of the Corinthian congregation, of whom he boasts that he has begotton them all in Christ? [1 Cor. 4:15] Lo, thus has Christian liberty been suppressed through the blindness of human superstition.

There is even less in the legal relationship[149], and yet they have set it above the divine right of marriage. Nor would I recognise that hindrance which they term "disparity of religion,"[150] and which forbids one to marry any unbaptised person, even on condition that she become converted to the faith. Who made this prohibition? God or man? Who gave to men the power to prohibit such a marriage? The spirits, forsooth, that speak lies in hypocrisy, as Paul says [1 Tim 4:1]. Of them it must be said: "The wicked have told me fables; but not as thy law." [Ps. 119:85] The heathen Patricius married the Christian Monica, the mother of St. Augustine; why should not the same be permitted nowadays?

The same stupid, nay, wicked cruelty is seen in "the hindrance of crime,"[151]--as when a man has married a woman with whom he had lived in adultery, or when he plotted to bring about the death of a woman's husband in order to be able to wed the widow. I pray you, whence comes this cruelty of man toward man, which even God never demanded? Do they pretend not to know that Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah, was wed by David, a most saintly man, after the double crime of adultery and murder? If the divine law did this, what do these despotic men to their fellowservants?

Another hindrance is that which they call "the hindrance of a tie,"[152]--as when a man is bound by being betrothed to another woman. Here they decide that, if he has had carnal knowledge of the second, the betrothal with the first becomes null and void. This I do not understand at all. I hold that he who has betrothed himself to one woman belongs no longer to himself, and because of this act, by the prohibition of the divine law, he belongs to the first, though he has not known her, even if he has known the second. For it was not in his power to give the latter what was no longer his own; he deceived her and actually committed adultery. But they regard the matter differently because they pay more heed to the carnal union than to the divine command, according to which the man, having plighted his troth to the first, is bound to keep it for ever. For whoever would give anything must give of that which is his own. And God forbids a man to overreach or circumvent his brother in any matter [1 Thess. 4:6]. This prohibition must be kept, over and above all the traditions of all men. Therefore, the man in the above case cannot with a good conscience live in marriage with the second woman, and this hindrance should be completely overthrown. For if a monastic vow make a man to be no longer his own, why does not a promise of betrothal given and received do the same?--since this[153] is one of the precepts and fruits of the Spirit (Galatians v) [Gal. 5:22 f.; Eph. 5:9], while a monastic vow is of human invention. And if a wife may claim her husband despite the act that he has taken a monastic vow, why may not a bride claim her betrothed, even though he has known another? But we said above[154] that he who has plighted his troth to a maiden ought not to take a monastic vow, but is in duty bound to keep faith with her, which faith he cannot break for any tradition of men, because it is commanded by God. Much more should the man here keep faith with his first bride, since he could not plight his troth to a second save with a lying heart, and therefore did not really plight it, but deceived her, his neighbor, against God's command. Therefore, the "hindrance of error"[155] enters in here, by which his marriage to the second woman is rendered null and void.

The "hindrance of ordination"[156] also is a lying invention of men, especially since they prate that even a contracted marriage is annulled by it. Thus they constantly exalt their traditions above the commands of God. I do not indeed sit in judgment on the present state of the priestly order, but I observe that Paul charges a bishop to be the husband of one wife [1 Tim. 3:2]; hence no marriage of deacon, priest, bishop or any other order can be annulled,--although it is true that Paul knew nothing of this species of priests, and of the orders that we have to-day. Perish those cursed human traditions, which have crept into the Church only to multiply perils, sins and evils! There exists, therefore, between a priest and his wife a true and indissoluble marriage, approved by the divine commandment. But what if wicked men in sheer despotism prohibit or annul it? So be it! Let it be wrong among men; it is nevertheless right before God, Whose command must needs take precedence if it conflicts with the commands of men.

An equally lying invention is that "hindrance of public decency,"[157] by which contracted marriages are annulled. I am incensed at that barefaced wickedness which is so ready to put asunder what God hath joined together that one may well scent antichrist in it, for it opposes all that Christ has done and taught. What earthly reason is there for holding that no relative of a deceased husband, even to the fourth degree, may marry the latter's widow? That is not a judgment[158] of public decency, but ignorance[158] of public decency. Why was not this judgment of public decency found among the people of Israel, who were endowed with the best laws, the laws of God? On the contrary, the next of kin was even compelled by the law of God to marry the widow of his relative [Deut. 25:5]. Must the people of Christian liberty be burdened with severer laws than the people of legal bondage? But, to make an end of these figments, rather than hindrances--thus far there seem to me to be no hindrances that may justly annul a contracted marriage save these: impotence of the husband, ignorance of a previously contracted marriage, and a vow of chastity. Still, concerning the last, I am to this day so far from certain that I do not know at what age such a vow is to be regarded as binding; as I also said above in discussing the sacrament of baptism[159]. Thus you may learn, from this one question of marriage, how wretchedly and desperately all the activities of the Church have been confused, hindered, ensnared, and subjected to danger through the pestilent, ignorant and wicked traditions of men, so that there is no hope of betterment unless we abolish at one stroke all the laws of all men, restore the Gospel of liberty, and by it judge and rule all things. Amen.

[Sidenote: Impotence]

We have to speak, then, of sexual impotence, that we may the more readily advise the souls that are in peril.[160] But first I wish to state that what I have said of hindrances is intended to apply after a marriage has been contracted; no marriage should be annulled by any such hindrance. But as to marriages which are to be contracted, I would briefly repeat what I said above[161]. Under the stress of youthful passion or of any other necessity for which the pope grants dispensation, any brother may grant a dispensation to another or even to himself, and following that counsel snatch his wife out of the power of the tyrannical laws as best he can. For with what right am I deprived of my liberty by another's superstition and ignorance? If the pope grants a dispensation for money, why should not I, for my soul's salvation, grant a dispensation to myself or to my brother? Does the pope set up laws? Let him set them up or himself, and keep hands off my liberty; else I will take it by stealth! Now let us discuss the matter of impotence.

Take the following case. A woman, wed to an impotent man, is unable to prove her husband's impotence before court, or perhaps she is unwilling to do so with the mass of evidence and all the notoriety which the law demands; yet she is desirous of having children or is unable to remain continent. Now suppose I had counseled her to demand a divorce from her husband in order to marry another, satisfied that her own and her husband's conscience and their experience were ample testimony of his impotence; but the husband refused his consent to this. Then suppose I should further counsel her, with the consent of the man (who is not really her husband, but merely a dweller under the same roof with her), to give herself to another, say her husband's brother, but to keep this marriage secret and to ascribe the children to the so-called putative father. The question is: Is such a woman in a saved state? I answer, Certainly. Because in this case the error and ignorance of the man's impotence are a hindrance to the marriage; the tyranny of the laws permits no divorce; the woman is free through the divine law, and cannot be compelled to remain continent. Therefore the man ought to yield her this right, and let another man have her as wife whom he has only in outward appearance.

Moreover, if the man will not give his consent, or agree to this division,--rather than allow the woman to burn or to commit adultery, I should counsel her to contract a marriage with another and flee to distant parts unknown. What other counsel could be given to one constantly in danger from lust? Now I know that some are troubled by the act that then the children of this secret marriage are not the rightful heirs of their putative father. But if it was done with the consent of the husband, then the children will be the rightful heirs. If, however, it was done without his knowledge or against his will, then let unbiased Christian reason, nay, let Christian charity, decide which of the two has done the greater injury to the other. The wife alienates the inheritance, but the husband has deceived his wife and is completely defrauding her of her body and her life. Is not the sin of the man who wastes his wife's body and life a greater sin than that of the woman who merely alienates the temporal goods of her husband? Let him, therefore, agree to a divorce, or else be satisfied with strange heirs; for by his own fault he deceived the innocence of a maiden and defrauded her of the proper use of her body, besides giving her a wellnigh irresistible opportunity to commit adultery. Let both be weighed in the same scales. Certainly, by every right, deceit should all back on the deceiver, and whoever has done an injury must make it good. What is the difference between such a husband and the man who holds another's wife captive together with her husband? Is not such a tyrant compelled to support wife and children and husband, or else to set them free? Why should not the same hold here? Therefore I maintain that the man should be compelled either to submit to a divorce or to support the other man's child as his heir. Doubtless this would be the judgment of charity. In that case, the impotent man, who is not really the husband, should support the heirs of his wife in the same spirit in which he would at great cost wait on his wife if she fell sick or suffered some other ill; for it is by his fault and not by his wife's that she suffers this ill. This have I set forth to the best of my ability, for the strengthening of anxious consciences, being desirous to bring my afflicted brethren in this captivity what little comfort I can.[162]

[Sidenote: Divorce]

As to divorce, it is still a moot question whether it be allowable. For my part I so greatly detest divorce that I should prefer bigamy to it,[163] but whether it be allowable, I do not venture to decide. Christ Himself, the Chief Pastor[164], says in Matthew v, "Whosoever shall put away his wife, excepting for the cause of fornication, maketh her commit adultery; and he that shall marry her that is put away, committeth adultery." [Matt. 5:32] Christ, then, permits divorce, but for the cause of fornication only. The pope must, therefore, be in error whenever he grants a divorce for any other cause, and no one should feel safe who has obtained a dispensation by this temerity (not authority) of the pope. Yet it is a still greater wonder to me, why they compel a man to remain unmarried after being separated from his wife, and why they will not permit him to remarry. For if Christ permits divorce for the cause of fornication and compels no one to remain unmarried, and if Paul would rather have one marry than burn [1 Cor. 7:9], then He certainly seems to permit a man to marry another woman in the stead of the one who has been put away. Would to God this matter were thoroughly threshed out and decided, so that counsel might be given in the infinite perils of those who, without any fault of their own, are nowadays compelled to remain unmarried, that is, of those whose wives or husbands have run away and deserted them, to come back perhaps after ten years, perhaps never. This matter troubles and distresses me; I meet cases of it every day, whether it happen by the special malice of Satan or because of our neglect of the word of God.

I, indeed, who, alone against all, can decide nothing in this matter, would yet greatly desire at least the passage in I Corinthians vii to be applied here,--"But if the unbeliever depart, let him depart. For a brother or sister is not under servitude in such cases." [1 Cor. 7:15] Here the Apostle gives permission to put away the unbeliever who departs and to set the believing spouse free to marry again. Why should not the same hold true when a believer--that is, a believer in name, but in truth as much an unbeliever as the one Paul speaks of--deserts his wife, especially if he never intends to return? I certainly can see no difference between the two. But I believe that if in the Apostle's day an unbelieving deserter had returned and had become a believer or had promised to live again with his believing wife, he would not have been taken back, but he too would have been given the right to marry again. Nevertheless, in these matters I decide nothing, as I have said,"[165] although there is nothing I would rather see decided, since nothing at present more grievously perplexes me and many more with me. I would have nothing decided here on the mere authority of the pope or the bishops; but if two learned and pious men agreed in the name of Christ and published their opinion in the spirit of Christ [Matt. 18:19 f.], I should prefer their judgment even to such councils as are nowadays assembled, famous only for numbers and authority, not for scholarship and saintliness. Herewith I hang up my harp[166][Ps. 137:2], until another and a better man shall take up this matter with me.

Ordination

ORDINATION

Of this sacrament the Church of Christ knows nothing; it is an invention of the church of the pope. Not only is there nowhere any promise of grace attached to it, but there is not the least mention of it in the whole New Testament. Now it is ridiculous to put forth as a sacrament of God that which cannot be proved to have been instituted by God. I do not hold that this rite, which has been observed for so many centuries, should be condemned; but in sacred things I am opposed to the invention of human fictions, nor is it right to give out as divinely instituted what was not divinely instituted, lest we become a laughing-stock to our opponents. We ought to see to it that every article of faith of which we boast be certain, pure, and based on clear passages of Scripture. But that we are utterly unable to do in the case of the sacrament under consideration.

[Sidenote: The Church Cannot Institute Sacraments]

The Church has no power to make new divine promises, as some prate, who hold that what is decreed by the Church is of no less authority than what is decreed by God, since the Church is under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. But the Church owes its life to the word of promise through faith, and is nourished and preserved by this same word. That is to say, the promises of God make the Church, not the Church the promise of God. For the Word of God is incomparably superior to the Church, and in this Word the Church, being a creature, has nothing to decree, ordain or make, but only to be decreed, ordained and made. For who begets his own parent? Who first brings forth his own maker? This one thing indeed the Church can do--it can distinguish the Word of God from the words of men; as Augustine confesses that he believed the Gospel, moved thereto by the authority of the Church, which proclaimed, this is the Gospel.[167] Not that the Church is, therefore, above the Gospel; if that were true, she would also be above God, in Whom we believe because she proclaims that He is God. But, as Augustine elsewhere says,[168] the truth itself lays hold on the soul and thus renders it able to judge most certainly of all things; but the truth it cannot judge, but is forced to say with unerring certainty that it is the truth. For example, our reason declares with unerring certainty that three and seven are ten, and yet it cannot give a reason why this is true, although it cannot deny that it is true; it is taken captive by the truth and does not so much judge the truth as it is judged by the truth. Thus it is also with the mind of the Church [1 Cor. 2:16], when under the enlightenment of the Spirit she judges and approves doctrines; she is unable to prove it, and yet is most certain of having it. For as in philosophy no one judges general conceptions, but all are judged by them, so it is in the Church with the mind of the Spirit, that judgeth all things and is judged by none, as the Apostle says [1 Cor. 2:15]. But of this another time.[169]

[Sidenote: Ordination not a Sacrament]

Let this then stand fast,--the Church can give no promises of grace; that is the work of God alone. Therefore she cannot institute a sacrament. But even if she could, it yet would not follow that ordination is a sacrament. For who knows which is the Church that has the Spirit? since when such decisions are made there are usually only a few bishops or scholars present; it is possible that these may not be really of the Church, and that all may err, as councils have repeatedly erred, particularly the Council of Constance[170], which fell into the most wicked error of all. Only that which has the approval of the Church universal, and not of the Roman church alone, rests on a trustworthy foundation. I therefore admit that ordination is a certain churchly rite, on a par with many others introduced by the Church Fathers, such as the blessing of vases, houses, vestments, water, salt, candles, herbs, wine, and the like. No one calls any of these a sacrament, nor is there in them any promise. In the same manner, to anoint a man's hands with oil, or to shave his head, and the like, is not to administer a sacrament, since there is no promise given to those things; he is simply prepared, like a vessel or an instrument, for a certain work.

But you will reply: "What do you say to Dionysius,[171] who in his _Ecclesiastical Hierarchy_ enumerates six sacraments, among which he also includes orders?" I answer: I am well aware that this is the one writer of antiquity who is cited in support of the seven sacraments, although he omits marriage and thus has only six. We read simply nothing about these "sacraments" in the other Fathers, nor do they ever refer to them as sacraments; for the invention of sacraments is of recent date. Indeed, to speak more boldly, the setting so great store by this Dionysius, whoever he may have been, greatly displeases me, for there is scarce a line of sound scholarship in him. Prithee, by what authority and with what reasons does he establish his hotch-potch about the angels, in his _Celestial Hierarchy_?--a book over which many curious and superstitious spirits have cudgeled their brains. If one were to read and judge fairly, is not all shaken out of his sleeve and very like a dream? But in his _Mystic Theology_, which certain most ignorant theologians greatly puff, he is downright dangerous, being more of a Platonist than a Christian; so that, if I had my way, no believing mind would give the least attention to these books. So far from learning Christ in them, you will lose even what you know of Him. I know whereof I speak. Let us rather hear Paul, that we may learn Jesus Christ and Him crucified [1 Cor. 2:2]. He is the way, the life and the truth; He is the ladder by which we come unto the Father, as He saith: "No man cometh unto the Father but by me." [John 14:6]

[Sidenote: Allegories]

And in the _Ecclesiastical Hierarchy_, what does this Dionysius do but describe certain churchly rites and play round them with his allegories without proving them? just as among us the author of the book entitled _Rationale divinorum_.[172] Such allegorical studies are the work of idle men. Think you I should find it difficult to play with allegories round anything in creation? Did not Bonaventure[173] by allegory draw the liberal arts into theology? And Gerson even converted the smaller Donatus into a mystic theologian.[173] It would not be a difficult task for me to compose a better hierarchy than that of Dionysius, for he knew nothing of pope, cardinals and archbishops, and put the bishop at the top. Nay, who has so weak a mind as not to be able to launch into allegories? I would not have a theologian give himself to allegorizing until he has perfected himself in the grammatical and literal interpretation of the Scriptures; otherwise his theology will bring him into danger, as Origen discovered.[175]

Therefore a thing does not need to be a sacrament simply because Dionysius describes it. Otherwise, why not also make a sacrament of the processions, which he describes in his book, and which continue to this day? There will then be as many sacraments as there have been rites and ceremonies multiplied in the Church. Standing on so unsteady a foundation, they have nevertheless invented "characters"[176] which they attribute to this sacrament of theirs and which are indelibly impressed on those who are ordained. Whence do such ideas come? By what authority, with what reasons, are they established? We do not object to their being free to invent, say and give out whatever they please; but we also insist on our liberty and demand that they shall not arrogate to themselves the right to turn their ideas into articles of faith, as they have hitherto presumed to do. It is enough that we accommodate ourselves to their rites and ceremonies for the sake of peace; but we reuse to be bound by such things as though they were necessary to salvation, when they are not. Let them put by their despotic demands, and we shall yield free obedience to their opinions, and thus live at peace with them. It is a shameful and wicked slavery for a Christian man, who is free, to be subject to any but heavenly and divine traditions.

[Sidenote: The Alleged Scriptural Basis of Ordination]

We come now to their strongest argument. It is this: Christ said at the Last Supper: "Do this in remembrance of me." [1 Cor. 11:24] Here, they say, Christ ordained the apostles to the priesthood. From this passage they also concluded, among other things, that both kinds are to be administered to the priests alone.[177] In fine, they have drawn out of this passage whatever they pleased, as men who might arrogate to themselves the free will to prove anything whatever from any words of Christ, no matter where found. But is that interpreting the words of God? Pray, answer me! Christ gives us no promise here, but only commands that this be done in remembrance of Him. Why do they not conclude that He also ordained priests when He laid upon them the office of the Word and of baptism, saying, "Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature, baptising them in the name," [Mark 16:15; Matt. 28:19] etc.? For it is the proper duty of priests to preach and to baptise. Or, since it is nowadays the chief and, as they say, indispensable duty of priests to read the canonical hours,[178] why have they not discovered the sacrament of ordination in those passages in which Christ, in many places and particularly in the garden, commanded them to pray that they might not enter into temptation? [Matt. 26:41] But perhaps they will evade this argument by saying that it is not commanded to _pray_; it is enough to _read_ the canonical hours. Then it follows that this priestly work can be proved nowhere in the Scriptures, and thus their praying priesthood is not of God, as, indeed, it is not.

But which of the ancient Fathers claimed that in this passage priests were ordained? Whence comes this novel interpretation? I will tell you. They have sought by this device to set up a nursery of implacable discord, whereby clerics and laymen should be separated from each other farther than heaven from earth, to the incredible injury of the grace of baptism and the confusion of our fellowship in the Gospel. Here, indeed, are the roots of that detestable tyranny of the clergy over the laity; trusting in the external anointing by which their hands are consecrated, in the tonsure and in vestments, they not only exalt themselves above lay Christians, who are only anointed with the Holy Spirit, but regard them almost as dogs and unworthy to be included with them in the Church. Hence they are bold to demand, to exact, to threaten, to urge, to oppress, as much as they please. In short, the sacrament of ordination has been and is a most approved device for the establishing of all the horrible things that have been wrought hitherto and will yet be wrought in the Church. Here Christian brotherhood has perished, here shepherds have been turned into wolves, servants into tyrants, churchmen into worse than worldlings.

[Sidenote: The Priesthood of All Christians]

If they were forced to grant that as many of us as have been baptised are all priests without distinction, as indeed we are, and that to them was committed the ministry only, yet with our consent, they would presently learn that they have no right to rule over us except in so far as we freely concede it. For thus it is written in i Peter ii, "Ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, and a priestly kingdom." [1 Peter 2:9] Therefore we are all priests, as many of us as are Christians.[179] But the priests, as we call them, are ministers chosen from among us, who do all that they do in our name. And the priesthood is nothing but a ministry, as we learn from I Corinthians iv, "Let a man so account of us as of the ministers of Christ, and the dispensers of the mysteries of God." [1 Cor. 4:1]

It follows herefrom that whoever does not preach the Word, called by the Church to this very thing, is no priest at all. And further, that the sacrament of ordination can be nothing else than a certain rite of choosing preachers in the Church. For thus is a priest defined in Malachi ii, "The lips of the priest shall keep knowledge, and they shall seek the law at his mouth: because he is the angel of the Lord of hosts." [Mal. 2:7] You may be certain, then, that whoever is not an angel of the Lord of hosts, or whoever is called to anything else than such angelic service--if I may so term it--is never a priest; as Hosea says, "Because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will reject thee, that thou shalt not do the office of priesthood to me." [Hosea 4:6] They are also called pastors because they are to pasture, that is, to teach. Therefore, they who are ordained only to read the canonical hours and to offer masses are indeed papist, but not Christian, priests, because they not only do not preach, but are not called to preach; nay, it comes to this, that such a priesthood is a different estate altogether from the office of preaching. Thus they are hour-priests and mass-priests, that is, a sort of living idol, having the name of priest, while they are in reality such priests as Jeroboam ordained, in Bethaven, of the off-scouring of the people, and not of the tribe of Levi.[180][1 Kings 12:31]

Lo, whither hath the glory of the Church departed! The whole earth is filled with priests, bishops, cardinals and clerics, and yet not one of them preaches by virtue of his office, unless he be called to do so by another and a different call besides his sacramental ordination. Every one thinks he is doing full justice to his sacrament by mumbling the vain repetitions of his prescribed prayers and by celebrating masses; moreover, by never really praying those hours[181], or if he does pray them, by praying them for himself, and by offering his masses as a sacrifice--which is the height of perversity!--whereas the mass consists in the use of the sacrament. It is clear, therefore, that the ordination which, as a sacrament, makes clerics of this sort of men, is in truth nothing but a mere fiction, devised by men who understand nothing about the Church, the priesthood, the ministry of the Word, or the sacraments. And as is the sacrament, so are the priests it makes. To such errors and such blindness has come a still worse captivity; in order to separate themselves still farther from other Christians, whom they deem profane, they have unmanned themselves, like the priests of Cybele, and taken upon them the burden of a pretended celibacy.

It was not enough for this hypocrisy and error to forbid bigamy, viz., the having of two wives at the same time, as it was forbidden in the law, and as is the accepted meaning of the term; but they have called it bigamy if a man married two virgins, one after the other, or if he married a widow. Nay, so holy is the holiness of this most holy sacrament, that no married man can become a priest as long as his wife lives. And--here we reach the very summit of holiness--even he is prevented from entering the priesthood, who without his knowledge or by an unfortunate chance married a fallen woman. But if one have defiled a thousand harlots, or ravished countless matrons and virgins, or even kept numerous Ganymedes, that would be no hindrance to his becoming bishop or cardinal or pope. Moreover, the Apostle's word, "the husband of one wife," [1 Tim. 3:2] must be interpreted to mean, "the prelate of one church," and this has given rise to the "incompatible benefices."[182] At the same time the pope, that munificent dispenser, may join to one man three, twenty, one hundred wives--I should say churches--if he be bribed with money or power--I should say, moved by godly charity and constrained by the care of the churches.

O pontiffs worthy of this holy sacrament of ordination! O princes, not of the catholic churches, but of the synagogues, nay, the black dens, of Satan! [Rev. 2:9] I would cry out with Isaiah: "Ye scornful men, who rule over my people that is in Jerusalem" [Isa. 28:14]; and with Amos: "Woe to you that are wealthy in Sion, and to you that have confidence in the mountain of Samaria: ye great men, heads of the people, that go in with state into the house of Israel." [Amos 6:1] O the reproach that such monstrous priests bring upon the Church of God! Where are there any bishops or priests who know the Gospel, not to speak of preaching it? Why then do they boast of being priests? Why do they desire to be regarded as holier and better and mightier than other Christians, who are merely laymen? To read the hours--what unlearned men, or, as the Apostle says, what men speaking with tongues, cannot do that? [1 Cor. 14:23] But to _pray_ the hours--that belongs to monks, hermits, and men in private life, all of them laymen. The duty of the priest is to preach, and if he does not preach he is as much a priest as a painted man is a man. Does ordaining such babbling priests make one a bishop? Or blessing churches and bells? Or confirming boys? Certainly not. Any deacon or layman could do as much. The ministry of the Word makes the priest and the bishop.

[Sidenote: Ordination, the Rite of Choosing Preachers]

Therefore my advice is: Flee, all ye that would live in safety; begone, young men, and do not enter upon this holy estate, unless you are determined to preach the Gospel, and are able to believe that you are not made one whit better than the laity through this sacrament of ordination! For to read the hours is nothing, and to offer mass is to receive the sacrament.[183] What then is there left to you that every layman does not have? Tonsure and vestments? A sorry priest, forsooth, who consists of tonsure and vestment! Or the oil poured on your fingers? But every Christian is anointed and sanctified with the oil of the Holy Spirit, both in body and soul, and in ancient times touched the sacrament with his hands no less than the priests do now.[184] But to-day our superstition counts it a great crime if the laity touch either the bare chalice or the _corporale_;[185] not even a nun who is a pure virgin would be permitted to wash the palls[186] and sacred linens of the altar. O God! how the sacrosanct sanctity of this sacrament of ordination has grown and grown. I anticipate that ere long the laity will not be permitted to touch the altar except when they offer their money. I can scarce contain myself when I contemplate the wicked tyrannies of these desperate men, who with their farcical and childish fancies mock and overthrow the liberty and the glory of the Christian religion.

Let every one, therefore, who knows himself to be a Christian be assured of this, and apply it to himself,--that we are all priests, and there is no difference between us; that is to say, we have the same power in respect to the Word and all the sacraments. However, no one may make use of this power except by the consent of the community or by the call of a superior. For what is the common property of all, no individual may arrogate to himself, unless he be called. And therefore this sacrament of ordination, if it have any meaning at all, is nothing else than a certain rite whereby one is called to the ministry of the Church. Furthermore, the priesthood is properly nothing but the ministry of the Word, mark you, of the Word--not of the law, but of the Gospel. And the diaconate is not the ministry of reading the Gospel or the Epistle, as is the present practice, but the ministry of distributing the Church's alms to the poor, so that the priests may be relieved of the burden of temporal matters and may give themselves more freely to prayer and the Word. For this was the purpose of the institution of the diaconate, as we read in Acts vi. [Acts 6:4] Whoever, therefore, does not know or preach the Gospel, is not only not a priest or bishop, but he is a plague of the Church, who under the false title of priest or bishop--in sheep's clothing, forsooth--oppresses the Gospel and plays the wolf in the Church. Therefore, unless those priests and bishops with whom the Church is now filled work out their salvation in some other way, that is, realise that they are not priests or bishops and bemoan the act that they bear the name of an office whose duties they either do not know or cannot fulfil, and thus with prayers and tears lament their wretched hypocritical life--unless they do this, they are truly the people of eternal perdition, and the words of Isaiah are fulfilled in them: "Therefore is my people led away captive, because they had not knowledge, and their nobles have perished with famine, and their multitude were dried up with thirst. Therefore hath hell enlarged her soul and opened her mouth without any bounds, and their strong ones, and their people, and their high and generous ones shall go down into it." [Isa. 5:13 f.] What a dreadful word for our age, in which Christians are sucked down into so deep an abyss!

Since, therefore, what we call the priesthood is a ministry, so far as we can learn from the Scriptures, I cannot understand why one who has been made a priest cannot again become a layman; for the sole difference between him and a layman is his ministry. But to depose a man from the ministry is so far from impossible that it is even now the usual penalty imposed upon guilty priests; they are either suspended for a season or permanently deprived of their office. For that lying "indelible character" has long since become a laughing-stock. I admit that the pope imparts this character, but Christ knows nothing of it; and a priest who is consecrated with it becomes thereby the life-long servant and captive, not of Christ, but of the pope; as it is in our day. Moreover, unless I am greatly mistaken, if this sacrament and this life all, the papacy itself with its characters will scarcely survive; our joyous liberty will be restored to us; we shall realize that we are all equal by every right, and having cast of the yoke of tyranny, shall know that he who is a Christian has Christ, and that he who has Christ has all things that are Christ's and is able to do all things [Phil. 4:13]. Of this I will write more, and more tellingly, as soon as I perceive that the above has displeased my friends the papists.[187]

The Sacrament Of Extreme Unction

THE SACRAMENT OF EXTREME UNCTION

[Sidenote: The Authority of James]

To the rite of anointing the sick our theologians have made two additions which are worthy of them; first, the call it a sacrament, and secondly, they make it the last sacrament. So that it is now the sacrament of extreme unction, which may be administered only to such as are at the point of death. Being such subtle dialecticians, perchance they have done this in order to relate it to the first unction of baptism and the two succeeding unctions of confirmation and ordination. But here they are able to cast in my teeth, that in the case of this sacrament there are, on the authority of James the Apostle, both promise and sign, which, as I have all along maintained, constitute a sacrament. For does not James say: "Is any man sick among you? Let him bring in the priests of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer of faith shall raise him up: and if he be in sins, they shall be forgiven him." [James 5:14 f.] There, say they, you have the promise of the forgiveness of sins, and the sign of the oil.

But I reply: If ever there was a mad conceit, here is one indeed. I will say nothing of the act that many assert with much probability that this Epistle is not by James the Apostle,[188] nor worthy of an apostolic spirit, although, whoever be its author, it has come to be esteemed as authoritative. But even if the Apostle James did write it, I yet should say, no Apostle has the right on his own authority to institute a sacrament, that is, to give a divine promise with a sign attached; for this belongs to Christ alone. Thus Paul says that he received from the Lord the sacrament of the Eucharist, and that he was not sent to baptise but to preach the Gospel [1 Cor. 11:23; 1 Cor. 1:17]. And we read nowhere in the Gospel of this sacrament of extreme unction. But let us also waive that point. Let us examine the words of the Apostle, or whoever was the author of the Epistle, and we shall at once see how little heed these multipliers of sacraments have given to them.

[Sidenote: The Unction Not Extreme]

In the first place, then, if they believe the Apostle's words to be true and binding, by what right do they change and contradict them? Why do they make an extreme and a particular kind of unction of that which the Apostle wished to be general? For he did not desire it to be an extreme unction or administered only to the dying; but he says quite generally: "If any man be sick"--not, "If any man be dying." I care not what learned discussions Dionysius has on this point in his _Ecclesiastical Hierarchy_;[189] the Apostle's words are clear enough, on which words he as well as they rely, without, however, following them. It is evident, therefore, that they have arbitrarily and without any authority made a sacrament and an extreme unction out of the misunderstood words of the Apostle, to the detriment of all other sick persons, whom they have deprived of the benefit of the unction which the Apostle enjoined.

[Sidenote: The Unction Medicinal]

But what follows is still better. The Apostle's promise expressly declares that the prayer of faith shall save the sick man, and the Lord shall raise him up. The Apostle commands us to anoint the sick man and to pray, in order that he may be healed and raised up; that is, that he may not die, and that it may not be an extreme unction. This is proved also by the prayers which are said, during the anointing, or the recovery of the one who is sick. But they say, on the contrary, that the unction must be administered to none but the dying; that is, that they may not be healed and raised up. If it were not so serious a matter, who could help laughing at this beautiful, apt and sound exposition of the Apostle's words? Is not the folly of the sophists here shown in its true colors? As here, so in many other places, they affirm what the Scriptures deny, and deny what they affirm. Why should we not give thanks to these excellent magisters of ours?[190] I therefore spoke truth when I said they never conceived a crazier notion than this.[191]

Furthermore, if this unction is a sacrament it must necessarily be, as they say, an effective sign[192] of that which it signifies and promises. Now it promises health and recovery to the sick, as the words plainly say: "The prayer of faith shall save the sick man, and the Lord shall raise him up." But who does not see that this promise is seldom if ever fulfilled? Scarce one in a thousand is restored to health, and when one is restored nobody believes that it came about through the sacrament, but through the working of nature or the medicine; or to the sacrament they ascribe the opposite power. What shall we say then? Either the Apostle lies in making this promise or else this unction is no sacrament. For the sacramental promise is certain; but this promise deceives in the majority of cases. Indeed--and here again we recognize the shrewdness and foresight of these theologians--for this very reason they would have it to be extreme unction, that the promise should not stand; in other words, that the sacrament should be no sacrament. For if it is extreme unction, it does not heal, but gives way to the disease; but if it heals, it cannot be extreme unction. Thus, by the interpretation of these magisters, James is shown to have contradicted himself, and to have instituted a sacrament in order not to institute one; for they must have an extreme unction just to make untrue what the Apostle intends, namely, the healing of the sick. If that is not madness, pray what is?

[Sidenote: Priests and Elders]

These people exemplify the word of the Apostle in i Timothy i, "Desiring to be teachers of the law, understanding neither the things they say, nor whereof they affirm." [1 Tim. 1:7] Thus they read and follow all things without judgment. With the same thoughtlessness they have also found auricular confession in our Apostle's words,--"Confess your sins one to another." [James 5:16] But they do not observe the command of the Apostle, that the priests of the church be called, and prayer be made for the sick. Scarce a single priestling is sent nowadays, although the Apostle would have many present, not because of the unction but of the prayer. Wherefore he says: "The prayer of faith shall save the sick man," etc. I have my doubts, however, whether he would have us understand priests when he says presbyters, that is, elders. For one who is an elder is not therefore a priest or minister; so that the suspicion is justified that the Apostle desired the older and graver men in the Church to visit the sick; these should perform a work of mercy and pray in faith and thus heal him. Still it cannot be denied that the ancient churches were ruled by elders, chosen for this purpose, without these ordinations and consecrations, solely on account of their age and their long experience.

Therefore, I take it, this unction is the same as that which the Apostles practised, in Mark vi, "They anointed with oil many that were sick, and healed them." [Mark 6:13] It was a ceremony of the early Church, by which they wrought miracles on the sick, and which has long since ceased; even as Christ, in the last chapter of Mark, gave them that believe the power to take up serpents, to lay hands on the sick, etc. [Mark 16:17] It is a wonder that they have not made sacraments also of these things; for they have the same power and promise as the words of James. Therefore, this extreme--that is, this fictitious--unction is not a sacrament, but a counsel of James, which whoever will may use, and it is derived from Mark vi, as I have shown. I do not believe it was a counsel given to all sick persons, for the Church's infirmity is her glory and death is gain [Rom. 5:3; Phil. 1:21]; but it was given only to such as might bear their sickness impatiently and with little faith. These the Lord allowed to remain in the Church, in order that miracles and the power of faith might be manifest in them.

[Sidenote: Prayer the Chief Part of Unction]

For this very contingency James provided with care and foresight by attaching the promise of healing and the forgiveness of sins not to the unction, but to the prayer of faith. For he says: "And the prayer of faith shall save the sick man, and the Lord shall raise him up: and if he be in sins, they shall be forgiven him." A sacrament does not demand prayer or faith on the part of the minister, since even a wicked person may baptise and consecrate without prayer; a sacrament depends solely on the promise and institution of God, and requires faith on the part of him who receives it. But where is the prayer of faith in our present use of extreme unction? Who prays over the sick one in such faith as not to doubt that he will recover? Such a prayer of faith James here describes, of which he said in the beginning of his Epistle: "But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering." [James 1:6] And Christ says of it: "Whatsoever you ask, believe that you shall receive; and it shall be done unto you." [Mark 11:24]

[Sidenote: The Unction and Faith]

If such prayer were made, even to-day, over a sick man--that is, prayer made in full faith by older, grave and saintly men--it is beyond all doubt that we could heal as many sick as we would. For what could not faith do? But we neglect this faith, which the authority of the Apostle demands above all else. By presbyters--that is, men preeminent by reason of their age and their faith--we understand the common herd of priests. Moreover, we turn the daily or voluntary unction into an extreme unction, and finally, we not only do not effect the result promised by the Apostle, namely, the healing of the sick, but we make it of none effect by striving after the very opposite. And yet we boast that our sacrament, nay, our figment, is established and proved by this saying of the Apostle, which is diametrically opposed to it. What theologians we are! Now I do not condemn this our sacrament of extreme unction, but I firmly deny that it is what the Apostle James prescribes; for his unction agrees with ours neither in form, use, power nor purpose. Nevertheless we shall number it among those sacraments which we have instituted, such as the blessing and sprinkling of salt and holy water[193]. For we cannot deny that every creature is sanctified by the word and by prayer, as the Apostle Paul teaches us [1 Tim. 4:4 f.]. We do not deny, therefore, that forgiveness of sins and peace are granted through extreme unction; not because it is a sacrament divinely instituted, but because he who receives it believes that these blessings are granted to him. For the faith of the recipient does not err, however much the minister may err. For one who baptises or absolves in jest[194], that is, does not absolve so far as the minister is concerned, does yet truly absolve and baptise if the person he baptises or absolves believe. How much more will one who administers extreme unction confer peace, even though he does not really confer peace, so far as his ministry is concerned, since there is no sacrament there. The faith of the one anointed receives even that which the minister either could not or did not intend to give; it is sufficient for him to hear and believe the Word. For whatever we believe we shall receive, that we do really receive, it matters not what the minister may do or not do, or whether he dissemble or jest. The Saying of Christ stands fast,--"All things are possible to him that believeth," [Mark 9:23] and, "Be it unto thee even as thou hast believed." [Matt. 8:13] But in treating the sacraments our sophists say nothing at all of this faith, but only babble with all their might of the virtues of the sacraments themselves--"ever learning, and never attaining to the knowledge of the truth." [2 Tim. 3:7]

Still it was a good thing that this unction was made extreme unction, or, thanks to that, it has been disturbed and subjected least of all the sacraments by tyranny and greed. This one last mercy, forsooth, has been let to the dying,--they may freely be anointed, even without confession and communion. If it had remained a practice of daily occurrence, especially if it had conferred health on the sick, even without taking away sins, how many worlds would not the pontiffs have under their control to-day? For through the one sacrament of penance and through the power of the keys, as well as through the sacrament of ordination, they have become such mighty emperors and princes. But now it is a fortunate thing that they despise the prayer of faith, and therefore do not heal any sick, and that they have made or themselves, out of an ancient ceremony, a brand-new sacrament.

Let this suffice now for these four sacraments. I know how it will displease those who believe that the number and use of the sacraments are to be learned not from the sacred Scriptures, but from the Roman See. As though the Roman See had given those sacraments and had not rather got them from the lecture halls of the universities, to which it is unquestionably indebted or whatever it has. The papal despotism would not have attained its present position, had it not taken over so many things from the universities. For there was scarce another of the celebrated bishoprics that had so few learned pontiffs; only in violence, intrigue, and superstition has it hitherto surpassed the rest. For the men who occupied the Roman See a thousand years ago differ so vastly from those who have since come into power, that one is compelled to refuse the name of Roman pontiff either to the former or to the latter.

[Sidenote: Other Possible Sacraments]

There are yet a few other things it might seem possible to regard as sacraments; namely, all those to which a divine promise has been given, such as prayer, the Word, and the cross. Christ promised, in many places, that those who pray should be heard; especially in Luke xi, where He invites us in many parables to pray [Luke 11:5 ff.]. Of the Word He says: "Blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it." [Luke 11:28] And who will tell how often He promises aid and glory to such as are afflicted, suffer, and are cast down? Nay, who will recount all the promises of God? The whole Scripture is concerned with provoking us to faith; now driving us with precepts and threats, now drawing us with promises and consolations. Indeed, whatever things are written are either precepts or promises; the precepts humble the proud with their demands, the promises exalt the humble with their forgiveness.

[Sidenote: Baptism and Bread the Only Sufficient Sacraments]

Nevertheless, it has seemed best to restrict the name of sacrament to such promises as have signs attached to them. The remainder, not being bound to signs, are bare promises. Hence there are, strictly speaking, but two sacraments in the Church of God--baptism and bread; for only in these two do we find both the divinely instituted sign and the promise of forgiveness of sins. The sacrament of penance, which I added to these two[195] lacks the divinely instituted visible sign, and is, as I have said[196], nothing but a return to baptism. Nor can the scholastics say that their definition fits penance, for they too ascribe to the sacrament a visible sign, which is to impress upon the senses the form of that which it effects invisibly. But penance, or absolution, has no such sign; wherefore they are constrained by their own definition, either to admit that penance is not a sacrament, and thus to reduce the number of sacraments, or else to bring forward another definition.

Baptism, however, which we have applied to the whole of life, will truly be a sufficient substitute for all the sacraments we might need as long as we live. And the bread is truly the sacrament of the dying; for in it we commemorate the passing of Christ out of this world, that we may imitate Him. Thus we may apportion these two sacraments as follows: baptism belongs to the beginning and the entire course of life, the bread belongs to the end and to death. And the Christian should use them both as long as he is in this poor body, until, fully baptised and strengthened, he passes out of this world and is born unto the new life of eternity, to eat with Christ in the Kingdom of His Father, as He promised at the Last Supper,--"Amen I say to you, I will not drink from henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God." [Matt. 26:29] Thus He seems clearly to have instituted the sacrament of the bread with a view to our entrance into the life to come. Then, when the meaning[197] of both sacraments is fulfilled, baptism and bread will cease.

[Sidenote: Conclusion]

Herewith I conclude this prelude, and freely and gladly offer it to all pious souls who desire to know the genuine sense of the Scriptures and the proper use of the sacraments. For it is a gift of no mean importance, to know the things that are given us, as it is said in I Corinthians ii [1 Cor. 2:12], and what use we ought to make of them. Endowed with this spiritual judgment, we shall not mistakenly rely on that which does not belong here. These two things our theologians never taught us, nay, methinks they took particular pains to conceal them from us. If I have not taught them, I certainly did not conceal them, and have given occasion to others to think out something better. It has at least been my endeavor to set forth these two things. Nevertheless, not all can do all things[198]. To the godless, on the other hand, and those who in obstinate tyranny force on us their own teachings instead of God's, I confidently and freely oppose these pages, utterly indifferent to their senseless fury. Yet I wish even them a sound mind, and do not despise their efforts, but only distinguish them from such as are sound and truly Christian.

I hear a rumor of new bulls and papal maledictions sent out against me, in which I am urged to recant or be declared a heretic[199]. If that is true, I desire this book to be a portion of the recantation I shall make; so that these tyrants may not complain of having had their pains for nothing. The remainder I will publish ere long, and it will, please Christ, be such as the Roman See has hitherto neither seen nor heard. I shall give ample proof of my obedience[200]. In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

Why doth that impious Herod fear When told that Christ the King is near? He takes not earthly realms away, Who gives the realms that ne'er decay.[201]

FOOTNOTES

[1] Born at Steinheim, near Paderborn, in Westphalia; a proofreader in Melchior Lotter's printing-house at Leipzig, with whose oldest son he went to Wittenberg in 1519; professor of poetry at the university; rector of the same, 1525; one of Luther's staunchest supporters; rector of the school at Lunenberg, 1532 until his death in 1540. Compare Enders, _Luther's Briewechsel_, II, 490; Tschackert, _op. cit._, 203, and literature in Clemen, I, 426.

[2] _Resolutiones disputatio num de indulgentiarum Virtute_, 1518; others think he refers to the Sermon _von Ablass und Gnade_, of the same year.

[3] Sylvester Prierias and the Dominicans. Comp. Kostlin-Kawerau, Luther, I, 189 ff.

[4] _Resolutiones super prop, xiii._, 1519.

[5] Comp. The Papacy at Rome, Vol. I, p. 392.

[6] Comp. Fr. Lepp, _Schlagworter des Ref. zeitalters_ (Leipzig, 1908), p. 62.

[7] The Franciscan Augustin Alveld. See Introduction, and compare Lemmens, _Pater Aug. v. Alveld_ (Freiburg, 1599).

[8] Isidore Isolani. See Introduction.

[9] Luther pokes fun at the use of _revocatio_ with an objective genitive.

[10] See above, p. 58, and compare Preserved Smith, _Luther's Correspondence_, Vol. I, letter no. 265.

[11] Cf. _The Papacy at Rome_, Vol. I, p. 337. The title-page of Alveld's treatise contained twenty-six lines.

[12] A satiric reference to a section in Alveld's treatise, on the name of Jesus, which he spells IHSVH and brings proofs for this form from the three languages, mentioned. See Seckendor, _Hist. Luth._, lib. I, sect. 27, section lxx, add. ii.

[13] Alveld calls himself, on his title-page, _Franciscanus regularis observantiae Sanctae Crucis_. The Observantines were Franciscan monks of the stricter rule, who separated from the Conventuals in the XV. Century. See _Prot. Realencyklopadie^3, VI, 213 ff.

[14] In the _Treatise on the Blessed Sacrament_; see above, p. 9.

[15] The universities of Cologne and Louvain had ratified Eck's "victory" over Luther at the Leipzig Disputation. See Kostlin-Kawerau, I, 266, 298.

[16] _De disputatione Lipsicensi_, 1519.

[17] _A venatione Luteriana Aegocerotis assertio_, 1519.

[18] Some theologians--e. g., Cajetan and Durandus--doubted whether the Sacrament of Order was received by deacons; the Council of Trent decided against them.--_Cath. Encyclop._, IV, 650.

[19] For Luther's opinion of Aristotle see above, pp. 146 f.

[20] The Franciscans are meant. The allusion may be to the seraphic vision of St. Francis.

[21] See above, pp. 153 ff.

[22] A less lenient view was taken by Boniface Amerbach, writing to his brother Basil at Basle, October 20, 1520: "The good man (Luther) was not a little injured by the libel of a poor impostor, who, by pretending that Martin had recanted, brought back even those who had entered upon the way of truth to their former errors." See Smith, _op. cit._, I, no. 316.

[23] The present did not last very long; see below, p. 292.

[24] So called because of the withholding of the wine from the laity.

[25] Cf. 1 Tim. 3:16. See Kostlin, _Theology of Luther_ (E. Tr.), I, 403; and below, pp. 258 f.

[26] The _Treatise on the Blessed Sacrament_, 1519.

[27] See page 174.

[28] See above, p. 10, note 1.

[29] _Decretal. Greg., lib. Ill, tit. xli, cap. 17_.

[30] Migne, XLIV, 699 f.

[31] _Verklarung etlicher Artikel_, 1520. _Weimer Ed._, VI, 80 11 ff.

[32] An allusion to his opponents' doctrine of the complete freedom of the will, which Luther denied. Compare his _De servo arbitrio_ (1525). _Weimar Ed._, XVIII, 600 ff. He finds in their treatment of Scripture and of logic a practical expression of this doctrine of theirs.

[33] Luther humbly identifies himself with the erring priesthood,

[34] Alveld.

[35] _The res sacramenti_. The sacrament consisted of these two parts--(1) the _sacramentum_, or external sign, and (2) the _res sacramenti_, or the thing signified, the sacramental grace. Another distinction is that between (1) _materia_, or the external sign, and (2) _forma_, or the words of institution or administration. See below, p. 223.

[36] Cf. _Weimar Ed._, VI, 505, note 1.

[37] Cf. Vol. I, p. 325, and _Realencyklopadie_, X, 289, pp. 11 ff.

[38] Cf. _Weimar Ed._, VI, 506, note 2.

[39] Cf. W. Kohler, _Luther unci die Kirchengeschichte_ (Erlangen, 1900), chap. viii.

[40] On the spiritual reception of the sacrament see H. Hering, _Die Mystik Luthers_ (1879), pp. 173 f. Cf. above, p. 40.

[41] See above, p. 172.

[42] John Wyclif (Died 1384), the keenest of the mediaeval critics of the doctrine of transubstantiation.

[43] Pierre d'Ailly (Died 1425), who, with his master Occam, greatly influenced Luther.

[44] The Sentences of Peter Lombard, the text-book of medieval theology.

[45] In the dogma of transubstantiation (Fourth Lateran Council, 1215) the Church taught that the substance of bread and wine was changed into the substance of Christ's body and blood, while the accidents of the former--i. e., their attributes, such as form, color, taste, etc.--remained.

[46] Aquinas.

[47] Thus the _Erlangen Ed._; the _Weimar Ed._ reads: _an accidentia ibi sint sine substantia_.

[48] See above, p. 20.

[49] i. e., the host, or wafer.

[50] _Decretal. Greg. lib. I, tit. i, cap. I, section 3_.

[51] See above, pp. 26 ff.

[52] See above, p. 137.

[54] Comp. Vol. I, pp. 295 ff.

[55] The Douay Version has here been followed.

[56] See Luther's own definition above, pp. 22 ff.

[57] See above, p. 181, note.

[58] See above, p. 198.

[59] See above, p. 195.

[60] See above, p. 10.

[61] See above, p. 187, note 1.

[62] See above, p. 188.

[63] See above, p. 182, note 2.

[64] On "fruits of the mass" compare Seeberg, _Dogmengesch._., III, p. 472.

[65] Comp. Vol. I, p. 307.

[66] Comp. Vol. I, pp. 302 f.

[67] See above, pp. 22 f.

[68] See p. 23.

[69] See Vol. I, pp. 187 ff.

[70] See above, p. 196.

[71] That portion of the mass included between the Sanctus and the Lord's Prayer.

[72] See Vol. I, p. 312, and _Prot. Realencyklop._, XIV, 679, 41 ff.

[73] See above, p. 211, note 2.

[74] See above, p. 16.

[75] See Vol. I, p. 306.

[76] The offertory prayers in the mass. _C. Prot. Realencyklopadie_, XII, 720, 46 ff.

[77] The private mass does not require the presence of a congregation. Besides the celebrant there need be present only a ministrant. There is no music, the mass is only read. See _Realencyklopadie_, XII, 723.

[78] The _res sacramenti_. See above, p. 182.

[79] Masses celebrated by special request or in honor of certain mysteries (e. g., of the Holy Trinity, of the Holy Spirit, or of angels). _Realencyklopadie_, XII, 722.

[80] Pope Gregory I. See Realencyklopadie, XII, 681 f.

[81] See above, p. 196, note, and comp. Seeberg, _Dogmengesch._, Ill, 461 f.

[82] For letters of indulgence.

[83] _E p_. 130, 9 (Migne, XXII, 1115).

[84] Factions in the monastic orders.

[85] The reference may be to Blandina, who suffered martyrdom under Marcus Aurelius.

[86] The three parts of penance; see below, p. 247.

[87] See Vol. I, p. 91.

[88] Peter Lombard, the fourth book of whose Sentences treats of the sacraments; see above, p. 188.

[89] See p. 182, note 2.

[90] The scholastics distinguished between the "material" and the "form" of a sacrament. In baptism, the material was the water; the form, the words, "I baptise thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

[91] Alexander, of Hales, denied the validity of baptism "in the name of Jesus," which Peter Lombard defended. Cf. _Realencyklopadie_, XIX, 412.

[92] Cf. _Weimar Ed._, I, 544, and _Erlangen Ed._, XLIV, 114 ff.

[93] See above, p. 203.

[94] A point at issue between Thomists and Franciscans. The former held that the grace of the sacrament was contained in the sacramental sign and directly imparted through it; thus Aquinas. The Franciscans contended that the sign was merely a symbol, but that God, according to a _pactio_, or agreement, imparted the grace of the sacrament when the sign was being used; thus Bonaventura, and especially Duns Scotus. See Seeberg, DC, III, 455 ff., and in _Realencyklopadie_, V, 73.

[95] The conclusion of the investigation begun on p. 226.

[96] See above, p. 204.

[97] See above, p. 223.

[98] See above, p. 226.

[99] _Baptisma_; see above, p. 226, and compare Vol. I, p. 56.

[100] _Res_. See above, p. 182, note 2.

[101] _Res baptismi_. See above, p. 231.

[102] Cf. below, pp, 258 ff.

[103] See above, p. 231.

[104] The position of Thomas Aquinas, going back to Augustine, and ratified by Clement V at the Council of Vienna, 1311-12.

[105] See above, p. 227.

[106] See above, pp. 227 ff.

[107] For a full discussion of this "baptism," see Scheel, in the _Berlin Edition_ of Luther's works, _Erganzungsband_ II, pp. 134-157.

[108] See above, p. 238.

[109] The threefold vow of the mendicant orders.

[110] _Bulla_ means both a papal bull and a bubble.

[111] Compare above, p. 172, note 4.

[112] An obscure allegorical reference to the Babylonian captivity of the Jews. "The people of the captivity" (comp. Ps. 64:1 and 1 Kings 24:14, Vulgate) are the better portion of the people who were carried captive, together with their possessions, to Babylon; "the people of the earth," _am haarez_, the common people, were left behind and became the nucleus of the hybrid Samaritan nation.

[113] See above, p. 123.

[114] See above, p. 75.

[115] See _Decretal. Greg., lib. Ill, tit. xxxiv, cap. 7_.

[116] Cf. Kohler, _Luther und die KG._, pp. 222 ff.

[117] Comp. below, p. 248.

[118] This time came during Luther's sojourn at the Wartburg, when he wrote _De votis monasticis_, 1521. See Vol. IV.

[119] The XCV Theses, the _Resolutiones_, the _Sermon von Ablass und Gnade_, the _Confitendi Ratio_; the first and last of these in Vol. I.

[120] Reference to a probably spurious bull of Clement VI. In his _Grund u. Ursach aller Artikel D. Martin Luthers, so durch rom. Bulle unrechtlich verdammt sind_ (1521), Luther writes: "Thus it happened in the days of John Hus that the pope commanded the angels of heaven to conduct to heaven the souls of the Roman pilgrims who died en route. Against this dreadful blasphemy and more than devilish presumption Hus raised his voice, and though he lost his life therefor, yet forced the pope to pipe a different tune and in future to refrain from such blasphemy."--Compare Kohler, _Luther u. die Kirchengeschichte_, p. 206. See also above, p. 81.

[121] _Longe viliorem_; the _Jena Ed._, followed by Lemme and Kawerau, reads, _longe meliorem_.

[122] Comp. Vol. I, p. 20.

[123] Comp. Vol. I, p. 86.

[124] See above, pp. 105 f.

[125] See above, p. 105, note 4.

[126] See above, p. 223, note 1,

[127] See above, p. 245, note 2.

[128] A play on the word _observantia_, which means both observation and observance. A scriptural fling at the _Observantines_. Comp. above, p. 172, note 4.

[129] Luther quotes correctly, _confortatus_, but thinks _confirmatus_.

[130] Vulgate: _confirmet_.

[131] Above, pp. 203 f.

[132] Vulgate: _sacramenta_.

[133] Erasmus edited the first published Greek New Testament in March, 1516 (Basle: John Froben), the Complutensian Polyglot being the first printed edition (1514). Luther used Erasmus' work as soon as it came out, as may be seen in his lectures on Romans, 1515-16 (cf. Picker, _Luthers Vorlesung uber den Romerbrie_; also Preserved Smith, _Luther's Correspondence_, etc., I, nos. 21 and 65). In an interesting letter to Luther of Feb. 14, 1519, Froben announces the second edition of Erasmus' New Testament, which Luther used in making his translation. Cf. Smith, op. cit., 00.125.

[134] See above, p. 177.

[135] Namely, for Paul.

[136] The precise meaning is not clear. The Latin is: _vel proprio spiritu vel general! sententia_.

[137] Here follows a passage that clearly breaks into the context and belongs elsewhere. See Introduction, p. 169.

"I admit that the sacrament of penance existed also in the Old Law, yea, from the beginning of the world. But the new promise of penance and the gift of the keys are peculiar to the New Law. For as we now have baptism instead of circumcision, so we have the keys instead of the sacrifices and other signs of penance. We said above that the same God at divers times gave divers promises and signs for the remission of sins and the salvation of men, but that all nevertheless received the same grace. Thus it is said in II Corinthians iv, 'Having the same spirit of faith, we also believe, or which cause we speak also'; and in i Corinthians x, 'Our fathers did all eat the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink; and they drank of the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ.' Thus also in Hebrews xi, 'These all died, not receiving the promise; God providing some better thing or us, that they should not be perfected without us.' For Christ Himself is, yesterday and to-day and forever, the Head of His Church, from the beginning even to the end of the world. Therefore there are divers signs, but the faith of all is the same. Indeed, without faith it is impossible to please God, by which faith even Abel pleased Him (Hebrews xi)."

[138] The _Summa angelica_ of Angelus de Clavassio of Genoa (died about 1495), published 1486, one of the favorite handbooks of casuistry, in which all possible cases of conscience were treated in alphabetical order. Cf. _Zeitschrit fur Kirchengesch._, XXVII, 296 ff. The _Summa angelica_ was among the papal books burned by Luther, together with the bull, December 10, 1520. Cf. Smith, _Luther's Correspondence_, I, no. 355.

[139] For a full discussion of the hindrances see article Eherecht, by Sehung, in _Prot. Realencyklopadie_, V.

[140] On this whole paragraph compare Vol. I, p. 294.

[141] It is to be borne in mind that all that follows is in the nature of advice to confessors in dealing with difficult cases of conscience, and is parallel to the closing paragraphs of the section on The Sacrament of the Bread.

[142] Namely, by officiating at the marriage ceremony.

[143] Namely, by betrothal (_sponsalia de praesenti_).

[144] Lemme pertinently reminds the reader that by "laws of men" Luther here understands the man-made laws of the Church of Rome.

[145] See above, p. 103, note 2.

[146] Relationship arising from sponsorship and legal adoption. Cf. above, p. 128.

[147] _Cognatio spiritualis_.

[148] _The res sacramenti_. See above, p. 182.

[149] _Cognatio legalis_.

[150] _Disparilitas religionis_.

[151] _Impedimentum criminis_.

[152] _Impedimentum ligamiais_.

[153] The _fides data et accepta_, which Luther finds in the _fides_ (faith) of Gal. 5:22

[154] Page 243.

[155] _Impedimentum erroris_. With fine sarcasm Luther here plays of one hindrance against another.

[156] _Impedimentum ordinis_.

[157] _Impedimentum publicae honestatis_.

[158] An untranslatable pun: _non iustitia sed inscitia_.

[159] Page 244.

[160] See p. 263, note 2.

[161] Page 242.

[162] The following points need to be borne in mind in order to a fair evaluation of this much criticized section: (1) What is here given is in the nature of advice to confessors, and the one guiding principle is the relief of souls in peril. (2) It must not be forgotten that Luther wrote the treatise in Latin, and not for the general public. There is without doubt a certain betrayal in turning into the vernacular a passage written in the language of the learned. Yet we have done this, being unwilling to all under the charge of giving a garbled version. (3) The hindrance Luther is here discussing was one recognized and provided or by the Church of Rome, and the remedy suggested by him was prescribed by the German _Volksrecht_ in many localities. (4) Divorce was absolutely forbidden. (5) Luther's error grew out of an unhistorical interpretation of the Old Testament, and consisted in his undervaluing the importance of the public law. "To make the individual conscience the sole arbiter in matters belonging to public law, leads to dangerous consequences." (See Kawarau, _Berlin Ed._, II, 482 f., where references are given.)

[163] As he actually did in the case of Henry VIII and Philip of Hesse.

[164] See above, p. 269, note 1.

[165] Page 271.

[166] An allusion to the act that what he is writing is a "Prelude." See Introduction, p. 168.

[167] _Contra epistolam Manichaei_, 5, 6 (Migne, XLII, 176). Cf. below, p. 451.

[168] _De trinitate_, 9, 6, 10 (Migne, VIII, 966).

[169] See below, pp. 451 ff.

[170] The council that condemned and burned John Hus (1414-1418).

[171] Dionysius Areopagita, the pseudonym (cf. Acts 17:54) of the unknown author (about 500, in Syria?) of the neoplatonic writings, _Of the Celestial_, and _Of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy_, etc.

[172] William Durandus the elder, died 1296.

[173] The Franciscan Bonaventura (Died 1274) in his _De reductione artium ad theologiara_.

[174] Donatus (ab. 350 A.D.), a famous Latin grammarian, whose _Ars minor_ was a favorite mediaeval text-book. The chancellor of the University of Paris, John Gerson (Died 1429), published a _Donatus moralisatus seu per allegoriam traductus_--a mystical grammar, in which the noun was compared to man, the pronoun to man's sinful state, the verb to the divine command to love, the _adverb_ to the fulfilment of the divine law, etc.

[175] See above, p. 190.

[176] The so-called _character indelebilis_, the peculiar gift of ordination, so that "once a priest, always a priest." See above, p. 68, note 5.

[177] See above, pp. 178 ff.

[178] The stated daily prayers, fixed by canon, of the clergy. The seven hours are respectively: matins (including noctums and lauds), prime, tierce, sext, nones, vespers, and compline.

[179] Comp. above, p. 69. The fullest development of Luther's doctrine of the spiritual priesthood of believers is to be found in his writings against Emser, especially _Auf das uberchristliche, ubergeistliche und uberkunstliche Buch Bock Emsers Antwort_, 1521.

[180] On the last sentence see above, pp. 251 f.

[181] See p. 278, note 1.

[182] See above, p. 92.

[183] See above, p. 280.

[184] See above, p. 185.

[185] See above, p. 213.

[186] Covers for the chalice.

[187] This promise was fulfilled in the Liberty of a Christian Man.

[188] Thus Erasmus: _Fieri potest ut nomen commune cum apostolo praebuerit occasionem ut haec epistola lacobo apostolo ascriberetur, cum uerit alterius cuiusdam Iacobi._--Moffatt, _Introduction to the Lit. of the N. T._, p. 472.

[189] See above, p. 275.

[190] Comp. above, p. 171.

[191] See above, p. 285.

[192] See above, p. 226.

[193] See above, p. 275.

[194] See above, p. 226.

[195] See above, p. 177.

[196] See above, pp. 220 f.

[197] The _res sacramenti_. See above, p. 182, note 2.

[198] Vergil's _Eclogues_, VIII, 63.

[199] See Introduction, p. 168.

[200] The remainder of Luther's "recantation" was the _De libertate_. In the letter to the pope, which accompanied it, he gave ample proof of his obedience.

[201] The eighth stanza of Coehus Sedulius' _Hymnus acrostichis totam vitam Christi continens_ (beginning, _A solis ortus cardine_), of the fifth century. Stanzas 8, 9, 11 and 13 were used as an Epiphany hymn, which Luther translated on December 12, 1541,--"Was furchtst du, Feind Herodes, sehr." The above translation is taken from _Hymns Ancient and Modern_, No. 60.

A Treatise On Christian Liberty With A Letter To Pope Leo X

A TREATISE ON CHRISTIAN LIBERTY WITH A LETTER TO POPE LEO X

1520

INTRODUCTION

The Letter to the Pope, like an earlier letter dated March 3, 1519, was written at the suggestion of Carl von Miltitz. Sent to Germany to bring Luther to Rome, this German diplomat knew German conditions and to some extent sympathized with Luther's denunciation of Tetzel and the sellers of indulgences. He preferred, therefore, to try to settle the controversy and to leave Luther in Germany. Although the pope insisted that Luther must come to Rome and recant, Miltitz arranged for a hearing of the case before a German bishop. Evidently Miltitz was far too optimistic in his representations both to Luther and to the pope. The pope, in a writing dated March 29, 1519, spoke in friendly terms to Luther, and urged him to come to Rome immediately and to make his recantation there. Luther, in the letter dated March 3, 1519, writes in most humble language to the pope, but declares it impossible for him to recant what he had written in the XCV Theses. The pope's letter did not reach Luther; Luther's letter was not forwarded to the pope.

Luther had promised to keep silent if his opponents would do the same, and had devoted himself to the study of the Scriptures. John Eck, however, had no such occupation to keep him from controversy, and Luther was not averse to a debate. At the Leipzig disputation, June 27-July 15, 1519, Luther learned more of the logical implications of his position. The plan of Miltitz had failed, but he would not be discouraged.

When Miltitz went to Germany, it was under the pretence of a mission "to deliver to his elector the papal golden rose, which the latter had coveted in vain for two years."[1] Now he decided to go in person to Augsburg, where it had been deposited with the Fuggers, and present it to Frederick. This also gave an opportunity for a second meeting with Luther at Liebwierde, October 9, 1519. Luther, although placing little confidence in Miltitz, consented to argue his case before the archbishop of Treves. The plan failed, partly because there was no citation for Luther to appear, partly because the Elector would not allow Luther to go without proper safe-conduct, and partly because Miltitz had not tried to prevent Luther's opponents from challenging him.

In spite of the evident lack of confidence on both sides, and in spite of Luther's constant progress in opposition to the Roman Church, Miltitz insisted that "the case is not as black as we priests make it," even when a papal bull was issued against Luther on June 15, 1520. On August 28th Miltitz attended a meeting of the Augustinian monks in Eisleben, and obtained their promise that Luther should be requested to write a letter to the pope assuring him that he had never attacked the pope's person. On September 11th Luther reported to Spalatin what he had done, and said that, although neither he nor his fellow-monks had any confidence in the plan, he would do Miltitz the favor of writing such a letter. This promise seemed meaningless to him after the bull against him had been published. The papal bull had been obtained by Eck, whom Miltitz now considered to be substituted for himself in dealing with Luther, in spite of the authority he had received. That the bull was ignored in some places and despised in others, pleased him and gave him new courage. There might, after all, be some chance for him to make use of his diplomatic skill.

Again he invited Luther to meet him in Lichtenberg. They met in the monastery of St. Anthony on October 12th, and Luther renewed his promise to write to the pope, to send the letter within twelve days, and to date it back to September 6th, that the appearance of intimidation by the papal bull might be avoided. It was agreed that Luther should send with the letter an historical account of his difficulties with the Roman Church which would show that Eck was the chief instigator, and that Luther had been forced to take the positions he defended. In writing, however, the historical review became a part of the letter, and a treatise of far different tone was sent as a gift to the pope, and as an evidence of the kind of work Luther would prefer to do if his opponents permitted him to choose--the Treatise on Christian Liberty.

It is again a question whether the pope received this letter. It has been an interesting speculation for more than one writer, what the thoughts and feelings of Leo the Tenth might have been if he did receive and read it. Schaff traces the progress of Luther in the three letters he wrote to the pope: "In his first letter to the pope, 1518, Luther had thrown himself at his feet as an obedient son of the vicar of Christ; in his second letter, 1519, he still had addressed him as a humble subject, yet refusing to recant his conscientious convictions; in his third and last letter he addressed him as an equal, speaking to him with great respect for his personal character even beyond his deserts, but denouncing in the severest terms the Roman See, and comparing him to a lamb among wolves, and to Daniel in the den of lions."[2] If the pope ever read it, "it must have filled him with mingled feelings of indignation and disgust."

We may go even farther. Luther thinks of St. Bernard's attitude toward Pope Eugene, and Bernard was Eugene's superior in the Cistercian order and had been looked up to as "father." Luther writes as a father confessor to a friend in trouble, and might have quoted Bernard's words: "I grieve with you. I should say, I grieve with you if, indeed, you also grieve. Otherwise I should have rather said, I grieve for you; because that is not grieving with another when there is none who grieves. Therefore if you grieve, I grieve with you; if not, still I grieve, and then most of all, knowing that the member which is without feeling is the farther removed from health and that the sick man who does not feel his sickness is in the greater danger."[3]

The pope was a humanist, not a spiritually minded priest; we may, therefore, believe that Charles Beard is not far wrong in his estimate of the possible effect of this letter upon him: "If Giovanni de Medici, the head of a house which had long come to consider itself princely, and the occupant of the Fisherman's chair, when it claimed to be the highest of earthly thrones, read this bold apostrophe, addressed to him by a 'peasant and a peasant's son,' he must have thought him mad with conceit and vanity. He was incapable of being touched by the moral nobleness of the appeal, and so audacious a contempt of merely social distinctions the world has rarely seen."[4]

After the mighty thunder of the Address to the Christian Nobility and the Babylonian Captivity of the Church, the Treatise on the Liberty of a Christian Man is, indeed, like a still, small voice. Luther himself says: "Unless I am deceived, it is the whole of Christian living in a brief form." Perhaps we may trace here also the influence of St. Bernard's _De Consideratione_, which was written as a devotional book for the pope and was a manual of Christian living for the pope, as this is a manual of Christian living or all Christians.

It has been rather difficult for the enemies of Luther to find much fault with this book. The Catholic historians, Janssen and Hergenrother, do not mention it. Grisar characteristically devotes a little space to each of the three great writings of 1520, and considers the book on Christian Liberty as the most mischievous of them all. "It does, indeed, frequently bring its false thoughts in the form of that mystical, heart-searching style which Luther learned from older German models."[5] The French Catholic, Leon Cristiani, is far more generous in his estimate: "A truly religious spirit breathes in these pages. Provoking polemic is almost entirely avoided. Here one finds again the inspiration of the great mystics of the Middle Ages. Does not the 'Imitation' continually describe the powerlessness of man when left to himself, the infinite mercy of God, the great benefit of the redemption of Christ? Does it not preach the necessity of doing all things through love, nothing of necessity? He is not a true Christian who would venture to disapprove the passages in which Luther speaks so eloquently of the goodness of God, of the gratitude which it should inspire in us, of the spontaneity which should mark our obedience, of the desire of imitating Christ which should inspire us."[6]

Protestants consider this book "perhaps the most beautiful of Luther's writings, the result of religious contemplation rather than of theological labor."[7] "It takes rank with the best books of Luther, and rises far above the angry controversies of his age, during which he composed it, in the full possession of the positive truth and peace of the religion of Christ."[8] The clear presentation of the thought of the liberty of a Christian man occurs at the close of the Tessaradecas.[9] In the Babylonian Captivity Luther had promised to publish a treatise on the subject after he had seen the effect of that treatise.[10] But the promise to send a treatise to the pope gave him an earlier opportunity, so that barely a month and a half intervened between the publication of the Captivity, October 6th, and that of the Liberty, middle of November. The German, although a translation in part and in part an abbreviation and rewriting of the Latin, appeared first, before November 16th. The publisher, seeing his opportunity, had, however, issued the Letter to the Pope in German separately before November 4th,[11] so that a new dedicatory letter, addressed to Hieronymus Mulphordt (Muhlpfort), of Zwickau, was prefixed to the German edition.

Our translation is made from the Latin, although the German has been compared wherever it is a real translation.

Two translations into English appeared in the sixteenth century: one printed by John Byddell before 1544, the translation being, according to Preserved Smith,[12] by John Tewkesbury; the other, prepared by James Bell and printed by Ralph Newbery and H. Bynneman, in 1579. Unfortunately, neither of these was accessible to the present translators. Modern translations, into English by Wace and Buchheim, and into German by Lemme, have been consulted.

W. A. Lambert

W. A. LAMBERT.

South Bethlehem, PA.

FOOTNOTES

[1] _Catholic Encyclopedia_, x, 318.

[2] _Church History_, vi, 224 f.

[3] _De consideratione_, i, I.

[4] _Martin Luther and the Reformation in Germany_, London, 1889, p. 370.

[5] _Luther_, I, 351.

[6] _Du Lutheranisme au Protestantisme_, 1911, p. 199.

[7] Kolde, _Luther_, 1, 274.

[8] Schaff, VI, 224.

[9] Vol. I, p. 170.

[10] See above, page 284.

[11] Enders, II, p. 496, gives as the date when the letter was written, "after Oct. 13th"; Smith, _Life and Letters of Martin Luther_, p. 91, dates it Oct. 20th.

[12] _Nation_, May 29, 1913.

Letter To Pope Leo X. Jesus

LETTER TO POPE LEO X.

JESUS.

To Leo the Tenth, Pope at Rome: Martin Luther wishes thee salvation in Christ Jesus our Lord. Amen.

[Sidenote: The Pope's Person]

In the midst of the monsters of this age with whom I am now for the third year waging war, I am compelled at times to look up also to thee, Leo, most blessed Father, and to think of thee; nay, since thou art now and again regarded as the sole cause of my warfare, I cannot but think of thee always. And although the causeless raging of thy godless flatterers against me has compelled me to appeal from thy See to a future council, despite those most empty decrees of thy predecessors Pius and Julius, who with a foolish tyranny forbade such an appeal, yet I have never so estranged my mind from thy Blessedness as not with all my heart to wish thee and thy See every blessing, for which I have, as much as lay in me, besought God with earnest prayers. It is true, I have made bold almost to despise and to triumph over those who have tried to righten me with the majesty of thy name and authority. But there is one thing which I cannot despise, and that is my excuse for writing once more to thy Blessedness. I understand that I am accused of great rashness, and that this rashness is said to be my great fault, in which, they say, I have not spared even thy person.

For my part, I will openly confess that I know I have only spoken good and honorable things of thee whenever I have made mention of thy name. And if I had done otherwise, I myself could by no means approve of it, but would entirely approve the judgment others have formed of me, and do nothing more gladly than recant such rashness and impiety on my part. I have called thee a Daniel in Babylon,[1] and every one who reads knows with what zeal I defended thy notable innocence against thy dreamer, Sylvester.[2] Indeed, thy reputation and the fame of thy blameless life, sung as they are throughout the world by the writings of so many great men, are too well known and too high to be assailed in any way by any one man, however great he may be. I am not so foolish as to attack him whom every one praises: it has rather been, and always will be, my endeavor not to attack even those whom public report decries; for I take no pleasure in the crimes of any man, since I am conscious enough of the great beam in my own eye [Matt. 7:3], nor could I be he that should cast the first stone at the adulteress [John 8:7].

[Sidenote: Luther's Enemies]

I have indeed sharply inveighed against ungodly teachings in general, and I have not been slow to bite my adversaries, not because of their immorality, but because of their ungodliness. And of this I repent so little that I have determined to persevere in that fervent zeal, and to despise the judgment of men, following the example of Christ, Who in His zeal called His adversaries a generation of vipers, blind, hypocrites, children of the devil [Matt. 23:13, 17, 33]. And Paul arraigned the sorcerer as a child of the devil full of all subtilty and mischief [Acts 13:10], and brands others as dogs, deceivers and adulterers [Phil. 3:2; 2 Cor. 11:13; 2 Cor. 2:17]. If you will allow those delicate ears to judge, nothing would be more biting and more unrestrained than Paul. Who is more biting than the prophets? Nowadays, it is true, our ears are made so delicate by the mad crowds of flatterers that as soon as we meet with a disapproving voice we cry out that we are bitten, and when we cannot ward off the truth with any other pretext we put it to light by ascribing it to a fierce temper, impatience and shamelessness. What is the good of salt if it does not bite? Or of the edge of the sword if it does not kill? Cursed be he that doeth the work of the Lord deceitfully [Jer. 48:10].

Wherefore, most excellent Leo, I pray thee, after I have by this letter vindicated myself, give me a hearing, and believe that I have never thought evil of thy person, but that I am a man who would wish thee all good things eternally, and that I have no quarrel with any man concerning his morality, but only concerning the Word of truth. In all things else I will yield to any man whatsoever: to give up or to deny the Word I have neither the power nor the will. If any man thinks otherwise of me, or has understood my words differently, he does not think aright, nor has he understood what I have really said.

[Sidenote: The Roman Curia]

But thy See, which is called the Roman Curia, and of which neither thou nor any man can deny that it is more corrupt than any Babylon or Sodom ever was, and which is, as far as I can see, characterized by a totally depraved, hopeless and notorious wickedness--that See I have truly despised, and I have been incensed to think that in thy name and under the guise of the Roman Church the people of Christ are mocked. And so I have resisted and will resist that See, as long as the spirit of faith shall live in me. Not that I shall strive after the impossible or hope that by my lone efforts anything will be accomplished in that most disordered Babylon, where the rage of so many sycophants is turned against me; but I acknowledge myself a debtor to my brethren, whom it is my duty to warn, that fewer of them may be destroyed by the plagues of Rome, or at least that their destruction may be less cruel.

For, as thou well knowest, these many years there has flowed forth from Rome, like a flood covering the world, nothing but a laying waste of men's bodies and souls and possessions, and the worst possible examples of the worst possible things. For all this is clearer than the day to all men, and the Roman Church, once the most holy of all, become the most licentious den of thieves [Matt. 21:13], the most shameless of all brothels, the kingdom of sin, death and hell; so that even Antichrist himself, should he come, could think of nothing to add to its wickedness.

[Sidenote: The Pope's Helplessness]

Meanwhile thou, Leo, sittest as a lamb in the midst of wolves [Matt. 10:16], like Daniel in the midst of the lions [Dan. 6:16], and, with Ezekiel, thou dwellest among scorpions [Ezek. 2:6]. What canst thou do single-handed, against these monsters? Join to thyself three or four thoroughly learned and thoroughly good cardinals: what are even these among so many? [John 6:9] You would all be poisoned before you could undertake to make a single decree to help matters. There is no hope or the Roman Curia: the wrath of God is come upon it to the end [1 Thess. 2:16]; it hates councils, it fears a reformation, it cannot reduce the raging of its wickedness, and is meriting the praise bestowed upon its mother, of whom it is written, "We have cured Babylon, but she is not healed: let us forsake her."[3][Jer. 51:9] It was thy duty, indeed, and that of thy cardinals, to remedy these evils, but that gout of theirs mocks the healing hand, and neither chariot nor horse heeds the guiding rein.[4] Moved by such sympathy for thee, I have always grieved, most excellent Leo, that thou hast been made pope in these times, for thou wert worthy of better days. The Roman Curia has not deserved to have thee or men like thee, but rather Satan himself; and in truth it is he more than thou who rules in that Babylon.

O would that thou mightest lay aside what thy most mischievous enemies boast of as thy glory, and wert living on some small priestly income of thine own, or on thy family inheritance! To glory in that glory none are worthy save the Iscariots, the sons of perdition [John 17:12]. For what dost thou accomplish in the Curia, my dear Leo? Only this: the more criminal and abominable a man is, the more successfully will he use thy name and authority to destroy the wealth and the souls of men, to increase crime, to suppress faith and truth and the whole Church of God. O truly, most unhappy Leo, thou sittest on a most dangerous throne; for I tell thee the truth, because I wish thee well. If Bernard pitied his Pope Eugene[5] at a time when the Roman See, although even then most corrupt, yet ruled with better prospects, why should not we lament who have for three hundred years had so great an increase of corruption and worthlessness? Is it not true that under yon vast expanse of heaven there is nothing more corrupt, more pestilential, more hateful than the Roman Curia? It surpasses the godlessness of the Turks beyond all comparison, so that in truth, whereas it was once a gate of heaven, it is now an open mouth of hell, and such a mouth as, because of the wrath of God, cannot be shut; there is only one thing that we can try to do, as I have said: perchance we may be able to call back a few from that yawning chasm of Rome and so save them.

Now thou seest, my Father Leo, how and why I have so violently attacked that pestilential See: for so far have I been from raging against thy person that I even hoped I might gain thy favor and save thee, if I should make a strong and sharp assault upon that prison, nay that hell of thine. For thou and thy salvation and the salvation of many others with thee will be served by every thing that men of ability can contribute to the confusion of this wicked Curia. They do thy work, who bring evil upon it; they glorify Christ, who in every way curse it. In short, they are Christians who are not Romans.

[Sidenote: Luther's Controversies]

[Sidenote: Eck]

To go yet farther, I never intended to inveigh against the Roman Curia, or to raise any controversy concerning it. For when I saw that all efforts to save it were hopeless, I despised it and gave it a bill of divorcement [Deut. 24:1] and said to it, "He that is filthy, let him be filthy still, and he that is unclean, let him be unclean still." [Rev. 22:11] Then I gave myself to the quiet and peaceful study of holy Scripture, that I might thus be of benefit to my brethren about me. When I had made some progress in these studies, Satan opened his eyes and filled his servant John Eck,[6] a notable enemy of Christ, with an insatiable lust for glory, and thereby stirred him up to drag me at unawares into a disputation, laying hold on me by one little word about the primacy of the Roman Church which I had incidentally let fall. Then that boasting braggart, frothing and gnashing his teeth, declared that he would venture all for the glory of God and the honor of the holy Apostolic See, and, puffed up with the hope of misusing thy power, he looked forward with perfect confidence to a victory over me. He sought not so much to establish the primacy of Peter as his own leadership among the theologians of our time; and to that end he thought it no small help if he should triumph over Luther. When that debate ended unhappily for the sophist, an incredible madness overcame the man: for he feels that he alone must bear the blame of all that I have brought forth to the shame of Rome.

[Sidenote: Cajetan]

But permit me, I pray thee, most excellent Leo, this once to plead my cause and to make charges against thy real enemies. Thou knowest, I believe, what dealings thy legate, Cardinal of St. Sixtus,[7] an unwise and unfortunate, or rather, unfaithful man, had with me. When, because of reverence for thy name, I had put myself and all my case in his hand, he did not try to establish peace, although with a single word he could easily have done so, since I at that time promised to keep silent and to end the controversy, if my opponents were ordered to do the same. But as he was a man who sought glory, and was not content with that agreement, he began to justify my opponents, to give them full freedom and to order me to recant, a thing not included in his instructions. When the matter was in a fair way, his untimely arbitrariness brought it into a far worse condition. Therefore, for what followed later Luther is not to blame; all the blame is Cajetan's, who did not suffer me to keep silent and to rest, as I then most earnestly asked him to do. What more should I have done?

[Sidenote: Miltitz]

Next came Carl Miltitz,[8] also a nuncio of thy Blessedness, who after great and varied efforts and constant going to and fro, although he omitted nothing that might help to restore that status of the question which Cajetan had rashly and haughtily disturbed, at last with the help of the most illustrious prince, Frederick the Elector, barely managed to arrange several private conferences with me. Again I yielded to your name, I was prepared to keep silent, and even accepted as arbiter either the archbishop of Treves or the bishop of Naumburg. So matters were arranged. But while this plan was being followed with good prospects of success, lo, that other and greater enemy of thine, Eck, broke in with the Leipzig Disputation which he had undertaken against Dr. Carlstadt. When a new question concerning the primacy of the pope was raised, he suddenly turned his weapons against me and quite overthrew that counsel of peace. Meanwhile Carl Miltitz waited: a disputation was held, judges were selected; but here also no decision was reached, and no wonder: through the lies, the tricks, the wiles of Eck everything was stirred up, aggravated and confounded worse than ever, so that whatever decision might have been reached, a greater conflagration would have resulted. For he sought glory, not the truth. Here also I let nothing undone that I ought to have done.[9]

[Sidenote: Eck]

I admit that on this occasion no small amount of corrupt Roman practices came to light, but whatever wrong was done was the fault of Eck, who undertook a task beyond his strength, and, while he strove madly for his own glory, revealed the shame of Rome to all the world. He is thy enemy, my dear Leo, or rather the enemy of thy Curia. From the example of this one man thou canst learn that there is no enemy more injurious than a flatterer. For what did he accomplish with his flattery but an evil which no king could have accomplished? To-day the name of the Roman Curia is a stench throughout the world, and papal authority languishes, ignorance that was once held in honor is evil spoken of; and of all this we should have heard nothing if Eck had not upset the counsel of peace planned by Carl and myself, as he himself now clearly sees, and is angry, too late and to no purpose, that my books were published. This he should have thought of when, like a horse that whinnies on the picket-line, he was madly seeking only his own glory, and sought only his own gain through thee at the greatest peril to thee. The vainglorious man thought that I would stop and keep silent at the terror of thy name; for I do not believe that he trusted entirely to his talents and learning. Now, when he sees that I have more courage than that and have not been silenced, he repents him too late of his rashness and understands that there is One in heaven who resists the proud and humbles the haughty [1 Pet. 5:5; Judith 6:15], if indeed he does understand it at last.

[Sidenote: The Augustinians]

Since we gained nothing by this disputation except that we brought greater confusion to the cause of Rome, Carl Miltitz made a third attempt; he came to the fathers of the Augustinian Order assembled in their chapter, and asked counsel in settling the controversy which had now grown most confused and dangerous. Since, by the favor of God, they had no hope of being able to proceed against me with violence, some of the most famous of their number were sent to me, and asked me at least to show honor to the person of thy Blessedness, and in a humble letter to plead as my excuse thy innocence and mine; they said that the affair was not yet in the most desperate state if of his innate goodness Leo the Tenth would take a hand in it. As I have always both offered and desired peace that I might devote myself to quieter and more useful studies, and have stormed with so great fury merely for the purpose of overwhelming by volume and violence of words, no less than of intellect, those whom I knew to be very unequal foes: I not only gladly ceased, but also with joy and thankfulness considered it a most welcome kindness to me if our hope could be fulfilled.

[Sidenote: Appeal to the Pope]

So I come, most blessed Father, and, prostrate before thee, I pray, if it be possible do thou interpose and hold in check those flatterers, who are the enemies of peace while they pretend to keep peace. But that I will recant, most blessed Father, let no one imagine, unless he prefer to involve the whole question in greater turmoil. Furthermore, I will accept no rules for the interpretation of the Word of God, since the Word of God, which teaches the liberty of all things else, dare not be bound [2 Tim. 2:9]. Grant me these two points, and there is nothing that I could not or would not most gladly do or endure. I hate disputations; I will draw out no one; but then I do not wish others to draw me out; if they do, as Christ is my Teacher, I will not be speechless. For, when once this controversy has been cited before thee and settled, thy Blessedness will be able with a small and easy word to silence both parties and command them to keep the peace, and that is what I have always wished to hear.

Do not listen, therefore, my dear Leo, to those sirens who make thee out to be no mere man but a demigod, so that thou mayest command and require what thou wilt. It will not be done in that fashion, and thou wilt not succeed. Thou art a servant of servants,[10] and beyond all other men in a most pitiable and most dangerous position. Be not deceived by those who pretend that thou art lord of the world and allow no one to be a Christian unless he accept thy authority; who prate that thou hast power over heaven, hell and purgatory. These are thy enemies and seek thy soul to destroy it [1 Kings 19:10]; as Isaiah says, "O my people, they that call thee blessed, the same deceive thee." [Isa. 3:12 (Vulgate)] They err who exalt thee above a council and above the Church universal. They err who ascribe to thee alone the right of interpreting Scripture; or under cover of thy name they seek to establish all their own wickedness in the Church, and alas! through them Satan has already made much headway under thy predecessors. In short, believe none who exalt thee, believe those who humble thee. For this is the judgment of God; "He hath put down the mighty from their seat, and hath exalted the humble." [Luke 1:52] See, how unlike His successors is Christ, although they all would be His vicars. And I fear that most of them have indeed been too literally His vicars. For a vicar is a vicar only when his lord is absent. And if the pope rules while Christ is absent and does not dwell in his heart, what else is he but a vicar of Christ? But what is such a Church except a mass of people without Christ? And what is such a vicar else than antichrist and an idol? How much more correctly did the Apostles call themselves servants of the present Christ, and not vicars of an absent Christ!

[Sidenote: Luther Follows St. Bernard's Example]

Perhaps I am impudent, in that I seem to instruct so great, so exalted a personage, from whom we ought all to learn, and from whom, as those plagues of thine boast, the thrones of judges receive their decisions. But I am following the example of St. Bernard in his book _de consideratione ad Eugenium_, a book every pope should have by heart. For what I am doing I do not from an eagerness to teach, but as an evidence of that pure and faithful solicitude which constrains us to have regard for the things of our neighbors even when they are safe, and does not permit us to consider their dignity or lack of dignity, since it is intent only upon the danger they run for the advantage they may gain. For when I know that thy Blessedness is driven and tossed about at Rome, that is, that far out at sea thou art threatened on all sides with endless dangers, and art laboring hard in that miserable plight, so that thou dost need even the slightest help of the least of thy brethren, I do not think it is absurd of me, if for the time I forget thy high office and do what brotherly love demands. I have no desire to flatter in so serious and dangerous a matter, but if men do not understand that I am thy friend and thy most humble subject, there is One that understandeth and judgeth. [John 8:50]

[Sidenote: Luther's Gift]

Finally, that I may not approach thee empty-handed, blessed Father, I bring with me this little treatise published under thy name as an omen of peace and of good hope. From this book thou mayest judge with what studies I would prefer to be more profitably engaged, as I could be if your godless flatterers would permit me, and had hitherto permitted me. It is a small thing if thou regard its bulk, but, unless I am deceived, it is the whole of Christian living in brief form, if thou wilt grasp its meaning. I am a poor man, and have no other gift to offer, and thou hast no need to be made rich by any other than a spiritual gift. With this I commend myself to thy Fatherhood and Blessedness. May the Lord Jesus preserve thee forever. Amen.

Wittenberg, September 6, 1520.[11]

A Treatise On Christian Liberty

A TREATISE ON CHRISTIAN LIBERTY

[Sidenote: Faith]

Many have thought Christian faith to be an easy thing, and not a few have given it a place among the virtues. This they do because they have had no experience of it, and have never tasted what great virtue there is in faith. For it is impossible that any one should write well of it or well understand what is correctly written of it, unless he has at some time tasted the courage faith gives a man when trials oppress him. But he who has had even a faint taste of it can never write, speak, meditate or hear enough concerning it. For it is a living fountain springing up into life everlasting, as Christ calls it in John iv [John 4:14]. For my part, although I have no wealth of faith to boast of and know how scant my store is, yet I hope that, driven about by great and various temptations, I have attained to a little faith, and that I can speak of it, if not more elegantly, certainly more to the point, than those literalists and all too subtile disputants have hitherto done, who have not even understood what they have written.

[Sidenote: Liberty and Bondage]

That I may make the way easier or the unlearned--for only such do I serve--I set down first these two propositions concerning the liberty and the bondage of the spirit:

_A Christian man is a perfectly free lord of all, subject to none._

_A Christian man is a perfectly dutiful servant of all, subject to all._

Although these two theses seem to contradict each other, yet, if they should be found to fit together they would serve our purpose beautifully. For they are both Paul's own, who says, in I Cor. ix, "Whereas I was free, I made myself the servant of all," [1 Cor. 9:19] and, Rom. xiii, "Owe no man anything, but to love one another." [Rom. 13:8] Now love by its very nature is ready to serve and to be subject to him who is loved. So Christ, although Lord of all, was made of a woman, made under the law [Gal. 4:4], and hence was at the same time free and a servant, at the same time in the form of God and in the form of a servant [Phil. 2:6 f.].

[Sidenote: Man's Nature]

Let us start, however, with something more remote from our subject, but more obvious. Man[12] has a twofold nature, a spiritual and a bodily. According to the spiritual nature, which men call the soul, he is called a spiritual, or inner, or new man; according to the bodily nature, which men call the flesh, he is called a carnal, or outward, or old man, of whom the Apostle writes, in II Cor. iv, "Though our outward man is corrupted, yet the inward man is renewed day by day." [2 Cor. 4:16] Because of this diversity of nature the Scriptures assert contradictory things of the same man, since these two men in the same man contradict each other, since the flesh lusteth against the spirit and the spirit against the flesh (Gal. v) [Gal. 5:17].

[Sidenote: The Inward Man]

_First_, let us contemplate the inward man, to see how a righteous, free and truly Christian man, that is, a new, spiritual, inward man, comes into being. It is evident that no external thing, whatsoever it be, has any influence whatever in producing Christian righteousness or liberty, nor in producing unrighteousness or bondage. A simple argument will furnish the proof. What can it profit the soul if the body are well, be free and active, eat, drink and do as it pleases? For in these things even the most godless slaves of all the vices are well. On the other hand, how will ill health or imprisonment or hunger or thirst or any other external misfortune hurt the soul? With these things even the most godly men are afflicted, and those who because of a clear conscience are most free. None of these things touch either the liberty or the bondage of the soul. The soul receives no benefit if the body is adorned with the sacred robes of the priesthood, or dwells in sacred places, or is occupied with sacred duties, or prays, fasts, abstains from certain kinds of food or does any work whatsoever that can be done by the body and in the body. The righteousness and the freedom of the soul demand something far different, since the things which have been mentioned could be done by any wicked man, and such works produce nothing but hypocrites. On the other hand, it will not hurt the soul if the body is clothed in secular dress, dwells in unconsecrated places, eats and drinks as others do, does not pray aloud, and neglects to do all the things mentioned above, which hypocrites can do.

[Sidenote: The Word of God]

Further, to put aside all manner of works, even contemplation, meditation, and all that the soul can do, avail nothing. One thing and one only is necessary for Christian life, righteousness and liberty. That one thing is the most holy Word of God, the Gospel of Christ, as he says, John xi, "I am the resurrection and the life: he that believeth in me, shall not die forever" [John 11:25]; and John viii, "If the Son shall make you free, you shall be free indeed" [John 8:26]; and Matthew iv, "Not in bread alone doth man live; but in every word that proceedeth from the mouth of God." [Matt. 4:4] Let us then consider it certain and conclusively established that the soul can do without all things except the Word of God, and that where this is not there is no help for the soul in anything else whatever. But if it has the Word it is rich and lacks nothing, since this Word is the Word of life, of truth, of light, of peace, of righteousness, of salvation, of joy, of liberty, of wisdom, of power, of grace, of glory and of every blessing beyond our power to estimate. This is why the prophet in the entire cxix Psalm, and in many other places of Scripture, with so many sighs yearns after the Word of God and applies so many names to it [Psalm 119]. On the other hand, there is no more terrible plague with which the wrath of God can smite men than a famine of the hearing of His Word, as He says in Amos, just as there is no greater mercy than when He sends forth His Word [Amos 8:11 f.], as we read in Psalm cvii, "He sent His word and healed them, and delivered them from their destructions." [Psalm 107:20] Nor was Christ sent into the world for any other ministry but that of the Word, and the whole spiritual estate, apostles, bishops and all the priests, has been called and instituted only or the ministry of the Word.

[Sidenote: The Gospel]

You ask, "What then is this Word of God, and how shall it be used, since there are so many words of God?" I answer. The Apostle explains that in Romans i. The Word is the Gospel of God concerning His Son, Who was made flesh, suffered, rose from the dead, and was glorified through the Spirit Who sanctifies. For to preach Christ means to feed the soul, to make it righteous, to set it free and to save it, if it believe the preaching. For faith alone is the saving and efficacious use of the Word of God, Romans x, "If thou confess with thy mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe with thy heart that God hath raised Him up from the dead, thou shalt be saved" [Rom. 10:9]; and again, "The end of the law is Christ, unto righteousness to every one that believeth" [Rom. 10:4]; and, Romans i, "The just shall live by his faith." [Rom. 1:17] The Word of God cannot be received and cherished by any works whatever, but only by faith [Hab. 2:4]. Hence it is clear that, as the soul needs only the Word for its life and righteousness, so it is justified by faith alone and not by any works; for if it could be justified by anything else, it would not need the Word, and therefore it would not need faith. But this faith cannot at all exist in connection with works, that is to say, if you at the same time claim to be justified by works, whatever their character; for that would be to halt between two sides, to worship Baal and to kiss the hand [1 Kings 18:21], which, as Job says, is a very great iniquity [Job 31:27 f.]. Therefore the moment you begin to believe, you learn that all things in you are altogether blameworthy, sinful and damnable, as Romans iii says, "For all have sinned and lack the glory of God" [Rom. 3:23]; and again, "There is none just, there is none that doeth good, all have turned out of the way: they are become unprofitable together." [Rom. 3:10 ff.] When you have learned this, you will know that you need Christ, Who suffered and rose again or you, that, believing in Him, you may through this faith become a new man, in that all your sins are forgiven, and you are justified by the merits of another, namely, of Christ alone.

[Sidenote: Justification by Faith]

Since, therefore, this faith can rule only in the inward man, as Romans x says, "With the heart we believe unto righteousness"; and since faith alone justifies, it is clear that the inward man cannot be justified, made free and be saved by any outward work or dealing whatsoever, and that works, whatever their character, have nothing to do with this inward man. On the other hand, only ungodliness and unbelief of heart, and no outward work, make him guilty and a damnable servant of sin. Wherefore it ought to be the first concern of every Christian to lay aside all trust in works, and more and more to strengthen faith alone, and through faith to grow in the knowledge, not of works, but of Christ Jesus, Who suffered and rose for him, as Peter teaches, in the last chapter of his first Epistle [1 Pet. 5:10]; since no other work makes a Christian. Thus when the Jews asked Christ, John vi [John 6:28 f.], what they should do that they might work the works of God, He brushed aside the multitude of works in which He saw that they abounded [John 6:27], and enjoined upon them a single work, saying, "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him Whom He hath sent. For Him hath God the Father sealed." [John 6:29]

Hence true faith in Christ is a treasure beyond comparison, which brings with it all salvation and saves from every evil, as Christ says in the last chapter of Mark, "He that believeth and is baptised, shall be saved; but he that believeth not, shall be condemned." [Mark 16:16] This treasure Isaiah beheld and foretold in chapter x, "The Lord shall make an abridged and consuming word upon the land, and the consumption abridged shall overflow with righteousness" [Isa. 10:22]; as if he said, "Faith, which is a brief and perfect fulfilment of the law, shall fill believers with so great righteousness that they shall need nothing more for their righteousness." So also Paul says, Romans x, "With the heart we believe unto righteousness." [Rom. 10:10]

[Sidenote: Faith and Works]

[Sidenote: Commands reveal Weakness]

Should you ask, how it comes that faith alone justifies without works offers us such a treasury of great benefits, when so many works, ceremonies and laws are prescribed in the Scriptures, I answer: First of all, remember what has been said: faith alone, without works, justifies, makes free and saves, as we shall later make still more clear. Here we must point out that all the Scriptures of God are divided into two parts--commands and promises. The commands indeed teach things that are good, but the things taught reveal are not done as soon as taught; for the commands show us what we ought to do, but do not give us the power to do it; they are intended to teach a man to know himself, that through them he may recognize his inability to do good and may despair of his powers. That is why they are called and are the Old Testament. For example: "Thou shalt not covet" [Ex. 20:17] is a command which convicts us all of being sinners, since no one is able to avoid coveting, however much he may struggle against it. Therefore, in order not to covet, and to fulfil the command, a man is compelled to despair of himself, and to seek elsewhere and from some one else the help which he does not ind in himself, as is said in Hosea, "Destruction is thy own, O Israel: thy help is only in Me." [Hos. 13:9] And as we are with this one command, so we are with all; or it is equally impossible or us to keep any one of them.

[Sidenote: Promises give Strength]

But when a man through the commands has learned to know his weakness, and has become troubled as to how he may satisfy the law, since the law must be fulfilled so that not a jot or tittle shall perish, otherwise man will be condemned without hope; then, being truly humbled and reduced to nothing in his own eyes, he finds in himself no means of justification and salvation. Here the second part of the Scriptures stands ready--the promises of God, which declare the glory of God and say, "If you wish to fulfil the law, and not to covet, as the law demands, come, believe in Christ, in Whom grace, righteousness, peace, liberty and all things are promised you; if you believe you shall have all, if you believe not you shall lack all." For what is impossible for you in all the works of the law, many as they are, but all useless, you will accomplish in a short and easy way through faith. For God our Father has made all things depend on faith, so that whoever has faith, shall have all, and whoever has it not, shall have nothing. "For He has concluded all under unbelief, that He might have mercy on all," Romans xi [Rom. 11:32]. Thus the promises of God give what the commands of God ask, and fulfil what the law prescribes, that all things may be of God alone, both the commands and the fulfilling of the commands. He alone commands. He also alone fulfils. Therefore the promises of God belong to the New Testament, nay, they are the New Testament.

And since these promises of God are holy, true, righteous, free and peaceful words, full of all goodness, it comes to pass that the soul which clings to them with a firm faith, is so united with them, nay, altogether taken up into them, that it not only shares in all their power, but is saturated and made drunken with it. For if a touch of Christ healed, how much more will this most tender touch in the spirit, rather this absorbing of the Word, communicate to the soul all things that are the Word's. This, then, is how through faith alone without works the soul is justified by the Word of God, sanctified, made true and peaceful and free, filled with every blessing and made truly a child of God, as John i says, "To them gave He power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on His Name." [John 1:12]

[Sidenote: Faith Justifies]

From what has been said it is easily seen whence faith has such great power, and why no good work nor all good works together can equal it: no work can cling to the Word of God nor be in the soul; in the soul faith alone and the Word have sway. As the Word is, so it makes the soul, as heated iron glows like fire because of the union of fire with it. It is clear then that a Christian man has in his faith all that he needs, and needs no works to justify him. And if he has no need of works, neither does he need the law; and if he has no need of the law, surely he is free from the law, and it is true, "the law is not made for a righteous man." [1 Tim. 1:9] And this is that Christian liberty, even our faith, which does not indeed cause us to live in idleness or in wickedness, but makes the law and works unnecessary for any man's righteousness and salvation.

[Sidenote: Faith Fulfils the Commands]

This is the first power of faith. Let us now examine the second also. For it is a further function of faith, that whom it trusts it also honors with the most reverent and high regard, since it considers him truthful and trustworthy. For there is no other honor equal to the estimate of truthfulness and righteousness with which we honor him whom we trust. Or could we ascribe to a man anything greater than truthfulness, and righteousness, and perfect goodness? On the other hand, there is no way in which we can show greater contempt for a man than to regard him as false and wicked and to suspect him, as we do when we do not trust him. So when the soul firmly trusts God's promises, it regards Him as truthful and righteous, than which nothing more excellent can be ascribed to God. This is the very highest worship of God, that we ascribe to Him truthfulness, righteousness and whatever else ought to be ascribed to one who is trusted. Then the soul consents to all His will, then it hallows His name and suffers itself to be dealt with according to God's good pleasure, because, clinging to God's promises, it does not doubt that He, Who is true, just and wise, will do, dispose and provide all things well. And is not such a soul, by this faith, in all things most obedient to God? What commandment is there that such obedience has not abundantly fulfilled? What more complete fulfilment is there than obedience in all things? But this obedience is not rendered by works, but by faith alone. On the other hand, what greater rebellion against God, what greater wickedness, what greater contempt of God is there than not believing His promises? For what is this but to make God a liar or to doubt that He is truthful?--that is, to ascribe truthfulness to one's self, but to God lying and vanity? Does not a man who does this deny God, and in his heart set up himself as his own idol? Then of what avail are works done in such wickedness, even if they were the works of angels and apostles? [Rom. 11:32] Rightly, therefore, has God concluded all--not in anger or lust, but in unbelief; so that they who imagine that they are fulfilling the law by doing the works of chastity and mercy required by the law (the civil and human virtues), might not be confident that they will be saved; they are included under the sin of unbelief, and must either seek mercy or be justly condemned.

But when God sees that we count Him to be true, and by the faith of our heart pay Him the great honor which is due Him, He in turn does us the great honor of counting us true and righteous for our faith's sake. For faith works truth and righteousness by giving to God what belongs to Him; therefore, God in turn gives glory to our righteousness. It is true and just that God is truthful and just, and to count Him and confess Him, so is to be truthful and just. So in I Sam. ii, He says, "Them that honor Me, I will honor, and they that despise Me, shall be lightly esteemed." [1 Sam. 2:30] So Paul says in Rom. iv, that Abraham's faith was counted unto him or righteousness, because by it he most perfectly gave glory to God, and that or the same reason our faith shall be counted unto us or righteousness if we believe. [Rom. 4:3]

[Sidenote: Faith Unites with Christ]

The third incomparable benefit of faith is this, that it unites the soul with Christ as a bride is united with her bridegroom. And by this mystery, as the Apostle teaches, Christ and the soul become one flesh [Eph. 5:31 f.]. And if they are one flesh and there is between them a true marriage, nay, by far the most perfect of all marriages, since human marriages are but frail types of this one true marriage, it follows that all they have they have in common, the good as well as the evil, so that the believing soul can boast of and glory in whatever Christ has as if it were its own, and whatever the soul has Christ claims as His own. Let us compare these and we shall see things that cannot be estimated. Christ is full of grace, life and salvation; the soul is full of sins, death and condemnation. Now let faith come between them, and it shall come to pass that sins, death and hell are Christ's, and grace, life and salvation are the soul's. For it behooves Him, if He is a bridegroom, to take upon Himself the things which are His bride's, and to bestow upon her the things that are His. For if He gives her His body and His very self, how shall He not give her all that is His? And if He takes the body of the bride, how shall He not take all that is hers?

Lo! here we have a pleasant vision not only of communion, but of a blessed strife and victory and salvation and redemption. For Christ is God and man in one person, Who has neither sinned nor died, and is not condemned, and Who cannot sin, die or be condemned; His righteousness, life and salvation are unconquerable, eternal, omnipotent; and He by the wedding-ring of faith shares in the sins, death and pains of hell which are His bride's, nay, makes them His own, and acts as if they were His own, and as if He Himself had sinned; He suffered, died and descended into hell that He might overcome them all. Now since it was such a one who did all this, and death and hell could not swallow Him up, they were of necessity swallowed up of Him in a mighty duel. For His righteousness is greater than the sins of all men, His life stronger than death. His salvation more invincible than hell. Thus the believing soul by the pledge of its faith is free in Christ, its Bridegroom, from all sins, secure against death and against hell, and is endowed with the eternal righteousness, life and salvation of Christ, its Bridegroom. So He presents to Himself a glorious bride, without spot or wrinkle [Eph. 5:27], cleansing her with the washing in the Word of life, that is, by faith in the Word of life, of righteousness, and of salvation. Thus He marries her to Himself in faith, in loving kindness, and in mercies, in righteousness and in judgment, as Hosea ii says. [Hos. 2:19 f.]

Who, then, can fully appreciate what this royal marriage means? Who can understand the riches of the glory of this grace? Here this rich and godly Bridegroom Christ marries this poor, wicked harlot, redeems her from all her evil and adorns her with all His good. It is now impossible that her sins should destroy her, since they are laid upon Christ and swallowed up in Him, and she has that righteousness in Christ her husband of which she may boast as of her own, and which she can confidently set against all her sins in the face of death and hell, and say, "If I have sinned, yet my Christ, in Whom I believe, has not sinned, and all His is mine, and all mine is His"--as the bride in the Song of Solomon says, "My beloved is mine, and I am his." [Song of Sol. 2:16] This is what Paul means when he says, in I Cor. xv, "Thanks be to God, Which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ,"[1 Co4. 15:57]--that is, the victory over sin and death, as he there says, "the sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law." [1 Cor. 15:36]

[Sidenote: Faith the Fulfilment of the Law]

From this you see once more why so much is ascribed to faith, that it alone may fulfil the law and justify without the Law works. You see that the First Commandment, which says, "Thou shalt worship one God," is fulfilled by faith alone. For though you were nothing but good works from the sole of your foot to the crown of your head, yet you would not be righteous, nor worship God, nor fulfil the First Commandment, since God cannot be worshiped unless you ascribe to Him the glory of truthfulness and of all goodness, which is due Him. And this cannot be done by works, but only by the faith of the heart. For not by the doing of works, but by believing, do we glorify God and acknowledge that He is truthful. Therefore, faith alone is the righteousness of a Christian man and the fulfilling of all the commandments. For he who fulfils the First, has no difficulty in fulfilling all the rest. But works, being insensate things, cannot glorify God, although they can, if faith be present, be done to the glory of God. At present, however, we are not inquiring what works and what sort of works are done, but who it is that does them, who glorifies God and brings forth the works. This is faith which dwells in the heart, and is the head and substance of all our righteousness. Hence, it is a blind and dangerous doctrine which teaches that the commandments must be fulfilled by works. The commandments must be fulfilled before any works can be done, and the works proceed from the fulfilment of the commandments [Rom. 13:10], as we shall hear.

[Sidenote: Old Testament Types]

But that we may look more deeply into that grace which our inward man has in Christ, we must consider that in the Old Testament God sanctified to Himself every first-born male, and the birth-right was highly prized, having a two-fold honor, that of priesthood, and that of kingship. For the first-born brother was priest and lord over all the others, and was a type of Christ, the true and only First-born of God the Father and of the Virgin Mary, and true King and Priest, not after the fashion of the flesh and of the world. For His kingdom is not of this world [John 18:36]. He reigns in heavenly and spiritual things and consecrates them--such as righteousness, truth, wisdom, peace, salvation, etc. Not as if all things on earth and in hell were not also subject to Him--else how could He protect and save us from them?--but His kingdom consists neither in them nor of them. Nor does His priesthood consist in the outward splendor of robes and postures, like that human priesthood of Aaron and of our present-day Church; but it consists in spiritual things, through which He by an unseen service intercedes for us in heaven before God, there offers Himself as a sacrifice and does all things a priest should do, as Paul in the Epistle to the Hebrews describes him under the type of Melchizedek [Heb. 6 f.]. Nor does He only pray and intercede for us, but within our soul He teaches us through the living teaching of His Spirit, thus performing the two real unctions of a priest, of which the prayers and the preaching of human priests are visible types.

Now, just as Christ by his birthright obtained these two prerogatives, so He imparts them to and shares them with every one who believes on Him according to the law of the aforesaid marriage, by which the wife owns whatever belongs to the husband. Hence we are all priests and kings in Christ, as many as believe on Christ, as I Pet. ii says, "Ye are a chosen generation, a peculiar people, a royal priesthood and priestly kingdom, that ye should show forth the virtues of Him Who hath called you out of darkness into His marvelous light." [1 Pet. 2:9]

[Sidenote: The Kingship of the Christian]

This priesthood and kingship we explain as follows: First, as to the kingship, every Christian is by faith so exalted above all things that by a spiritual power he is lord of all things without exception, so that nothing can do him any harm whatever, nay, all things are made subject to him and compelled to serve him to his salvation. Thus Paul says in Rom. viii, "All things work together for good to them who are called." [Rom. 8:28] And, in I Cor. iii, "All things are yours, whether life or death, or things present or things to come, and ye are Christ's." [1 Cor. 3:22 f.] Not as if every Christian were set over all things, to possess and control them by physical power,--a madness with which some churchmen are afflicted,--for such power belongs to kings, princes and men on earth. Our ordinary experience in life shows us that we are subjected to all, suffer many things and even die; nay, the more Christian a man is, the more evils, sufferings and deaths is he made subject to, as we see in Christ the first-born Prince Himself, and in all His brethren, the saints. The power of which we speak is spiritual; it rules in the midst of enemies, and is mighty in the midst of oppression, which means nothing else than that strength is made perfect in weakness [2 Cor. 12:9], and that in all things I can find profit unto salvation, so that the cross and death itself are compelled to serve me and to work together with me for my salvation [Rom. 8:28]. This is a splendid prerogative and hard to attain, and a true omnipotent power, a spiritual dominion, in which there is nothing so good and nothing so evil, but that it shall work together for good to me, if only I believe. And yet, since faith alone suffices for salvation, I have need of nothing, except that faith exercise the power and dominion of its own liberty. Lo, this is the inestimable power and liberty of Christians.

[Sidenote: The Priesthood of the Christian]

Not only are we the freest of kings, we are also priests forever, which is far more excellent than being kings, because as priests we are worthy to appear before God to pray for others and to teach one another the things of God. For these are the functions of priests, and cannot be granted to any unbeliever. Thus Christ has obtained for us, if we believe on Him, that we are not only His brethren, co-heirs and fellow-kings with Him, but also fellow-priests with Him, who may boldly come into the presence of God in the spirit of faith and cry, "Abba, Father!" [Heb. 10:19, 22] pray for one another and do all things which we see done and prefigured in the outward and visible works of priests. But he who does not believe is not served by anything, nor does anything work for good to him, but he himself is a servant of all, and all things become evils to him, because he wickedly uses them to his own profit and not to the glory of God. And so he is no priest, but a profane man, whose prayer becomes sin and never comes into the presence of God, because God does not hear sinners [John 9:31]. Who then can comprehend the lofty dignity of the Christian? Through his kingly power he rules over all things, death, life and sin, and through his priestly glory is all powerful with God, because God does the things which he asks and desires, as it is written, "He will fulfil the desire of them that fear Him; He also will hear their cry, and will save them." [Phil. 4:13] To this glory a man attains, surely not by any works of his, but by faith alone.

[Sidenote: Distinctions among Christians]

From this any one can clearly see how a Christian man is free from all things and over all things, so that he needs no works to make him righteous and to save him, since faith alone confers all these things abundantly. But should he grow so foolish as to presume to become righteous, free, saved and a Christian by means of some good work, he would on the instant lose faith and all its benefits: a foolishness aptly illustrated in the fable of the dog who runs along a stream with a piece of meat in his mouth, and, deceived by the reflection of the meat in the water, opens his mouth to snap at it, and so loses both the meat and the reflection. You will ask, "If all who are in the Church are priests, how do those whom we now call priests differ from laymen?" I answer: "Injustice is done those words, 'priest,' 'cleric,' 'spiritual,' 'ecclesiastic,' when they are transferred from all other Christians to those few who are now by a mischievous usage called 'ecclesiastics.' For Holy Scripture makes no distinction between them, except that it gives the name 'ministers,' 'servants,' 'stewards,' to those who are now proudly called popes, bishops, and lords and who should by the ministry of the Word serve others and teach them the faith of Christ and the liberty of believers. For although we are all equally priests, yet we cannot all publicly minister and teach, nor ought we if we could." Thus Paul writes in I Cor. iv, "Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God." [I Cor. 4:1]

But that stewardship has now been developed into so great a pomp of power and so terrible a tyranny, that no heathen empire or earthly power can be compared with it, just as if laymen were not also Christians. Through this perversion the knowledge of Christian grace, faith, liberty and of Christ Himself has altogether perished, and its place has been taken by an unbearable bondage of human words and laws, until we have become, as the Lamentations of Jeremiah say, servants of the vilest men on earth, who abuse our misfortune to serve only their base and shameless will [Lam. 1:11].

[Sidenote: How Christ is to be Preached]

To return to our purpose, I believe it has now become clear that it is not enough nor is it Christian, to preach the works, life and words of Christ as historical acts, as if the knowledge of these would suffice for the conduct of life, although this is the fashion of those who must to-day be regarded as our best preachers; and far less is it enough for Christian to say nothing at all about Christ and to teach instead the laws of men and the decrees of the Fathers. And now there are not a few who preach Christ and read about Him that they may move men's affections to sympathy with Christ, to anger against the Jews and such like childish and womanish nonsense. Rather ought Christ to be preached to the end that faith in Him may be established, that He may not only be Christ, but be Christ for thee and for me, and that what is said of Him and what His Name denotes may be effectual in us. And such faith is produced and preserved in us by preaching why Christ came, what He brought and bestowed,[13] what benefit it is to us to accept Him. This is done when that Christian liberty which He bestows is rightly taught, and we are told in what way we who are Christians are all kings and priests and so are lords of all, and may firmly believe that whatever we have done is pleasing and acceptable in the sight of God, as I have said.

[Sidenote: Effect of such Preaching]

What man is there whose heart, hearing these things, will not rejoice to its very core, and in receiving such comfort grow tender so as to love Christ, as he never could be made to love by any laws or works? Who would have power to harm such a heart or to make it afraid? If the knowledge of sin for the fear of death break in upon it is ready to hope in the Lord; it does not grow afraid when it hears tidings of evil, nor is it disturbed until it shall look down upon its enemies [Psalm 112:7 f.]. For it believes that the righteousness of Christ is its own, and that its sin is not its own, but Christ's; and that all sin is swallowed up by the righteousness of Christ is, as has been said above, a necessary consequence of faith in Christ. So the heart learns to scoff at death and sin, and to say with the Apostle, "Where, O death, is thy victory? where, O death, is thy sting? The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ." [1 Cor. 15:55 ff.] For death is swallowed up not only in the victory of Christ, but also by our victory, because through faith His victory has become ours, and in that faith we also are conquerors.

Let this suffice concerning the inward man, his liberty and its source, the righteousness of faith,[14] which needs neither laws nor good works, nay, is rather injured by them, if a man trusts that he is justified by them.

[Sidenote: The Outward Man]

Now let us turn to the second part, to the outward man. Here we shall answer all those who, misled by the word "faith" and by all that has been said, now say: "If faith does all things and is alone sufficient unto righteousness, why then are good works commanded? We will take our ease and do no works, and be content with faith." I answer, Not so, ye wicked men, not so. That would indeed be proper, if we were wholly inward and perfectly spiritual men; but such we shall be only at the last day, the day of the resurrection of the dead. As long as we live in the flesh we only begin and make some progress in that which shall be perfected in the future life. For this reason the Apostle, in Romans viii, calls all that we attain in this he "the first fruits" of the spirit [Rom. 8:23], because, forsooth, we shall receive the greater portion, even the fulness of the spirit, in the future. This is the place for that which was said above, that a Christian man is the servant of all and made subject to all. For in so far as he is free he does no works, but in so far as he is a servant he does all manner of works. How this is possible, we shall see.

[Sidenote: Needs to do Works]

Although, as I have said, a man is abundantly justified by faith inwardly, in his spirit, and so has all that he ought to have, except in so far as this faith and riches must grow from day to day even unto the future he: yet he remains in this mortal life on earth, and in this life he must needs govern his own body and have dealings with men. Here the works begin; here a man cannot take his ease; here he must, indeed, take care to discipline his body by fastings, watchings, labors and other reasonable discipline, and to make it subject to the spirit so that it will obey and conform to the inward man and to faith, and not revolt against faith and hinder the inward man, as it is the body's nature to do if it be not held in check. For the inward man, who by faith is created in the likeness of God, is both joyful and happy because of Christ in Whom so many benefits are conferred upon him, and therefore it is his one occupation to serve God joyfully and for naught, in love that is not constrained.

While he is doing this, lo, he meets a contrary will in his own flesh, which strives to serve the world and to seek its own advantage. This the spirit of faith cannot tolerate, and with joyful zeal it attempts to put the body under and to hold it in check, as Paul says in Romans vii, "I delight in the law of God after the inward man; but I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin" [Rom. 7:22 f.]; and, in another place, "I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway," [1 Cor. 9:27] and in Galatians, "They that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with its lusts." [Gal. 5:24]

[Sidenote: Works do not Justify]

In doing these works, however, we must not think that a man is justified before God by them: for that erroneous opinion faith, which alone is righteousness before God, cannot endure; but we must think that these works reduce the body to subjection and purity it of its evil lusts, and our whole purpose is to be directed only toward the driving out of lusts. For since by faith the soul is cleansed and made a lover of God, it desires that all things, and especially its own body, shall be as pure as itself, so that all things may join with it in loving and praising God. Hence a man cannot be idle, because the need of his body drives him and he is compelled to do many good works to reduce it to subjection. Nevertheless the works themselves do not justify him before God, but he does the works out of spontaneous love in obedience to God, and considers nothing except the approval of God, Whom he would in all things most scrupulously obey.

In this way every one will easily be able to learn for himself the limit and discretion, as they say, of his bodily castigations: for he will fast, watch and labor as much as he finds sufficient to repress the lasciviousness and lust of his body. But they who presume to be justified by works do not regard the mortifying of the lusts, but only the works themselves, and think that if only they have done as many and as great works as are possible, they have done well, and have become righteousness; at times they even addle their brains and destroy, or at least render useless, their natural strength with their works. This is the height of folly, and utter ignorance of Christian life and faith, that a man should seek to be justified and saved by works and without faith.

[Sidenote: An Analogy]

In order that what we have said may be more easily understood, we will explain it by analogies. We should think of the works of a Christian man who is justified and saved by faith because of the pure and free mercy of God, just as we would think of the works which Adam and Eve did in Paradise, and all their children would have done if they had not sinned. We read in Genesis ii, "God put the man whom He had formed into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it." [Gen. 2:15] Now Adam was created by God righteous and upright and without sin, so that he had no need of being justified and made upright through his dressing and keeping the garden, but, that he might not be idle, the Lord gave him a work to do--to cultivate and to protect the garden. These would truly have been the freest of works, done only to please God and not to obtain righteousness, which Adam already had in full measure, and which would have been the birthright of us all.

Such also are the works of a believer. Through his faith he has been restored to Paradise and created anew, has no need of works that he may become or be righteous; but that he may not be idle and may provide for and keep his body, he must do such works freely only to please God; only, since we are not wholly re-created, and our faith and love are not yet perfect, these are to be increased, not by external works, however, but within themselves.

[Sidenote: A Second Analogy]

Again: A bishop, when he consecrates a Church, confirms children or performs any other duty belonging to his office, is not made a bishop by these works; nay, if he had not first been made a bishop, none of these works would be valid, they would be foolish, childish and a mere farce. So the Christian, who is consecrated by his faith, does good works, but the works do not make him more holy or more Christian; for that is the work of faith alone, and if a man were not first a believer and a Christian, all his works would amount to nothing at all and would be truly wicked and damnable sins.

These two sayings, therefore, are true: "Good works do not make a good man, but a good man does good works; evil works do not make a wicked man, but a wicked man does evil works"; so that it is always necessary that the "substance" or person itself be good before there can be any good works, and that good works follow and proceed from the good person, as Christ also says, "A corrupt tree does not bring forth good fruit, a good tree does not bring forth evil fruit." [Matt. 7:18] It is clear that the fruits do not bear the tree, nor does the tree grow on the fruits, but, on the contrary, the trees bear the fruits and the fruits grow on the trees. As it is necessary, therefore, that the trees must exist before their fruits, and the fruits do not make trees either good or corrupt, but rather as the trees are so are the fruits they bear; so the person of a man must needs first be good or wicked before he does a good or a wicked work, and his works do not make him good or wicked, but he himself makes his works either good or wicked.

[Sidenote: Illustrations]

Illustrations of the same truth can be seen in all trades, A good or a bad house does not make a good or a bad builder, but a good or a bad builder makes a bad or a good house. And in general, the work never makes the workman like itself, but the workman makes the work like himself. So it is also with the works of man: as the man is, whether believer or unbeliever, so also is his work--good, if it was done in faith; wicked, if it was done in unbelief. But the converse is not true, that the work makes the man either a believer or an unbeliever. For as works do not make a man a believer, so also they do not make him righteous. But as faith makes a man a believer and righteous, so faith also does good works. Since, then, works justify no one, and a man must be righteous before he does a good work, it is very evident that it is faith alone which, because of the pure mercy of God through Christ and in His Word, worthily and sufficiently justifies and saves the person, and a Christian man has no need of any work or of any law in order to be saved, since through faith he is free from every law and does all that he does out of pure liberty and freely, seeking neither benefit nor salvation, since he already abounds in all things and is saved through the grace of God because of his faith, and now seeks only to please God.

[Sidenote: Works Neither Save nor Damn]

Furthermore, no good work helps an unbeliever, so as to justify or save him. And, on the other hand, no evil work makes him wicked or damns him, but the unbelief which makes the person and the tree evil, does the evil and damnable works. Hence when a man is made good or evil, this is effected not by the works, but by faith or unbelief, as the Wise Man says, "This is the beginning of sin, that a man falls away from God," [Sirach 10:14 f.] which happens when he does not believe. And Paul, Hebrews xi, says, He that cometh to God must believe." [Heb. 11:6] And Christ says the same: "Either make the tree good and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt and his fruit corrupt," [Matt. 12:33] as if He would say, "Let him who would have good fruit begin by planting a good tree." So let him who would do good works not begin with the doing of works, but with believing, which makes the person good. For nothing makes a man good except faith, nor evil except unbelief.

It is indeed true that in the sight of men a man is made good or evil by his works, but this being made good or evil is no more than that he who is good or evil is pointed out and known as such; as Christ says, in Matthew vii, "By their fruits ye shall know them." [Matt. 7:20] But all this remains on the surface, and very many have been deceived by this outward appearance and have presumed to write and teach concerning good works by which we may be justified, without even mentioning faith; they go their way, always being deceived and deceiving, advancing, indeed, but into a worse state, blind leaders of the blind [2 Tim. 3:13], wearying themselves with many works, and yet never attaining to true righteousness [Matt. 15:14]. Of such Paul says, in II Timothy iii, "Having the form of godliness, but denying its power, always learning and never attaining to the knowledge of the truth." [2 Tim. 3:5, 7]

He, therefore, who does not wish to go astray with those blind men, must look beyond works, and laws and doctrines about works; nay, turning his eyes from works, he must look upon the person, and ask how that is justified. For the person is justified and saved not by works nor by laws, but by the Word of God, that is, by the promise of His grace [Tit. 3:5], and by faith, that the glory may remain God's, Who saved us not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy by the word of His grace, when we believed. [1 Cor. 1:21]

[Sidenote: The Doctrine of Good Works]

From this it is easy to know in how far good works are to be rejected or not, and by what standard all the teachings of men concerning works are to be interpreted. If works are sought after as a means to righteousness, are burdened with this perverse leviathan[15] and are done under the false impression that through them you are justified, they are made necessary and freedom and faith are destroyed; and this addition to them makes them to be no longer good, but truly damnable works. For they are not free, and they blaspheme the grace of God, since to justify and to save by faith belongs to the grace of God alone. What the works have no power to do, they yet, by a godless presumption, through this folly of ours, pretend to do, and thus violently force themselves into the office and the glory of grace. We do not, therefore, reject good works; on the contrary, we cherish and teach them as much as possible. We do not condemn them for their own sake, but because of this godless addition to them and the perverse idea that righteousness is to be sought through them; for that makes them appear good outwardly, when in truth they are not good; they deceive men and lead men to deceive each other, like ravening wolves in sheep's clothing [Matt. 7:15].

But this leviathan and perverse notion concerning works is insuperable where sincere faith is wanting. Those work-saints cannot get rid of it unless faith, its destroyer, come and rule in their hearts. Nature of itself cannot drive it out, nor even recognize it, but rather regards it as a mark of the most holy will. And if the influence of custom be added and confirm this perverseness of nature, as wicked Magisters have caused it to do, it becomes an incurable evil, and leads astray and destroys countless men beyond all hope of restoration. Therefore, although it is good to preach and write about penitence, confession and satisfaction, if we stop with that and do not go on to teach about faith, our teaching is unquestionably deceitful and devilish.

[Sidenote: What we are to Preach]

Christ, like His forerunner John, not only said, "Repent ye," [Matt. 3:2] but added the word of faith, saying, "The kingdom of heaven is at hand." [Matt. 4:17] And we are not to preach only one of these words of God, but both; we are to bring forth out of our treasure things new and old [Matt. 13:52], the voice of the law as well as the word of grace. We must bring forth the voice of the law that men may be made to fear and to come to a knowledge of their sins, and so be converted to repentance and a better life. But we must not stop with that. For that would be only to wound and not to bind up, to smite and not to heal, to kill and not to make alive, to lead down into hell and not to bring back again, to humble and not to exalt. Therefore, we must also preach the word of grace and the promise of forgiveness, by which faith is taught and strengthened. Without this word of grace the works of the law, contrition, penitence and all the rest are performed and taught in vain.

There remain even to our day preachers of repentance and grace, but they do not so explain God's law and promise that a man might learn from them the source of repentance and grace. For repentance proceeds from the law of God, but faith or grace from the promise of God, as Romans x says, "Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ" [Rom. 10:17]; so that a man is consoled and exalted by faith in the divine promise, after he has been humbled and led to a knowledge of himself by the threats and the fear of the divine law. So we read in Psalm xxx, "Weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning." [Ps. 30:6]

[Sidenote: Works of Love]

Let this suffice concerning works in general, and at the same time concerning the works which a Christian does for his own body. Lastly, we will also speak of the things which he does toward his neighbor. A man does not live for himself alone in this mortal body, so as to work for it alone, but he lives also for all men on earth, nay, rather, lives only for others and not for himself. And to this end he brings his body into subjection, that he may the more sincerely and freely serve others, as Paul says in Romans xiv, "No one lives to himself, and no man dies to himself. For he that liveth, liveth unto the Lord, and he that dieth, dieth unto the Lord." [Rom. 14:7 f.] Therefore, it is impossible that he should ever in this life be idle and without works toward his neighbors, for of necessity he will speak, deal with and converse with men, as Christ also, being made in the likeness of men, was found in form as a man, and conversed with men, as Baruch iii says [Bar. 3:38].

[Sidenote: Do not Save]

[Sidenote: Grow out of Faith]

But none of these things does a man need for his righteousness and salvation. Therefore, in all his works he should be guided by this thought and look to this one thing alone, that he may serve and benefit others in all that he does, having regard to nothing except the need and the advantage of his neighbor. Thus, the Apostle commands us to work with our hands that we may give to him who is in need, although he might have said that we should work to support ourselves; he says, however, "that he may have to give to him that needeth." [Eph. 4:28] And this is what makes it a Christian work to care for the body, that through its health and comfort we may be able to work, to acquire and to lay by funds with which to aid those who are in need, that in this way the strong member may serve the weaker, and we may be sons of God, each caring for and working for the other, bearing one another's burdens, and so fulfilling the law of Christ [Gal. 6:2]. Lo, this is a truly Christian life, here faith is truly out effectual through love [Gal. 5:6]; that is, it issues in works of the freest service cheerfully and lovingly done, with which a man willingly serves another without hope of reward, and for himself is satisfied with the fulness and wealth of his faith.

So Paul after teaching the Philippians how rich they were made through faith in Christ, in which they obtained all things, proceeds immediately to teach them further, saying, "If there be any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, fulfil ye my joy, that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, thinking nothing through strife or vainglory, but in lowliness each esteeming the other better than themselves; looking not every man on his own things, but on the things of others." [Phil. 2:1 ff.] Here we see clearly that the Apostle has prescribed this rule for the life of Christians,--that we should devote all our works to the welfare of others, since each has such abundant riches in his faith, that all his other works and his whole He are a surplus with which he can by voluntary benevolence serve and do good to his neighbor.

[Sidenote: The Example of Christ]

As an example of such a life the Apostle cites Christ, saying, "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus, Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: but made Himself of no reputation, and took upon Him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: and being found in fashion as a man, He became obedient unto death." [Phil. 2:5 ff.] This salutary word of the Apostle has been obscured for us by those who have not at all understood the Apostle's words, "form of God," "form of a servant," "fashion," "likeness of men," and have applied them to the divine and the human nature. Paul means this: Although Christ was filled with the form of God and rich in all good things, so that He needed no work and no suffering to make Him righteous and saved (for He had all this always from the beginning), yet He was not puffed up by them, nor did He lift Himself up above us and assume power over us, although He could rightly have done so; but, on the contrary, He so lived, labored, worked, suffered and died, that He might be like other men, and in fashion and in actions be nothing else than a man, just as if He had need of all these things and had nothing of the form of God. But He did all this for our sake, that He might serve us, and that all things He accomplished in this form of a servant might become ours.

So a Christian, like Christ, his Head, is filled and made rich by faith, and should be content with this form of God which he has obtained by faith; only, as I have said, he ought to increase this faith until it be made perfect. For this faith is his life, his righteousness and his salvation: it saves him and makes him acceptable, and bestows upon him all things that are Christ's, as has been said above, and as Paul asserts in Gal. ii, when he says, "And the life which I now live in the flesh, I live by the faith of the Son of God." [Gal. 2:20] Although the Christian is thus free from all works, he ought in this liberty to empty himself, to take upon himself the form of a servant, to be made in the likeness of men, to be found in fashion as a man, and to serve, help and in every way deal with his neighbor as he sees that God through Christ has dealt and still deals with himself. And this he should do freely, having regard to nothing except the divine approval. He ought to think: "Though I am an unworthy and condemned man, my God has given me in Christ all the riches of righteousness and salvation without any merit on my part, out of pure, free mercy, so that henceforth I need nothing whatever except faith which believes that this is true. Why should I not therefore freely, joyfully, with all my heart, and with an eager will, do all things which I know are pleasing and acceptable to such a Father, Who has overwhelmed me with His inestimable riches? I will therefore give myself as a Christ to my neighbor, just as Christ offered Himself to me; I will do nothing in this life except what I see is necessary, profitable and salutary to my neighbor, since through faith I have an abundance of all good things in Christ."

[Sidenote: Faith and Love]

Lo, thus from faith flow forth love and joy in the Lord, and from love a joyful, willing and free mind that serves one's neighbor willingly and takes no account of gratitude or ingratitude, of praise or blame, of gain or loss. For a man does not serve that he may put men under obligations, he does not distinguish between friends and enemies, nor does he anticipate their thankfulness or unthankfulness; but most freely and most willingly he spends himself and all that he has, whether he waste all on the thankless or whether he gain a reward. For as his Father does, distributing all things to all men richly and freely, causing His sun to rise upon the good and upon the evil [Matt. 5:45], so also the son does all things and suffers all things with that freely bestowing joy which is his delight when through Christ he sees it in God, the dispenser of such great benefits.

Therefore, if we recognize the great and precious things which are given us, as Paul says [Rom. 5:5], there will be shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost the love which makes us free, joyful, almighty workers and conquerors over all tribulations, servants of our neighbors and yet lords of all. But for those who do not recognize the gifts bestowed upon them through Christ, Christ has been born in vain; they go their way with their works, and shall never come to taste or to feel those things. Just as our neighbor is in need and lacks that in which we abound, so we also have been in need before God and have lacked His mercy. Hence, as our heavenly Father has in Christ freely come to our help, we also ought freely to help our neighbor through our body and its works, and each should become as it were a Christ to the other, that we may be Christs to one another and Christ may be the same in all; that is, that we may be truly Christians.

[Sidenote: The Christian Serves Freely]

Who then can comprehend the riches and the glory of the Christian life? It can do all things, and has all things, and lacks nothing; it is lord over sin, death and hell, and yet at the same time it serves, ministers to and benefits all men. But, alas, in our day this life is unknown throughout the world; it is neither preached about nor sought after; we are altogether ignorant of our own name and do not know why we are Christians or bear the name of Christians. Surely we are so named after Christ, not because He is absent from us, but because He dwells in us, that is, because we believe on Him and are Christs one to another and do to our neighbors as Christ does to us. But in our day we are taught by the doctrine of men to seek naught but merits, rewards and the things that are ours; of Christ we have made only a taskmaster far more harsh than Moses.

[Sidenote: Examples: The Virgin]

Of such faith we have a pre-eminent example in the blessed Virgin. As is written in Luke ii, she was purified according to the law of Moses, after the custom of all women, although she was not bound by that law, and needed not to be purified. But out of free and willing love she submitted to the law, being made like other women, lest she should offend or despise them. She was not justified by this work, but being righteous she did it freely and willingly. So our works also should be done, not that we may be justified by them; since, being justified beforehand by faith, we ought to do all things freely and joyfully for the sake of others.

[Sidenote: St. Paul]

St. Paul also circumcised his disciple Timothy, not because circumcision was necessary for his righteousness, but that he might not offend or despise the Jews who were weak in the faith and could not yet grasp the liberty of faith. But on the other hand, when they despised the liberty of faith and insisted that circumcision was necessary for righteousness, he withstood them and did not allow Titus to be circumcised, (Gal. ii) [Gal. 2:3]. For as he was unwilling to offend for to despise any man's weak faith, and yielded to their will for the time, so he was also unwilling that the liberty of faith should be offended against or despised by stubborn work-righteous men. He chose a middle way, sparing the weak or a time, but always withstanding the stubborn, that he might convert all to the liberty of faith. What we do should be done with the same zeal to sustain the weak in faith, as Romans xiv teaches [Rom. 14:1 ff.]; but we should firmly withstand the stubborn teachers of works. Of this we will say more later.

Christ also, in Matthew xvii, when the tribute money was demanded of His disciples, argued with St. Peter, Christ whether the sons of the king were not free from the payment of tribute, and Peter affirmed that they were. None the less Christ commanded Peter to go to the sea, and said, "Lest we should offend them, go, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee." [Matt. 17:24 ff.] This incident its beautifully to our subject, since Christ here calls Himself and those that are His, children and sons of the King, who need nothing; and yet He freely submits and pays the tribute. Just as necessary or helpful as this work was to Christ's righteousness or salvation, just so much do all other works of His or of His followers avail for righteousness; since they all follow after righteousness and are free, and are done only to serve others and to give them an example of good works.

Of the same nature are the precepts which Paul gives, in Romans xiii [Rom. 13:1 ff.] and Titus iii [Tit. 3:1], that Christians should be subject to the powers that be, and be ready to do every good work, not that they shall in this way be justified, since they already are righteous through faith, but that in the liberty of the Spirit they shall by so doing serve others and the powers themselves, and obey their will freely and out of love. Of this nature should be the works of all colleges, monasteries and priests. Each one should do the works of his profession and position, not that by them he may strive after righteousness, but that through them he may keep under his body, be an example to others, who also need to keep under their bodies, and finally that by such works he may submit his will to that of others in the freedom of love. But very great care must always be taken that no man in a false confidence imagine that by such works he will be justified, or acquire merit or be saved; for this is the work of faith alone, as I have repeatedly said.

[Sidenote: Church Precepts]

Any one knowing this could easily and without danger find his way among those numberless mandates and precepts of pope, bishops, monasteries, churches, princes and magistrates, upon which some ignorant pastors insist as if they were necessary to righteousness and salvation, calling them "precepts of the Church," although they are nothing of the kind. For a Christian, as a free man, will say, "I will fast, pray, do this and that as men command, not because it is necessary to my righteousness or salvation; but that I may show due respect to the pope, the bishop, the community, some magistrate or my neighbor, and give them an example, I will do and suffer all things, just as Christ did and suffered far more for me, although He needed nothing of it all or Himself, and was made under the law for my sake, although He was not under the law." And although tyrants do violence or injustice in making their demands, yet it will do no harm, so long as they demand nothing contrary to God.

From what has been said, every one can pass a safe judgment on all works and laws and make a trustworthy distinction between them, and know who are the blind and ignorant pastors and who are the good and true. For any work that is not done solely for the purpose of keeping under the body or of serving one's neighbor, so long as he asks nothing contrary to God, is not good nor Christian. And for this reason I mightily fear that few or no colleges, monasteries, altars and offices of the Church are really Christian in our day: no, nor the special fasts and prayers on certain saints' days[16] either. I fear, I say, that in all these we seek only our own profit, thinking that through them our sins are purged away and that we ind salvation in them. In this way Christian liberty perishes altogether. And this comes from our ignorance of Christian faith and of liberty.

[Sidenote: Ignorance of Liberty]

This ignorance and suppression of liberty very many blind pastors take pains to encourage: they stir up and urge on their people in these practices by praising such works, puffing them up with their indulgences, and never teaching faith. But I would counsel you, if you wish to pray, fast or establish some foundation in the Church, take heed not to do it in order to obtain some benefit, whether temporal or eternal. For you would do injury to your faith, which alone offers you all things, Your one care should be that faith may increase, whether it be trained by works or by sufferings. Give your gifts freely and for nothing, that others may profit by them and are well because of you and your goodness. In this way you shall be truly good and Christian. For of what benefit to you are the good works which you do not need for the keeping under of your body? Your faith is sufficient for you, through which God has given you all things.

See, according to this rule the good things we have from God should flow from one to the other and be common to all, so that every one should "put on" his neighbor, and so conduct himself toward him as if he himself were in the other's place. From Christ they have flowed and are flowing into us: He has so "put on" us and acted for us as if He had been what we are. From us they flow on to those who have need of them, so that I should lay before God my faith and my righteousness that they may cover and intercede for the sins of my neighbor, which I take upon myself and so labor and serve in them as if they were my very own. For that is what Christ did for us. This is true love and the genuine rule of a Christian life. The love is true and genuine where there is true and genuine faith. Hence, the Apostle says of love in I Cor. xiii, that it seeketh not its own. [1 Cor. 13:5]

[Sidenote: Conclusion]

We conclude, therefore, that a Christian man lives not in himself, but in Christ and in his neighbor. Otherwise he is not a Christian. He lives in Christ through faith, in his neighbor through love; by faith he is caught up beyond himself into God, by love he sinks down beneath himself into his neighbor; yet he always remains in God and in His love, as Christ says in John i, "Verily, I say unto you, Hereafter ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man." [John 1:51]

Enough now of liberty. As you see, it is a spiritual and true liberty, and makes our hearts free from all sins, laws and mandates, as Paul says, I Tim. i, "The law is not made for a righteous man." [1 Tim. 1:9] It is more excellent than all other liberty which is external, as heaven is more excellent than earth. This liberty may Christ grant us both to understand and to preserve. Amen.

[Sidenote: Liberty]

[Sidenote: Neither License]

[Sidenote: Nor Necessity]

Finally, something must be added for the sake of those for whom nothing can be so well said that they will not spoil it by misunderstanding it, though it is a question whether they will understand even what shall here be said. There are very many who, when they hear of this liberty of faith, immediately turn it into an occasion for the flesh, and think that now all things are allowed them. They want to show that they are free men and Christians only by despising and finding fault with ceremonies, traditions and human laws; as if they were Christians because on stated days they do not fast or eat meat when others fast, or because they do not use the accustomed prayers, and with upturned nose scoff at the precepts of men, although they utterly disregard all else that pertains to the Christian religion. The extreme opposite of these are those who rely for their salvation solely on their reverent observance of ceremonies, as if they would be saved because on certain days they fast or abstain from meats, or pray certain prayers; these make a boast of the precepts of the Church and of the Fathers, and care not a fig or the things which are of the essence of our faith. Plainly, both are in error, because they neglect the weightier things which are necessary to salvation, and quarrel so noisily about those trifling and unnecessary matters.

How much better is the teaching of the Apostle Paul, who bids us take a middle course, and condemns both sides when he says, "Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth." [Rom. 14:3] Here you see that they who neglect and disparage ceremonies, not out of piety, but out of mere contempt, are reproved, since the Apostle teaches us not to despise them. Such men are puffed up by knowledge. On the other hand, he teaches those who insist on the ceremonies not to judge the others, or neither party acts toward the other according to the love that edifies. Wherefore, we ought here to listen to the Scriptures, which teach that we should not go aside to the right nor to the left [Deut. 28:14], but follow the statutes of the Lord which are right, rejoicing the heart [Ps. 19:8]. For as a man is not righteous because he keeps and clings to the works and forms of the ceremonies, so also will a man not be counted righteous merely because he neglects and despises them.

[Sidenote: freedom from False Opinions]

Our faith in Christ does not free us from works, but from false opinions concerning works, that is, from the foolish presumption that justification is acquired by works. For faith redeems, corrects and preserves our consciences, so that we know that righteousness does not consist in works, although works neither can nor ought to be wanting; just as we cannot be without food and drink and all the works of this mortal body, yet our righteousness is not in them, but in faith; and yet those works of the body are not to be despised or neglected on that account. In this world we are bound by the needs of our bodily life, but we are not righteous because of them. "My kingdom is not of this world," [John 18:36] says Christ, but He does not say, "My kingdom is not here, that is, in this world." And Paul says, "Though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh," [2 Cor. 10:3] and in Galatians ii, "The life which I now live in the flesh, I live in the faith of the Son of God." [Gal. 2:20] Thus what we do, live, and are in works and in ceremonies, we do because of the necessities of this life and of the effort to rule our body; nevertheless we are righteous not in these, but in the faith of the Son of God.

[Sidenote: Opponents]

[Sidenote: Ceremonialists]

[Sidenote: Ignorant Men]

Hence, the Christian must take a middle course and face those two classes of men. He will meet first the unyielding, stubborn ceremonialists, who like deaf adders [Ps. 58:4] are not willing to hear the truth of liberty, but, having no faith, boast of, prescribe and insist upon their ceremonies as means of justification. Such were the Jews of old, who were unwilling to learn how to do good. These he must resist, do the very opposite and offend them boldly, lest by their impious views they drag many with them into error. In the presence of such men it is good to eat meat, to break the fasts and for the sake of the liberty of faith to do other things which they regard the greatest of sins. Of them we must say, "Let them alone, they are blind and leaders of the blind." [Matt. 15:14] For on this principle Paul would not circumcise Titus when the Jews insisted that he should [Gal. 2:3], and Christ excused the Apostles when they plucked ears of corn on the sabbath [Matt. 12:1 ff.]; and there are many similar instances. The other class of men whom a Christian will meet, are the simple-minded, ignorant men, weak in the faith, as the Apostle calls them, who cannot yet grasp the liberty of faith, even if they were willing to do so. These he must take care not to offend; he must yield to their weakness until they are more fully instructed. For since these do and think as they do, not because they are stubbornly wicked, but only because their faith is weak, the fasts and other things which they think necessary must be observed to avoid giving them offence. For so love demands, which would harm no one, but would serve all men. It is not by their fault that they are weak, but their pastors have taken them captive with the snares of their traditions and have wickedly used these traditions as rods with which to beat them. From these pastors they should have been delivered by the teaching of faith and liberty. So the Apostle teaches us, Romans xiv, "If my meat cause my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth" [Rom. 14:14]; and again, "I know that through Christ nothing is unclean, except to him who esteemeth any thing to be unclean; but it is evil or the man who eats and is offended."

Wherefore, although we should boldly resist those teachers of traditions and sharply censure the laws of the popes by means of which they plunder the people of God, yet we must spare the timid multitude whom those impious tyrants hold captive by means of these laws, until they be set free. Fight strenuously therefore against the wolves, but for the sheep, and not also against the sheep. This you will do if you inveigh against the laws and the law-givers, and at the same time observe the laws with the weak, so that they will not be offended, until they also recognize the tyranny and understand their liberty. But if you wish to use your liberty, do so in secret, as Paul says, Romans xiv, "Hast thou the faith? have it to thyself before God" [Rom. 14:22]; but take care not to use your liberty in the sight of the weak. On the other hand, use your liberty constantly and consistently in the sight of the tyrants and the stubborn, in despite of them, that they also may learn that they are impious, that their laws are of no avail for righteousness, and that they had no right to set them up.

[Sidenote: Ceremonies]

Now, since we cannot live our life without ceremonies and works, and the froward and untrained youth need to be restrained and saved from harm by such bonds; and since each one should keep his body under by means of such works, there is need that the minister of Christ be far-seeing and faithful; he ought so to govern and teach the people of Christ in all these matters that their conscience and faith be not offended, and that there spring not up in them a suspicion and a root of bitterness, and many be defiled thereby [Heb. 12:15], as Paul admonishes the Hebrews; that is, that they may not lose faith and become defiled by the false estimate of the value of works, and think that they must be justified by works. This happens easily and defiles very many, unless faith is at the same time constantly taught; it is impossible to avoid it when faith is not mentioned and only the devisings of men are taught, as has been done until now through the pestilent, impious, soul-destroying traditions of our popes and the opinions of our theologians. By these snares numberless souls have been dragged down to hell, so that you might see in this the work of Antichrist.

[Sidenote: The Test of Faith]

[Sidenote: Temporary Helps]

In brief, as wealth is the test of poverty, business the test of faithfulness, honors the test of humility, easts the test of temperance, pleasures the test of chastity, so ceremonies are the test of the righteousness of faith. "Can a man," says Solomon, "take fire in his bosom, and his clothes not be burned?" [Prov. 6:27] Yet, as a man must live in the midst of wealth, business, honors, pleasures and easts, so also must he live in the midst of ceremonies, that is, in the midst of dangers. Nay, as infant boys need beyond all else to be cherished in the bosoms and by the hands of maidens to keep them from perishing, and yet when they are grown up their salvation is endangered if they associate with maidens, so the inexperienced and froward youth need to be restrained and trained by the iron bars of ceremonies, lest their unchecked ardor rush headlong into vice after vice. Yet it would be death or them to be always held in bondage to ceremonies, thinking that these justify them. They are rather to be taught that they have been so imprisoned in ceremonies, not that they should be made righteous or gain great merit by them, but that they might thus be kept from doing evil, and might be more easily instructed unto the righteousness of faith. Such instruction they would not endure if the impulsiveness of their youth were not restrained. Hence ceremonies are to be given the same place in the life of a Christian as models and plans have among builders and artisans. They are prepared not as permanent structures, but because without them nothing could be built or made. When the structure is completed they are laid aside. You see, they are not despised, rather, they are greatly sought after; but what we despise is the false estimate of them, since no one holds them to be the real and permanent structure. If any man were so egregiously foolish as to care for nothing all his life long except the most costly, careful and persistent preparation of plans and models, and never to think of the structure itself, and were satisfied with his work in producing such plans and mere aids to work, and boasted of it, would not all men pity his insanity, and estimate that with what he has wasted something great might have been built? Thus we do not despise ceremonies and works, nay, we set great store by them; but we despise the false estimate placed upon works, in order that no one may think that they are true righteousness, as those hypocrites believe who spend and lose their whole lives in zeal for works, and never reach that for the sake of which the works are to be done; as the Apostle says, "ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." [2 Tim. 3:7] For they seem to wish to build, they make their preparations, and yet they never build, Thus they remain caught in the form of godliness and do not attain unto its power [2 Tim. 3:5]. Meanwhile they are pleased with their efforts, and even dare to judge all others whom they do not see shining with a like show of works. Yet with the gifts of God which they have spent and abused in vain they might, if they had been filled with faith, have accomplished great things to the salvation of themselves and of others.

[Sidenote: Men Need to be Taught of God]

But since human nature and natural reason, as it is called, are by nature superstitious and ready to imagine, when laws and works are prescribed, that righteousness must be obtained through them; and further, since they are trained and confirmed in this opinion by the practice of all earthly lawgivers, it is impossible that they should of themselves escape from the slavery of works and come to a knowledge of the liberty of faith. Therefore there is need of the prayer that the Lord may give us [John 6:45] and make us _theodidacti_, that is, taught of God, and Himself, as He has promised, write His law in our hearts; otherwise there is no hope for us. For if He Himself do not teach our hearts this wisdom hidden in a mystery [1 Cor. 2:7], nature can only condemn it and judge it to be heretical, because nature is offended by it and regards it as foolishness. So we see that it happened in olden times, in the case of the Apostles and prophets, and so godless and blind popes and their flatterers do to me and to those who are like me. May God at last be merciful to them and to us, and cause His face to shine upon us [Ps. 67:1 f.], that we may know His way upon earth. His salvation among all nations, God, Who is blessed forever [2 Cor. 11:31]. Amen.

FOOTNOTES

[1] See below, page 304.

[2] Sylvester Prierias. See Vol. I, p. 338.

[3] Cf. Preface to Prierias' Epitome, _Weimar Ed._, VI, 329.

[4] Virgil, _Georgics_, I, 514.

[5] Pope Eugene III, 1145-1153, for whom Bernard of Clairvaux wrote a devotional book, _De consideratione_, in which he rehearsed the duties and the dangers of the pope. See Realencyklopadie II, 632; Kohler, Luther u. die Kirchengeschichte, 311 f. Cf. Resolutiones disput. de indulg. virtute, 1518, Clemen, 1, 113.

[6] John Maier, born in Eck an der Gunz, and generally known as John Eck; an ambitious theologian, who first attacked his professor in Freiburg, then Erasmus' Annotations to the New Testament, and next wrote against Luther's XCV Theses (see Vol. I, 10, 176, etc.). He was the opponent of Luther and Carlstadt at the Leipzig Disputation (1519), to which Luther here refers.

[7] Jacopo de Vio, born in Gaeta, Italy, in 1469, died in 1534. The name Cajetan he derived from his birthplace, the Latin name of which is Cajeta. In the Dominican Order he was known as Thomas, so that his writings are published under the title, _Thomae de Vio Cajetani opera_. He was made cardinal-presbyter with the title of S. Sisto in 1517, and in the following year was sent as papal legate to the Diet of Augsburg. Here he met and examined Luther, but accomplished nothing because he insisted that Luther must recant. See Kolde in Realencyklopadie 3, 632 ff.

[8] Carl von Miltitz was educated at Cologne, was prebendary at Mainz, Trier and Meissen, and later went to Rome, where he acted as agent for Frederick, Elector of Saxony, and Duke George the Bearded. "After the endeavours of Cardinal Cajetan to silence Luther had failed, Miltitz appeared to be the person most suited to bring the negotiations to a successful ending." (_Catholic Encyclopedia_, X, 318, where, however, the statement that Miltitz was educated at Mainz, Trier and Meissen is evidently a slip.) It seems that Miltitz returned to Rome for a time, but in 1522 again came to Germany, where he was drowned in the Main, November 20, 1529. See Flathe, Art. _Miltitz, in Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie_, 21, 759 f.

[9] The German reads: "Thus I always did what was required of me, and neglected nothing which it was my duty to do."

[10] This was the usual title of the pope, with which the bull of excommunication opened: _Leo Episcopus Servus Servorum Dei_.

[11] See above, pp. 298, 300, and compare the letters of Miltitz to the elector Frederick in Smith, _Luther's Correspondence_, I, pp. 367 f.

[12] Here the German is more accurate: "Every Christian man."

[13] German: _Wie man sein brauchen und niessen soll_, "how we are to benefit by and enjoy what He is for us."

[14] German: _der heubt gerechtigkteit._

[15] Possibly a reminiscence of the _Leviathan serpentem tortuosum_ in Isa. 27:1. Cf. _Erl. Ed._, xxiv, 73; xxvii, 323 f; xviii, 91. Lemme translates _Teuelswahn_.

[16] German: _die fasten und gepett etiichen heyligen so derlich gethan_.

A BRIEF EXPLANATION (EINE KURZE FORM) OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS, THE

Creed, And The Lord'S Prayer

CREED, AND THE LORD'S PRAYER

1520

INTRODUCTION

The work here presented bears the German title, _Eine kurze Form der zehn Gebote, eine kurze Form des Glaubens, eine kurze Form des Vaterunsers_. It is the most important of Luther's catechetical works prior to the Catechisms of 1529, and deserves the name that has been given it, "the first evangelical catechism."[1]

To be sure, the name "catechism" was not applied to the _Kurze Form_ at the time. In mediaeval usage "catechism" was the name for oral instruction in the elements of Christian truth. This instruction had been based from time immemorial upon the Creed and the Lord's Prayer. The decalogue held a minor place and was overshadowed by the commandments of the church. During the later Middle Ages the influence of the sacrament of penance gave it a higher position. It gradually became a subject of "catechetical" instruction, but only alongside of the other standards for the classification of sins.[2] It was the work of Luther so to expound the Ten Commandments as to give them a permanent place of their own in Christian instruction, side by side with the Creed and the Lord's Prayer.

The first manuals of instruction of this kind were prepared for the use of the priests, to guide them in the questioning of penitents, but with the discovery of the art of printing popular hand-books for the use of the laity became more and more common, and with certain of these manuals Luther was familiar.[3]

From the beginning of his ministry at Wittenberg, Luther had preached from time to time upon the Ten Commandments and the Lord's Prayer. In 1518 his friend Agricola published a series of sermons on the Lord's Prayer which Luther had preached in Lent, 1517.[4] In the same year Luther published his own _Kurze Auslegung der zehn Gebote, ihrer Erfullung und Uebertretung_.[5] The year 1519 saw the publication of the _Kurze Form das Paternoster zu verstehen und zu beten_, and the _Kurze und gute Auslegung des Vaterunsers vor sich und hinter sich_.[7] The _Treatise on Good Works_[8], which is essentially an exposition of the decalogue, was written in the early months of 1520. During the same period the mind of Luther was frequently occupied with the abuses of the confessional, as we learn from the _Confitendi Ratio_,[9] and the _Kurze Unterweisung wie man beichten soil_.[10] All the material for the first and third parts of the present work was, therefore, in hand and had appeared in print before 1520.

In 1520 the Kurze Form came from the press.[11] It consists of three separately composed expositions of the three chief subjects of catechetical instruction in the Middle Ages. The expositions of the Commandments and the Lord's Prayer are reproductions of the _Kurze Auslegung der zehn Gebote_ and the _Kurze Form das Paternoster zu verstehen und zu beten_. The treatment of the Apostles' Creed is new, as is also the Introduction, in which Luther sets forth the relation of the three parts to one another in the unity of the Christian life.

The work is not scientific and theological, but popular and religious. Its purpose is primarily devotional, not pedagogical. The mediaeval root out of which it grew is not to be denied. The catalogue of transgressions and fulfilments attached to the explanation of the decalogue shows that it is intended to be a manual for penitents, but the spirit in which the Creed and the Lord's Prayer are explained is not mediaeval, and the manner in which the explanations of the decalogue are simplified and rid of the excrescences of the XV Century hand-books shows the new evangelical conception of confession to which Luther had attained. The division of the Creed into three articles instead of the traditional twelve marks an epoch in the development of catechetical instruction. The little book contains passages of rare beauty, clouded at times, we fear, by the new language into which it has here been put, and seldom has the _Wesen des Christentums_ been more simply and tellingly set forth than in the treatment of the Creed.

In 1522 Luther republished the _Kurze Form_ with a few slight changes and a number of additions under the title _Betbuchlein_. The _Betbuchlein_ ran through many editions, and grew in the end to a book of rather large proportions, a complete manual of devotion.

In its original form and as the chief content of the _Betbuchlein_, the _Kurze Form_ exercised a profound influence upon the manuals of Christian doctrine that appeared in ever-increasing number after 1522.[12] Its influence extended to England, where Marshall's _Goodly Primer_ (1534 and 35) offered to English readers a translation of the _Betbuchlein_, in which, however, no acknowledgments were made to the original author.[13]

The _Kurze Form_ is found in _Weimar Ed._, VII, 194 ff.; _Erl. Ed._, XXII, 3 ff.; _Clemen Ed._, II, 38 ff.; _Walch Ed._, X, 182 ff.; _St. Louis Ed._, X, 149 ff.

Literature

LITERATURE

F. Cohrs, _Die evang. Katechismusversuche vor L.'s Enchiridion_ (especially I, 1 ff. and IV, 229 ff.), Arts. _Katechismen L.'s and Katechismusunterricht_ in _Realencyk._, X, 130 ff., and XXIII, 743 ff., and _Introd. to Betbuchlein_ in _Weimar Ed._, X; O. Albrecht, _Vorbemerkungen zu den beiden Katechismen von 1529_, in _Weimar Ed._, XXX', 426 ff. (Further literature cited by all the above.) See also Gecken, _Bilderkatechismus d. XV Jh_. and von Zezschwitz, _System d. Katechetik_ (especially II, i).

Charles M. Jacobs. Lutheran Theological Seminary,

CHARLES M. JACOBS.

LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY,

Mount Airy, Philadelphia

FOOTNOTES

[1] Cohrs, _Evang. Katechismusversuche_, I, 4.

[2] _von Zezschwitz, Katechetik_, II, 176, 265 ff.

[3] _Weimar Ed._, X', 475.

[4] _Weimar Ed._, IX, 122 ff. The same series was republished by Luther himself, ibid., IV, 74 ff.

[5] _Weimar Ed._, I, 248 ff.

[6] _Weimar Ed._, VI, 9 ff.

[7] _Weimar Ed._, VI, 20 ff.

[8] Vol. I, pp. 187 ff.

[9] Vol. I, pp. 81-101.

[10] _Weimar Ed._, II, 47 ff.

[11] On the exact date, see _Weimar Ed._, VII, 195; _Clemen_, II, 38.

[12] See Cohrs, IV, 326 ff.

[13] For this information I am indebted to the Rev. J. F. Bornhold, of Mount Holly, N. J. The act was discovered almost simultaneously by Pro. M. Reu, of Dubuque, Iowa.

A Brief Explanation Of The Ten Commandments, The Creed, And The Lord'S Prayer

A BRIEF EXPLANATION OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS, THE CREED, AND THE LORD'S PRAYER

1520

Preface

PREFACE

The ordinary Christian, who cannot read the Scriptures, is required to learn and know the Ten Commandments, the Creed, and the Lord's Prayer; and this has not come to pass without God's special ordering. For these three contain fully and completely everything that is in the Scriptures, everything that ever should be preached, and everything that a Christian needs to know, all put so briefly and so plainly that no one can make complaint or excuse, saying that what he needs or his salvation is too long or too hard to remember.

Three things a man needs to know in order to be saved. _First_, he must know what he ought to do and what he ought not to do. _Second_, when he finds that by his own strength he can neither do the things he ought, nor leave undone the things he ought not to do, he must know where to seek and find and get the strength he needs. _Third_, he must know how to seek and find and get this strength.

When a man is ill, he needs to know first what his illness is,--what he can do and what he cannot do. Then he needs to know where to find the remedy that will restore his health and help him to do and leave undone the things he ought. Third, he must ask for this remedy, and seek it, and get it or have it brought to him. In like manner, the _Commandments_ teach a man to know his illness, so that he feels and sees what he can do and what he cannot do, what he can and what he cannot leave undone, and thus knows himself to be a sinner and a wicked man. After that the _Creed_ shows him and teaches him where he may find the remedy,--the grace which helps him to become a good man and to keep the Commandments; it shows him God, and the mercy which He has revealed and offered in Christ. In the third place, the _Lord's Prayer_ teaches him how to ask or this grace, get it, and take it to himself, to wit, by habitual, humble, comforting prayer; then grace is given, and by the fulfillment of God's commandments he is saved.

These are the three chief things in all the Scriptures. Therefore we begin at the beginning, with the Commandments, which are the first thing, and learn to recognise our sin and wickedness, that is, our spiritual illness, which prevents us from doing the things we ought to do and leaving undone the things we ought not to do.

The Ten Commandments

THE TEN COMMANDMENTS

[Sidenote: The First Table]

The _First Table of Moses_--the Table of the Right Hand--contains the first three Commandments, In these man is taught his duty toward God, what things he is in duty bound to do, and what to leave undone.

[Sidenote: The First Commandment]

The _First Commandment_ teaches how man shall treat God inwardly, in the heart, that is, how he ought always to remember Him and think of Him and esteem Him. To Him, as to a Father and good Friend, man is to look at all times or all good things, in all trust and faith and love, with fear; he is not to offend Him, but trust Him as a child its father. For nature teaches us that there is one God, Who gives all good and helps against all evil, as even the heathen show us by their worshiping of idols. This commandment is,

_Thou shalt have no other gods._

[Sidenote: The Second Commandment]

The _Second Commandment_ teaches how man shall act toward God outwardly, in words, before other men, or even inwardly before his own self; that is, he shall honor God's Name. For no one can show God either to himself or to others in His divine nature, but only in His names. This commandment is,

_Thou shalt not take the Name of the Lord thy God in vain._

[Sidenote: The Third Commandment]

The _Third Commandment_ teaches how man shall act toward God outwardly in deeds, that is, in the worship of God. It is,

_Thou shalt hallow the holy day._[1]

These three commandments, then, teach how man is to act toward God in thoughts, words and deeds,--that is, in all his life.

[Sidenote: The Second Table]

The _Second Table of Moses_--the Table of the Left Hand--contains the other seven Commandments. In these man is taught what he is in duty bound to do and not to do to other men, that is, to his neighbor,

[Sidenote: The Fourth Commandment]

The _first_ of them teaches how one is to conduct oneself toward all the authorities who are God's representatives. Therefore, it has its place before the rest, and immediately after the first three, which concern God Himself. Such authorities are father and mother, spiritual and temporal lords, etc. It is,

_Honor thy father and thy mother._

The _second_ teaches how one is to conduct oneself toward one's neighbor in matters that concern his person,--not to do him injury, but to benefit and help him when he is in need. It is,

_Thou shalt not kill._

[Sidenote: The Sixth Commandment]

The _third_ teaches how one is to conduct oneself toward the best possession one's neighbor has next to his person,--that is, toward his wife, his child, his friend. He is to put no shame upon them, but to preserve their honor, so far as he is able. It is,

_Thou shalt not commit adultery._

[Sidenote: The Seventh Commandment]

The _fourth_ teaches how one is to conduct oneself toward one's neighbor's temporal possessions,--not to take them from him or hinder him in their use, but to aid him in increasing them. It is,

_Thou shalt not steal._

[Sidenote: The Eighth Commandment]

The _fifth_ teaches how one is to conduct oneself toward one's neighbor's worldly honor and good name,--not to impair them, but to increase and guard and protect them. It is,

_Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor._

So, then, it is forbidden to harm one's neighbor in any of his possessions, and it is commanded to advance his interests. If we consider the natural law,[2] we find how just and right all these commandments are; for there is no act here commanded, toward God or one's neighbor, that each of us would not wish to have done toward himself, if he were God, or in God's place or his neighbor's.

[Sidenote: The Ninth and Tenth Commandments]

The last two Commandments teach how wicked human nature is, and how pure we should be from all the desires of the flesh and desires for this world's goods; but that means struggle and labor as long as we live here below. They are,

_Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house._

_Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his cattle, nor anything that is thy neighbor's._

A Brief Conclusion To The Ten Comandments

A BRIEF CONCLUSION TO THE TEN COMANDMENTS

Christ Himself says, "Whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even so to them; this is the whole law and all the prophets." [Matt. 7:12] Now no one wishes to receive ingratitude for benefits conferred or to let another take away his good name. No one wishes to have pride shown toward him. No one wishes to endure disobedience, wrath, a wife's impurity, robbery, lying, deceit, slander; but every one wishes to find in his neighbor kindliness, thankfulness, helpfulness, truth and fidelity. All this the Ten Commandments require.

The Transgression Of The Commandments

THE TRANSGRESSION OF THE COMMANDMENTS

_Against the First_

[Sidenote: the First Commandment]

He who in his tribulation seeks the help of sorcery, black art, or witchcraft.

He who uses letters[3], signs, herbs, words[4], charms and the like.

He who uses divining-rods and incantations, and practices crystal-gazing, cloak-riding, and milk-stealing[5].

He who orders his life and work by lucky days, the signs of the zodiac and the advice of the fortune-tellers.

He who seeks by charms and incantations to protect himself, his cattle, his house, his children and all his property against wolves, iron, fire and water.

He who blames his misfortunes and tribulations on the devil or on wicked men, and does not accept them with praise and love, as good and evil which come from God alone, and who does not ascribe them to God with thanksgiving and willing patience.

He who tempts God, and needlessly puts himself in danger of body or soul.

He who glories in his piety, his wisdom, or other spiritual gifts.

He who honors God and the saints only for the sake of temporal gain, and is forgetful of his soul's need.

He who does not trust in God at all times, and is not confident of God's mercy in all he does.

He who doubts concerning the faith or the grace of God.

He who does not keep back others from unbelief and doubt, and does not help them, so far as in him lies, to believe and trust in God's grace.

Here, too, belong all forms of unbelief, despair, and misbelief.

_Against the Second_

[Sidenote: The Second Commandment]

He who swears needlessly or habitually.

He who perjures himself, or breaks a vow.

He who vows or swears to do evil.

He who curses by God's name.

He who tells foolish tales of God, and frivolously perverts the words of Scripture.

He who in his tribulation calls not upon God's name, nor blesses Him in joy and sorrow, in good fortune and in ill.

He who by his piety, wisdom or the like seeks reputation and honor and a name.

He who calls upon God's name falsely, as do the heretics and all vainglorious saints.

He who does not praise God's name in all that befalls him.

He who does not resist those that dishonor the name of God, use it falsely and work evil by it.

Here belong all the sins of vainglory and spiritual pride.

_Against the Third_

[Sidenote: The Third Commandment]

He who is given to gluttony, drunkenness, gambling, dancing, idleness and unchastity.

He who is lazy, who sleeps when he ought to be at mass, stays away from mass, goes walking and indulges in idle talk.

He who without special need works and transacts business on the Lord's day.

He who prays not, meditates not upon Christ's sufferings, repents not of his sins and asks no grace, and therefore keeps the day only in outward fashion, by his dress, his food and his actions.

He who in all his works and sufferings is not satisfied that God shall do with him as He will.

He who does not help others to do this and does not resist them when they do otherwise.

Here belongs the sin of slothfulness and indifference to worship.

_Against the Fourth_

[Sidenote: The Fourth Commandment]

He who is ashamed of his parents because of their poverty, their failings or their lowly position.

He who does not provide them with food and clothing in their need.

Much more, he who curses them, speaks evil of them, hates them and disobeys them.

He who does not from the heart esteem them highly because of God's commandment.

He who does not honor them, even though they do wrong and violence.

He who does not keep the commandments of the Christian Church with respect to fast- and feast-days, etc.

He who dishonors, slanders and insults the priestly office.

He who dost not pay honor, allegiance and obedience to his lords and those in authority, be they good or bad.

Among the transgressors of this commandment are all heretics, schismatics, apostates, excommunicates, hardened sinners and the like.

He who does not help men to keep this commandment and resist those who break it.

Here belong all forms of pride and disobedience.

_Against the Fifth_

[Sidenote: The Fifth Commandment]

He who is angry with his neighbor.

He who sayeth to his neighbor, _Raca_, which stands for all terms of anger and hatred. [Matt. 5:22]

He who sayeth to his neighbor, _Fatue_, "thou fool," which stands for every sort of vile language, cursing, slander, evil speaking, judging, condemning, mockery, etc.

He who scolds about his neighbor's sins or failings, and does not rather cover and excuse them.

He who forgives not his enemies nor prays for them, is not kindly disposed toward them and does them no good.

This commandment includes also all the sins of anger and hatred, such as murder, war, robbery, arson, quarreling, contention, envy of a neighbor's good fortune and joy over his misfortune.

He who does not practice works of mercy even toward his enemies.

He who sets men at enmity with one another.

He who sows discord between man and man.

He who does not reconcile those who are at enmity.

He who does not hinder or prevent wrath and enmity when he is able.

_Against the Sixth_

[Sidenote: The Sixth Commandment]

He who seduces virgins, commits adultery and is guilty of incest and like unchastity.

He who uses unnatural means to satisfy his desires--these are the "mute sins."[6]

He who arouses or displays evil desires with obscene words, songs, tales or pictures.

He who by looks, touch or thoughts arouses his own desires and defiles himself.

He who does not avoid the causes of unchastity, such as gluttony, drunkenness, idleness, laziness, oversleeping and intimate association with men or women.

He who by extravagant dress or demeanor incites others to unchastity.

He who gives house, place, time or help to the commission of this sin.

He who does not by word and deed help others to preserve their chastity.

_Against the Seventh_

[Sidenote: The Seventh Commandment]

He who practices thievery, robbery and usury.

He who uses false weights and measures, or sells bad wares for good.

He who receives bequests and incomes dishonestly. He who withholds wages that have been earned, and repudiates a debt.

He who will not lend to a needy neighbor without taking interest.[7]

All who are avaricious and make haste to be rich, and do any of those other things by which a neighbor's property is withheld or taken away.

He who does not protect another against loss.

He who does not warn another against loss.

He who places an obstacle in the way of his neighbor's profit and begrudges his neighbor's gains.

Against the Eighth

[Sidenote: The Eight Commandment]

He who conceals or suppresses the truth in a court of law.

He who lies and deceives to another's hurt.

All hurtful flatterers, whisperers and double-dealers.

He who speaks evil of his neighbor's possessions, lie, words and works and defames them.

He who gives place to slanderers, helps them on and does not resist them.

He who does not use his tongue to defend his neighbor's good name.

He who does not rebuke the slanderer.

He who does not say all good of every man and keep silent about all evil.

He who conceals or does not defend the truth.

_Against the Last Two_

[Sidenote: The Ninth and Tenth Commandments]

The last two commandments have no place in confession[8], but are set as a goal to which we are to attain, and toward which, through repentance and by the help and grace of God, we are daily to strive; or wicked inclinations do not wholly die, until the flesh turns to dust and is new created[9].

The "five senses"[10] are included in the Fifth and Sixth Commandments; the "six works of mercy," in the Fifth and Seventh; of the "seven deadly sins," pride is included in the First and Second, unchastity in the Sixth, anger, and hatred in the Fifth, gluttony in the Sixth, indolence in the Third, and indeed in all the commandments. The "alien sins" are included in all the commandments, or it is possible to sin against all the commandments by bidding, advising and helping others to sin against them. The "crying sins" and the "mute sins" are committed against the Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Commandments, etc.

In all these works we see nothing else than self-love, which seeks its own, takes from God what is His, from men what is theirs, and out of all it is and all it has and all it can do gives nothing either to God or men. St. Augustine well says, "The beginning of all sin is the love of one's own self."[11]

From all this it follows that the commandments command nothing but love and forbid nothing but love; nothing but love fulfils the commandments and nothing but love breaks them. Wherefore, St. Paul says that love is the fulfilling of all commandments; just as evil love is the transgression of all commandments.

The Fulfilment of the Commandments

Of the First

[Sidenote: The First Commandment]

To fear and love God in true faith, and always, in all our works, to trust Him firmly, and be wholly, completely, altogether resigned in all things, whether they be evil or good.

Here belongs whatever is written in all the Scriptures concerning faith, hope and love of God, all of which is briefly comprehended in this commandment.

_Of the Second_

[Sidenote: The Second Commandment]

To praise, honor, bless and call upon God's Name, and to count our own name and honor as altogether nothing, so that God alone may be praised; for He alone is all things, and worketh all things.

Here belongs all that is taught in the Scripture about rendering praise and honor and thanks to God, about God's name and about joy in Him.

_Of the Third_

[Sidenote: The Third Commandment]

To prepare oneself for God and to seek His grace by praying, hearing mass and the Gospel, and meditating on the sufferings of Christ, so that one goes to the sacrament in a spiritual manner; for this commandment requires a soul "poor in spirit," [Matt. 5:3.] which offers its nothingness to God, that He may be its God and receive in it the honor due His work and Name according to the first two commandments.

Here belongs all that is commanded about worship, the hearing of sermons, and good works by which the body is made subject to the spirit, so that all our works may be God's and not our own.

_Of the Fourth_

[Sidenote: The Fourth Commandment]

Willing obedience, humility, submission to all authority because it is God's good-pleasure, as the Apostle St. Peter says, without retort, complaint or murmuring.

Here belongs all that is written of obedience, humility, submissiveness and reverence.

_Of the Fifth_

[Sidenote: The Fifth Commandment]

Patience, meekness, kindness, peacefulness, mercy, and a heart in all things sweet and kindly, without hatred, anger or bitterness toward any man, even toward enemies. Here belong all the teachings about patience, meekness, peace and concord.

_Of the Sixth_

Chastity, purity and modesty, in works, words, demeanor and thoughts; moderation in eating, drinking and sleeping; and everything that furthers chastity.

Here belong all the teachings about chastity, fasting, sobriety, moderation, prayer, watching, laboring and everything by which chastity is preserved.

_Of the Seventh_

[Sidenote: The Seventh Commandment]

Poverty of spirit, charity, willingness to lend and give of one's possessions, and a life free from greed and avarice. Here belong all the teachings about avarice, unrighteous wealth, usury, guile, deceit, injury and hindrance of one's neighbor in temporal things.

_Of the Eighth_

[Sidenote: The Eight Commandment]

A peaceful, wholesome tongue, that injures no one and profits every one, that reconciles those that are at enmity, apologizes for those that are slandered and takes their part; in short, truthfulness and simplicity in speech. Here belong all the teachings about talking and keeping silent in matters which concern one's neighbor's honor and rights, his cause and his salvation.

_Of the Last Two_

[Sidenote: The Ninth and Tenth Commandments]

That entire chastity and utter despising of temporal desire and possessions, which are perfectly attained only in the life to come.

In all these works we see nothing else than the love of others--that is, of God and of one's neighbor--which seeketh not its own, but what is God's and its neighbor's [1 Cor. 13:5], and surrendereth itself freely to every one to be his, to serve him and to do his will.

Thus you see that the Ten Commandments contain, in a very brief and orderly manner, all the teaching that is needful for man's life; and if a man desires to keep them, he has good works or every hour of his life, and has no need to choose him other works, to run hither and thither, and do what is not commanded[12].

All this is evident from the act that these commandments teach nothing about what a man shall do or not do or himself, or what he shall ask of others, but only what he shall do and not do for others--God and man. From this we are to learn that their fulfilment consists in love toward others, not toward ourselves; for in his own behalf man already seeks and does and leaves undone too much. He needs not to be taught this, but to be kept from it. Therefore he lives best who lives in no wise for himself, and he who lives for himself, lives worst; for so the Ten Commandments teach. From them we learn how few men lead good lives; nay, as man, no one can lead a good life. Knowing this, we must learn next whence we shall get the power to lead good lives and to keep the Commandments[13].

The Creed

THE CREED

[Sidenote: Division of the Creed]

The Creed is divided into three parts[14], according to the Creed three Persons of the holy and divine Trinity who are therein mentioned. The first part belongs to the Father, the second to the Son, the third to the Holy Ghost; for the Trinity is the chief thing in the Creed, on which everything else depends.

[Sidenote: Two Ways of Believing]

We should note that there are two ways of believing. One way is to believe about God, as I do when I believe that what is said of God is true; just as I do when I believe what is said about the Turk, the devil or hell. This faith is knowledge or observation rather than faith. The other way is to believe in God, as I do when I not only believe that what is said about Him is true, but put my trust in Him, surrender myself to Him and make bold to deal with Him, believing without doubt that He will be to me and do to me just what is said of Him. I could not thus believe in the Turk or in any man, however highly his praises might be sung. For I can readily believe that a man is good, but I do not venture on that account to build my faith on him.

[Sidenote: True Faith]

This faith, which in He or death dares to believe that God is what He is said to be, is the only faith that makes a man a Christian and obtains from God whatever it will. This faith no false and evil heart can have, for it is a living faith; and this faith is commanded in the First Commandment, which says, "I am the Lord thy God, thou shalt have no other gods." Wherefore the word _in_ is rightly used; and it is diligently to be noted that we may not say, "I believe God the Father," or "about the Father," but "_in_ God the Father, _in_ Jesus Christ, _in_ the Holy Ghost." This faith we should render to no one but to God. Therefore we confess the divinity of Jesus Christ and of the Holy Ghost, when we believe in them even as we believe in the Father; and just as our faith in all three Persons is one and the same faith, so the three Persons are one and the same God.

The First Part of the Creed

[Sidenote: The First Article]

_I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth._

_This means--_

I renounce the evil spirit, all idolatry, all sorcery and misbelief.

I put my trust in no man on earth, nor in myself, my power, my learning, my wealth, my piety, nor anything that I may have.

I put my trust in no creature in heaven or on earth.

I dare to put my trust only in the one absolute, invisible, incomprehensible God, Who made heaven and earth, and Who alone is over all creatures.

On the other hand, I am not afraid of any wickedness of the devil and his company, or my God is above them all.

Even though I be forsaken or persecuted by all men, I still believe in God.

I believe, even though I am poor, unwise, unlearned, despised or in need of everything.

I believe, even though I am a sinner. For this faith of mine must and shall soar above everything that is and everything that is not--above sin and virtue and all else--so that it may remain simply and purely a faith in God, as the First Commandment constrains me.

Nor do I ask of Him a sign, to tempt Him. [Luke 11:16]

I trust constantly in Him, however long He tarry, and do not prescribe the goal, the time, the measure or the manner of His working, but in bold, true faith I leave all to His divine will.

If He is almighty, what can I lack that He cannot give me and do for me?

If He is Creator of heaven and earth and Lord of all things, who will take anything from me, or harm me? [Rom. 8:28] Nay, how shall not all things rather serve me and turn out to my good, if He to Whom all things are obedient and subject wishes me well?

Because He is God, He can do the thing that is best for me, and knows what that thing is.

Because He is Father, He wills to do what is best for me, and to do it with all His heart.

Because I do not doubt, but put my trust in Him, I am assuredly His child. His servant and His heir forever, and as I believe, so will it be done unto me. [Matt. 8:13]

The Second Part

[Sidenote: The Second Article]

_And in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord, Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried; He descended into hell; the third day He rose again from the dead; He ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead._

_This means--_

I believe not only that Jesus Christ is the true and only Son of God, begotten from eternity in one eternal, divine nature and substance; but also that all things are made subject to Him by His Father, and that in His humanity He is made Lord of me and of all things which, in His divinity, He, with the Father, has created.

I believe that no one can believe in the Father or come to the Father by his own learning, works or reason, nor by anything that can be named in heaven or on earth, save only in and through Jesus Christ, His only Son--that is, through faith in His name and lordship. [John 14:6]

I firmly believe that for my sake He was conceived by the Holy Ghost, without human or fleshly work, without bodily father or seed of man, to the end that so He might purify my sinful, fleshly, unclean, damnable conception, and the conception of all who believe in Him, and make it spiritual through His own and His almighty Father's gracious will.

I believe that for me He was born of the pure Virgin Mary, without harm to her bodily and spiritual virginity, in order that, by the mercy of His Father, He might make my sinful, damnable birth, and the birth of all who believe in Him, blessed and harmless and pure.

I believe that He bore His cross and passion for my sin and the sin of all believers, and thereby has consecrated all sufferings and every cross, and made them not only harmless, but salutary and highly meritorious.

I believe that He died and was buried to slay entirely and to bury my sin and the sin of all who believe in Him, and that He has destroyed bodily death and made it altogether harmless, nay profitable and salutary.

I believe that He descended into hell to overthrow and take captive the devil and all his power, guile and wickedness, for me and for all who believe in Him, so that henceforth the devil cannot harm me; and that He has redeemed me from the pains of hell, and made them harmless and meritorious.

I believe that He rose on the third day from the dead, to give to me and to all who believe in Him a new life; and that He has thereby quickened us with Him, in grace and in the Spirit, that we may sin no more, but serve Him alone in every grace and virtue.

I believe that He ascended into heaven and received from the Father power and honor above all angels and all creatures, and thus sitteth on the right hand of God--that is, He is King and Lord over all that is God's, in heaven and hell and earth. Therefore, He can help me and all believers in all our necessities against all our adversaries and enemies.

I believe that He will come again from heaven at the last day, to judge those who then are living and those who have died meanwhile, and all men, all angels and devils must come before His judgment-seat and see Him in the flesh; that He will come to redeem me and all who believe in Him from bodily death and all infirmities, to punish our enemies and adversaries eternally, and to redeem us eternally from their power.

The Third Part

[Sidenote: The Third Article]

_I believe in the Holy Ghost, a Holy Christian Church, a communion of saints, a forgiveness of sins, a resurrection of the body, and a life everlasting. Amen._

_This means--_

I believe not only that the Holy Ghost is one true God, with the Father and the Son, but that no one can come to the Father through Christ and His life, sufferings and death, and all that has been said of Him, nor attain any of His blessings, without the work of the Holy Ghost, by which the Father and the Son teach, quicken, call, draw me and all that are His, make us, in and through Christ, alive and holy and spiritual, and thus bring us to the Father; for it is He by Whom the Father, through Christ and in Christ, worketh all things and giveth life to all.

I believe that there is on earth, through the whole wide world, no more than one holy, common[15], Christian Church, which is nothing else than the congregation[16], or assembly of the saints, i. e., the pious, believing men on earth, which is gathered, preserved, and ruled by the Holy Ghost, and daily increased by means of the sacraments and the Word of God.

I believe that no one can be saved who is not found in this congregation, holding with it to one faith, word, sacraments, hope and love, and that no Jew, heretic, heathen or sinner can be saved along with it, unless he become reconciled to it, united with it and conformed to it in all things.

I believe that in this congregation, or Church[17], all things are common, that everyone's possessions belong to the others and no one has anything of his own; therefore, all the prayers and good works of the whole congregation must help, assist and strengthen me and every believer at all times, in life and death, and thus each bear the other's burden, as St. Paul teaches. [Gal. 6:2]

I believe that in this congregation, and nowhere else, there is forgiveness of sins; that outside of it, good works, however great they be or many, are of no avail for the forgiveness of sins; but that within it, no matter how much, how greatly or how often men may sin, nothing can hinder forgiveness of sins, which abides wherever and as long as this one congregation abides. To this congregation Christ gives the keys, and says, in Matthew xviii, "Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven." [Matt. 18:18] In like manner He says, in Matthew xvi, to the one man Peter, who stands as the representative of the one and only Church [Matt. 16:19], "Whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

I believe that there will be a resurrection of the dead, in which, by the same Holy Ghost, all flesh will be raised again--that is, all men, in flesh, or body, the good and the wicked; and, therefore, the self-same flesh which has died, been buried, mouldered and been destroyed in many ways shall return and become alive.

I believe that after the resurrection there will be an eternal life for the saints and an eternal death or sinners; and I doubt not that the Father, through His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, with and in the Holy Ghost, will bring all this to pass--that is the meaning of _Amen_, "It is assuredly and certainly true."

Hereupon follows

The Lord'S Prayer

THE LORD'S PRAYER

[Sidenote: The Preface]

The Preface and Preparation for offering the Seven Petitions to God: _Our Father Who art in heaven_.

_This means--_

O Almighty God, Who in Thy boundless mercy hast not only granted us permission, but by Thine only beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, hast bidden and taught us through His merit and mediation to look to Thee as Father and call Thee Father, though Thou mightest in all justice be a stern Judge of us sinners, who have sinned so often and so grievously against Thy divine and gracious will, and thus have angered Thee: Put in our hearts, by this Thy mercy, a comfortable confidence in Thy fatherly love, and make us feel and taste the sweetness of childlike trust, so that we may joyfully name Thee Father, and know Thee and love Thee, and call upon Thee in all our necessities. Have us in Thy keeping, that we may remain Thy children, and not be guilty of making Thee, dear Father, a terrible Judge, and ourselves Thine enemies, and not Thy children.

It is Thy will that we not only call Thee Father, but that all of us together call Thee our Father, and thus offer our prayers with one accord or all: Grant us, therefore, brotherly love and unity, that we may know and think of one another as true brethren and sisters, and pray to Thee, our one common Father, or all men and for every man, even as one child prays or another to its father.

Let no one among us seek his own things or forget before Thee the things of others; but, all hatred, envy and dissension laid aside [Phil. 2:4], may we love one another as good and true children of God, and thus say with one accord not "my Father," but "_our_ Father."

Moreover, since Thou art not a father according to the flesh nor upon earth, but art in heaven, a spiritual Father, Who diest not and art not weak, but unlike an earthly father who cannot help himself, whereby Thou showest us how immeasurably better a Father Thou art, and teachest us to hold as nothing in comparison with Thee all earthly fatherhood, fatherland, friends, goods, flesh and blood: Grant us, therefore, O Father, that we may also be Thy heavenly children; teach us to think only of our souls and of our heavenly inheritance, that our temporal fatherland and earthly lot may not deceive and hold and hinder us, and make us altogether children of this world, so that with real and true cause we may say, "Of our _heavenly_ Father," and may be truly Thy heavenly children.

The First Petition: _Hallowed be thy Name_. The

_This means--_

[Sidenote: The First Petition]

O Almighty God, dear heavenly Father, in this wretched vale of sorrows Thy Holy Name is so much profaned, blasphemed and put to shame, given to much which is not for Thine honor, abused in many things and made a cloak for sin, so that even a shameful life may well be called a shaming and dishonoring of Thy Holy Name:

Grant us, therefore, Thy divine grace, that we may be on our guard against everything which doth not serve to the praise and honor of Thy Holy Name. Help us, that all witchcraft and sorcery may be done away. Help us, that all conjuring of the devil or of creatures by Thy Name may cease. Help us, that all false beliefs and superstitions may be rooted out. Help us, that all heresy and false doctrine which disguise themselves with Thy Name may come to naught. Help us, that no false pretence of truth and piety and holiness may deceive any man. Help us that none may swear or lie or deceive by Thy Name.

Protect us against all false confidence pretending to rest upon Thy Name. Protect us against all spiritual pride and the vainglory of worldly honor or reputation. Help us in all our necessities and weaknesses to call upon Thy Holy Name. Help us in anguish of conscience and in the hour of death not to forget Thy Name. Help us with all our goods and in all our words and works to praise and honor Thee alone, and not thereby to make or seek to make a name for ourselves, but only for Thee, Whose alone are all things. Preserve us from the shameful vice of ingratitude.

Grant that by our good works and life all other men may be stirred up to praise, not us, but Thee in us, and to honor Thy Name [Matt. 5:16]. Help us, that our evil works or weaknesses may give no one occasion to stumble and dishonor Thy Name or to cease from praising Thee. Keep us, that we may not desire any temporal or eternal blessing which is not to the honor and praise of Thy Name, and if we pray for such things, give Thou no ear to our folly. Help us so to live that we may be found true children of God, that Thy Fathername may not be named upon us falsely or in vain.

To this petition belong all the psalms and prayers in which we praise, honor, thank and sing to God, and here belongs the whole Hallelujah.

The Second Petition: _Thy Kingdom come_.

[Sidenote: The Second Petition]

_This means--_

This wretched life is a kingdom of all sin and wickedness, under one lord, the evil spirit, the source and head of all wickedness and sin; but Thy kingdom is a kingdom of every grace and virtue under one Lord, Jesus Christ Thy dear Son, the Head and Source of every grace and virtue. Therefore help us, dear Father, and be gracious unto us. Grant us above all things a true and constant faith in Christ, a fearless hope in Thy mercy despite all the fearfulness of our sinful conscience, and a thorough love to Thee and to all mankind. Keep us from unbelief and despair and revengefulness.

Help us against lewdness and unchastity, and give us a love for virginity and all purity. Help us out of dissension, war and discord, and let the virtue of Thy kingdom come--peace, and unity, and quiet rest. Grant that neither wrath nor any other bitterness may set up its kingdom within us, but that there may rule within us, by Thy grace, sweet simplicity and brotherly fidelity, and all kindliness, charity and gentleness. Help us to have within us no undue sorrow or sadness, but let joy and gladness in Thy grace and mercy come to us. And help us, finally, that all sin may be turned away from us, so that we may be filled with Thy grace, and all virtues and good works, and thus become Thy kingdom, so that all our heart, mind and spirit, with all our powers of body and soul, may obediently serve Thee, keep Thy commandments and do Thy will, be ruled by Thee alone, and may not follow after self or flesh or world or devil.

Grant that this Thy kingdom, now begun in us, may increase, and daily grow in power; that indifference to God's service--that subtle wickedness--may not overcome us and make us all away, but give us rather the power and earnest purpose not only to make a beginning in righteousness, but boldly to go on unto perfection; as saith the prophet, "Lighten mine eyes, lest I sleep the sleep of death or grow idle in the good life I have begun; and lest the enemy again prevail against us." [Ps. 13:3 f.]

Help us that we may remain constant, and that Thy future kingdom may finish and complete this Thy kingdom which is here begun. Help us out of this sinful, perilous life; help us to long for the life to come, and more and more to hate this life. Help us not to fear death, but desire it. Take away from us the love of living here, and all dependence on this present life, that thus Thy kingdom may in us be made perfect and complete.

To this petition belong all the psalms, versicles and prayers in which we pray to God or grace and virtue.

The Third Petition: _Thy Will be done on earth as it is in heaven_.

[Sidenote: The Third Petition]

_This means--_

Our will, compared with Thy will, is never good, but always evil; but Thy will is always best, lovable above all things and most to be desired. Therefore, be merciful to us, dear Father, and let nothing be done according to our will. Grant us and teach us to have real and perfect patience when our will is broken or hindered. Help us, if anyone speaks or is silent, does or omits anything that is contrary to our will, that we become not angry or wrathful, neither curse, nor complain, nor cry out, nor judge, nor condemn, nor accuse. Help us with all humility to give place to those who oppose or hinder our will, and letting our own will go, to praise and bless them and do good to them as those who, against our own will, fulfil Thy divine will, which is altogether good.

Give us grace willingly to bear illness, poverty, shame, suffering and adversity, and to know that these are Thy divine will, or the crucifying of our will. Help us to bear even injustice gladly, and keep us from avenging ourselves. Suffer us not to render evil or evil or to resist force with force, but grant us grace to take pleasure in this will of Thine, which lays these things upon us, and to give Thee praise and thanks. Suffer us not to lay it to the charge of the devil or of wicked men when anything befalls us contrary to our will, but help us to ascribe it only to Thy divine will, which orders all such things for the hindering of our will and the increasing of our blessedness in Thy kingdom.

Help us to die willingly and joyfully, and to welcome death as a manifestation of Thy will, so that impatience and despair may not make us disobedient toward Thee. Help us that all our members--eyes, tongue, heart, hands, feet--be not submissive to their own desires or will, but be taken captive, imprisoned and broken in Thy will. Preserve us from all evil, rebellious, obstinate, stubborn and capricious self-will.

Grant us a true obedience, a submissiveness simple and complete in all things, spiritual and worldly, temporal and eternal. Preserve us from the cruel vice of aspersion, slander, back-biting, malicious judging, condemning and accusing of other men. O keep far from us the great unhappiness and grievous plague of tongues like these; but teach us, when we see or hear in others things blameworthy and to us displeasing, to hold our peace, to cover them over, to make complaint of them to none but Thee, to give them over to Thy will, and thus heartily to forgive our debtors and have sympathy with them.

Teach us to know that no one can do us any harm, except he first do himself a thousandfold greater harm in Thine eyes, so that we may be moved thereby to mercy rather than to anger, to pity rather than revenge. Help us not to rejoice when it goes ill with those who have not done our will or have hurt us or otherwise displeased us by their way of life; help us also not to be disturbed when it goes well with them.

To this petition belong all the psalms, versicles and prayers in which we pray to be delivered from sin and from our enemies.

The Fourth Petition: _Give us this day our daily Bread_.

[Sidenote: The Fourth Petition]

_This means--_

The bread is our Lord Jesus Christ[19], Who feedeth and comforteth the soul. Therefore, O heavenly Father, grant us grace, that Christ's life and words, His works and sufferings be preached, made known and preserved to us and to all the world. Help us that in all our life we may have His words and works before us as a powerful example and mirror of all virtue. Help us in sufferings and adversities to find strength and comfort in and through His cross and passion. Help us in firm faith to overcome our own death by His death, and thus boldly to follow our beloved Leader into the other life.

Give Thy grace to all preachers, that they may preach Thy Word and Christ, to profit and salvation, in all the world. Help all who hear the preaching of Thy Word to learn Christ, and honestly to better their lives thereby. Graciously drive out of the Holy Church all strange preaching and teaching from which men do not learn Christ. Have mercy upon all bishops, priests, clergy and all that are in authority, that they may be enlightened by Thy grace to teach and govern us aright by precept and example. Preserve all that are weak in faith, that they may not stumble at the wicked example of their rulers.

Preserve us from heretical and apostate teachers, that we may remain one, partaking of one daily bread--the daily doctrine and word of Christ. Graciously teach us to regard aright the sufferings of Christ, receive them into our hearts, and form them in our lives, to our salvation. Suffer us not at our last hour to be deprived of the true and holy body of Christ[20]. Help all priests to use and administer the holy sacrament worthily and savingly, to the edification of the whole Church. Help us and all Christians to receive the Holy Sacrament at its proper season, with Thy grace and to our salvation. And _summa summarum_, "Give us our daily bread," that is, may Christ abide in us and we in Him forever, and may we worthily bear His name, the name of Christian.

To this petition belong all prayers or psalms which are prayed for rulers, and especially those or protection against false teachers, those for the Jews, heretics and all that are in error, and also those or all distressed and comfortless sufferers.

The Fifth Petition: _And forgive us our Debts, as we forgive our Debtors._

[Sidenote: The Fifth Petition]

_This means--_

To this petition a condition is attached, viz., that we first forgive our debtors. When that has been done we may say afterward, "Forgive us our debts." That we may do this, we have prayed in the Third Petition, "Thy will be done." It is God's will that we patiently suffer all things, and not render evil for evil, nor seek revenge; but render good for evil, as doth our Father in heaven. Who maketh His sun to rise upon the good and evil, and sendeth rain upon the thankful and unthankful [Matt. 5:45]. Therefore, we pray: O Father, comfort our conscience now and in our last hour, for it is now and will be hereafter in grievous terror because of our sin and Thy judgment. Send Thy peace into our hearts, that we may with joy await Thy judgment. Enter not with us into the sharpness of Thy judgment, for then will no man be found righteous [Ps. 143:2]. Teach us, dear Father, not to rely on our own good works or merits, or to comfort ourselves therewith; but boldly to cast ourselves upon Thy boundless mercy alone. In like manner, suffer us not to despair because of our blameworthy, sinful life, but to deem Thy mercy higher and broader and stronger than all our life.

Help all men who in the hour of death or of temptation feel the anguish of despair, and especially N. or N. Have mercy also upon all poor souls in purgatory, especially N. and N. Forgive them and all of us our sins, comfort them and receive them into grace. Render us Thy good for our evil, as Thou hast commanded us to do to others. Silence the evil spirit, that cruel slanderer, accuser and magnifier of our sins now and at our last hour, and in all anguish of conscience, even as we too refrain from slander, and from magnifying the sins of other men. Judge us not according to the accusation of the devil and of our miserable conscience, and hearken not to the voice of our enemies who accuse us day and night before Thee, even as we too will not give ear to those who accuse and slander other men. Remove from us the heavy burden of sin and conscience, that with light and joyous hearts we may live and die, do and suffer, trusting wholly in Thy mercy.

To this petition belong all the psalms and prayers which invoke God's mercy upon sin.

The Sixth Petition: _And lead us not into Temptation_.

[Sidenote: The Sixth Petition]

_This means--_

We have three temptations or adversaries, the flesh, the world and the devil. Therefore, we pray:

[Sidenote: The Flesh]

Dear Father, grant us grace that we may have control over the lust of the flesh. Help us to resist its desire to eat, to drink, to sleep overmuch, to be idle, to be slothful. Help us by fasting, by moderation in food and dress and sleep and work, by watching and labor, to bring the flesh into subjection and it it for good works. Help us to fasten its evil, unchaste inclinations and all its desires and incitements with Christ upon the cross, and to slay them, so that we may not consent to any of its allurements, nor follow after them. Help us when we see a beautiful person, or image or any other creature, that it may not be a temptation, but an occasion or love of chastity and for praising Thee in Thy creatures. When we hear sweet sounds and feel things that please the senses, help us to seek therein not lust, but Thy praise and honor.

[Sidenote: The World]

Preserve us from the great vice of avarice and the desire or the riches of this world. Keep us, that we may not seek this world's honor and power, nor consent to the desire for them. Preserve us, that the world's deceit, pretences and false promises may not move us to walk in its ways. Preserve us, that the wickedness and the adversities of the world may not lead us to impatience, revenge, wrath or other vices. Help us to renounce the world's lies and deceits, its promises and unfaithfulness and all its good and evil (as we have already promised in baptism to do), to abide firmly in this renunciation and to grow therein from day to day.

[Sidenote: The Devil]

Preserve us from the suggestions of the devil, that we may not consent to pride, become self-satisfied, and despise others for the sake of riches, rank, power, knowledge, beauty or other good gifts of Thine. Preserve us, that we all not into hatred or envy or any cause. Preserve us, that we yield not to despair, that great temptation of our faith, neither now nor at our last hour.

Have in Thy keeping, heavenly Father, all who strive and labor against these great and manifold temptations. Strengthen those who are yet standing; raise up all those who have fallen and are overcome; and to all of us grant Thy grace, that in this miserable and uncertain life, incessantly surrounded by so many enemies, we may fight with constancy, and with a firm and knightly faith, and win the everlasting crown.

The Seventh Petition: _Deliver us from evil._

[Sidenote: The Seventh Petition]

_This means--_

This petition is a prayer against all that is evil in pain and punishment; as the holy Church prays in the litanies: Deliver us, O Father, from Thine eternal wrath and from the pains of hell. Deliver us from Thy strict judgment, in death and at the last day. Deliver us from sudden death. Preserve us from water and fire, from lightning and hail. Preserve us from famine and scarcity. Preserve us from war and bloodshed. Preserve us from Thy great plagues, pestilence, the French sickness, and other grievous diseases. Preserve us from all evils and necessities of body, yet in such wise that in all these things Thy Name may be honored, Thy Kingdom increased and Thy divine Will be done. Amen.

AMEN

[Sidenote: The Amen]

The God help us, without doubting, to obtain all these petitions, and suffer us not to doubt that Thou hast heard us and wilt hear us in them all; that it is "Yea," not "Nay," and not "Perhaps." Therefore we say with joy, "Amen--it is true and certain." Amen.

FOOTNOTES

[1] For this translation see Vol. I, p. 222, note 1.

[2] The law that we have outside of divine revelation. C.f. Rom. 2:15.

[3] The possessor of these letters (_Himmels-und Teuelsbriefe_) was thought to be under the special protection of the spirits.

[4] Magical formulas.

[5] Practices popularly ascribed to the witches.

[6] See below, p. 364, note 1.

[7] Luther believed, with the mediaeval Church, that the lending of money at interest was a sin. See above pp. 159 ff., and _Weimar Ed._, XXV, 293 ff.

[8] i. e., In the confession made to the priest. See Vol. I, p. 285, and Introduction, above, p. 351.

[9] C. Vol. I, pp. 58, 285.

[10] In the manuals for confession with which Luther was familiar sins were divided into the various classes mentioned here. C. Vol. I, pp. 90 ff.; Gecken, _Der Bilderkatechismus des XV Jhs._, and especially v. Zezschwitz, II, 197 ff.

[11] _Serm._, 96, 2; _Migne_, XXVIII, 585.

[12] Cf. Vol. I, p. 187.

[13] See above, p. 355.

[14] Luther has here departed from the customary Roman division of the Creed into twelve articles.

[15] _Gemein._

[16] _Gemeine._

[17] _Christenheit_, cf. Vol. I, p. 338.

[18] _Kirche._

[19] In the catechisms of 1529 Luther abandons this interpretation of the bread.

[20] i. e. The sacrament of the Lord's Supper.

The Eight Wittenberg Sermons

THE EIGHT WITTENBERG SERMONS

1522

INTRODUCTION

After the bold utterance of unshaken conviction at the Diet of Worms Luther disappeared from the scene of his activities. In the darkness of night he was taken by the friendly "foe" to the secure hiding-place where the imperial proscription could not affect him. Thus he entered the Wartburg on May 4, 1521. But the "crowded canvas of the sixteenth century," bereft of its central figure, threatened to become mere portrayal of turbulence and confusion. In Wittenberg and other places the new life of the soul had burst its ancient fetters and was about to lose its spiritual value in a destructive lateral movement. The inability of the hesitating elector and the helpless Melanchthon to stem the tide, caused Luther, in utter disregard of personal safety, to return to his beloved city on March 6, 1522, and on Sunday, March 9th, and the seven days following to preach the _Eight Sermons_ herewith given, guiding the turbulent waves of popular uprising into the channels marked by faith and love.

During his absence others had heeded the clarion call to lead the Church out of its "Babylonian Captivity," and had put into practice the measures which would carry out the principles he had uttered. The mass was abolished[1], monks left the monasteries, some priests took wives, and communion under both kinds was instituted. With these measures Luther was in sympathy, which is evident from his letters to Melanchthon[2] and to Wenceslaus Link, Staupitz's successor as the Augustinian vicar[3], and the treatises _De votis monasticis_ and _De abroganda missa privata_[4]. But these treatises also show that Luther was not fully informed of the disturbances accompanying the new measures. In so critical a time the absence of a great leader was soon manifest. Melanchthon, ardent in the beginning, could not hold back the radical procedure of Carlstadt and Zwilling.

Carlstadt, moderate at first in his conduct, nevertheless had sown the seeds, in his teaching, which resulted in the bountiful harvest of disorder Without Luther's clearness of vision and aptness of speech, he likewise failed to discern the pitfalls which Luther so carefully avoided. "In my opinion, he who partakes only of the bread, sins."[5] "In all things of divine appointment, the divine law must be taught and observed, even if it cause offence."[6] "The Gregorian chant keeps the spirit away from God. . . . Organs belong to theatrical exhibitions and princes' palaces."[7] "That we have images in churches is wrong and contrary to the first commandment. To have carved and painted idols standing on the altar is even more harmful and devilish."[8] For his Scripture proof in other places, too, particularly concerning vows, Carlstadt drew largely from the Old Testament. On Christmas Day, 1521, he preached a sermon in which he opposed going to confession before receiving communion. Attired in his street garb he then proceeded to celebrate an "evangelical" mass by giving communion in both kinds to the people, placing the elements directly into their hands. Many of the communicants had not previously confessed, nor observed the prescribed rule of fasting. From a denial of any distinction between clergy and laity, Carlstadt finally progressed to a condemnation of all scholarship and learning as unnecessary to an understanding of the Divine Word, since it is given directly from above[9].

Without the theological acumen of Carlstadt, and with less restraint, the Augustinian monk Gabriel Zwilling labored in season and out of season for the new order of things. In December the Zwickau prophets, Niclas Storch, Thomas Drechsel, weavers by trade, and Marcus Stubner, a former university student, appeared in Wittenberg claiming direct divine inspiration, and preached the overturn of present conditions. Earlier in the month (December 3d) some students and citizens had caused a disturbance in the parish church and driven off the priests who were saying mass. Soon after a number of citizens crowded into the council chamber and demanded of the three councillors who presided over Wittenberg the abolition of the mass by law, the restitution of the cup, and the release of those in custody for causing the tumult of December 3d. On Christmas Eve both the parish and the castle churches witnessed scenes of wild disorder. On January 11th the monks, led by Zwilling, destroyed all the altars except one in the convent church, and cast out the images. The city council, in the endeavor to restore order, on January 24, 1522, in full accord with a commission of the university, adopted a "Worthy Ordinance for the princely City of Wittenberg,"[10] in which the popular demands were met and a date was fixed on which the images should be removed from the parish church--the only one of the four churches of Wittenberg subject to the council's control. But the excited populace did not await the day. Taking the matter into its own hands it invaded the church, tore images and pictures from the walls and burned them up.

The council and the university turned to Luther. Immediately after his three-day secret visit to Wittenberg in December, on which he had sensed the unrest in Wittenberg and elsewhere, he issued his _Faithful Exhortation for all Christians to shun Riot and Rebellion_[11], in which he emphasizes the principles reiterated in the _Eight Sermons_, the sufficiency of the Word and the duty of dealing gently with the weak. But the time for writing had passed. "Satan had broken into his sheepfold" and had caused such havoc that he could not meet it "by writing."[12] In spite of the elector's instruction to remain--the same whose ineffectual measures had failed to avert the storm--Luther on March 1st bade farewell to the Wartburg. On his way to Wittenberg, in Borna on March 5th, he wrote the famous letter to the elector[13] in which he declared that he desired no protection from the elector. "I come to Wittenberg under much higher protection." He arrived in Wittenberg on Thursday, March 6th, and on the following Sunday, March 6th, the first Sunday in Lent, he again ascended the pulpit in the parish church. In an interesting report of an eye and ear witness--Johann Kessler--we are told that he first gave an explanation of the Gospel for the day on the temptation of Christ (Matt. 4:1 ff.), after which "he dropped the text and took up the present affair."[14] This earlier portion of the sermon has not come down to us. It may be that Luther likewise first preached on the Gospel for the day on the following Sunday, and for that reason it is called "a brief summary" (see Sermon No. 8) in the early printed editions, when, in reality, it is longer than that of Saturday (No. 7).

The sermons, delivered in a _vox suavis et sonora_[15], produced immediate results. In a letter by Schurf, dated March 15th, even before the last of the sermons had been delivered, it is stated that "Gabriel [Zwilling] has confessed that he was wrong." Carlstadt was silenced, the city council made acknowledgment to Luther by substantial gifts and Wittenberg bowed to law and order.

Luther did not publish these sermons himself. He elaborated the principles here uttered in the treatise, published a few weeks later, _The Reception of both Kinds in the Sacrament_[16]. A fragment, covering the thoughts of sermons 1 to 4, and formerly described as a pastoral letter to the Wittenberg congregation, is now held to be a piece of written preparation by Luther for these sermons[17].

The notes of a hearer of these sermons furnished the basis for the printed editions. The Wednesday sermon (No. 4--On the Images) was published separately at Augsburg and other places; the eight sermons were published in Augsburg and Mainz. Seven editions of the former and six of the latter are known.

Johann Aurifaber, the publisher of Luther's Table-talk, also edited and published these sermons at Eisleben in 1564. His free amplification of the older text, in an attempt to modernize it, is not an improvement. His considerable additions to Luther's Scripture citations are from Luther's own translation of a later date. Yet for two centuries this edition remained the standard. The _Walch Edition_ was the first again to pay attention to the original text, however placing the Aurifaber text first. (_Walch Ed._, XX.) The _Erlangen Edition_ (XXYHI) observes the same order. O. von Gerlach, _Luthers Werke_, _Auswahl seiner Hauptschriten_ (Berlin, 1841), gives only the older text (V); Buchwald, in the Berlin Edition (I), gives only the Aurifaber text. The Weimar Edition (Xc) places the old text on the upper half of the page, with the Aurifaber recension immediately below. The translation which follows is based on the older text as found in the _Weimar Edition_, with which the other editions have been compared.

For further discussion, see, in addition to the literature mentioned, the biographies of Luther and the Church Histories. Also

Barge's articles in the _Realencyklopadie_, X, 73 ff. and XXIII, 738 ff.; also Kolde's, IV, 639 ff. and XIII, 556 ff.

Barge, _Fruhprotestantisches Gemeindechristentum in Wittenberg und Orlamiinde_, Leipzig, 1909.

Cristiani, _Du Lutheranisme au Protestantisme_, Paris, 1911.

Boehmer, _Luther im Lichte der neueren Forschung_, third ed., Leipzig, 1914.

Vedder, _The Reformation in Germany_. New York, 1914.

A. Steimle

A. STEIMLE.

Allentown, Pa.

FOOTNOTES

[1] The consequent closing of the churches except for preaching services leads Muller (_Luther und Karlstadt_, p. 52) to see in this the origin of the Protestant custom of closing churches on weekdays.

[2] August 1, 1521. Enders, _Luthers Briewechsel_, III, 208.

[3] December 20, 1521. Enders, III, 257.

[4] Date of both, November, 1521. Both in _Weimar Ed._, VIII, and in _Erl. Ed., O; var. arg._, VI. The latter also in German (_Vom Misbrauch der Messe_), _Erl. Ed._, XXVIII.

[5] 24 Theses (July, 1521). Barge, _Andreas Bodenstein von Karlstadt_, I, 291. Repeated in _De celebratione missae_ (October), _ibid._, 487.

[6] _De scandalo et missa_ (Oct. or Nov.), _ibid._, 491.

[7] _De cantu gregoriano disputatio_ (1520), _ibid._, 492.

[8] _Von Abthuung der Bilder_ (January, 1522), _ibid._, 367.

[9] See Kostlin-Kawesau, _Martin Luther_, I, 485.

[10] Published by H. Lietzmann in _Kleine Texte_, no. 21; also in Richter, _Kirchenordnungen_, II, 484.

[11] _Weimar Ed._, VIII, 670 ff. _Erl. Ed._, XXII, 43 ff.

[12] Luther's letter to the elector on March 7th. De Wette, II, 138; _Weimar Ed._, Xc Introd., xlvii f.

[13] Enders, III, 484.

[14] Kessler, _Sabbata_, _St. Gallen_, 1902. Quoted at length in _Weimar Ed._, Xc, Introduction, lii.

[15] Letter of Albert Burer, _Briewechsel des Beatus Rhenanus_, 303. See also Introd., liii, in _Weimar Ed._, Xc.

[16] _Weimar Ed._, Xb; _Erl. Ed._, XXVIII.

[17] See Kawerau, _Luthers Ruckkehr von der Wartburg_, 67. Fragment in full in _Weimar Ed._, Xc, Introduction, lv ff., where see also a recently discovered short Latin fragment, which served a similar purpose.

Eight Sermons By Dr. Martin Luther

EIGHT SERMONS BY DR. MARTIN LUTHER

Preached at Wittenberg in Lent, 1522

Treating Briefly of the Mass, Images, Both Kinds In The Sacrament, Eating of Meats, Private Confession, etc.

The First Sermon Invocavit Sunday

THE FIRST SERMON

INVOCAVIT SUNDAY

[Sidenote: The Chief Things]

The challenge of death comes to us all, and no one can die for another. Every one must fight his own battle with death by himself, alone. We can shout into one another's ears, but every one must be prepared finally to meet death alone. I will not be with you then, nor you with me. Therefore every one must know for himself the chief things in Christianity, and be armed therewith. They are the same which you, my beloved, have long ago heard from me.

In the first place, We must know that we are the children of wrath, and all our works, intentions and thoughts are nothing at all. To prove this point we must have a clear, strong text, and although there are many such in the Bible I will not overwhelm you with them, but ask you to note just this one, "We are all the children of wrath." [Eph. 2:3] And pray, do not boast in reply: I have builded an altar, given a foundation for masses, etc.

Secondly, That God has sent us His only-begotten Son that we may believe in Him, and whosoever will put his trust in Him, should be free from sin and a child of God, as John declares in the first chapter, "He gave them power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe in his name." [John 1:12] Here we should all be thoroughly at home in the Bible and be ready with many passages to confront the devil. In respect to these two points nothing seems to be lacking or amiss, but they have been rightly preached to you; I should be very sorry if it were otherwise. Nay, I am well aware and I dare say, that you are more learned herein than I, and that there are not only one, two, three, or four, but perhaps ten or more, who have this wisdom and enlightenment.

[Sidenote: Love]

Thirdly, There must also be love, and through love we must do unto one another as God has done unto us through faith. For without love faith is nothing, as St. Paul says, I Cor. ii, "If I could speak with the tongues of angels, and of the highest things in faith, and have not love, I am nothing." [1 Cor. 13:1] And here, dear friends, have you not grievously failed? I see no signs of love among you, and I observe that you have not been grateful to God for His rich gifts and treasures.

Let us beware lest Wittenberg become Capernaum. I notice that you have a great deal to say of the doctrine which is preached to you, of faith and of love. This is not surprising; an ass can almost intone the lessons, and why should you not be able to repeat the doctrines and formulas? Dear friends, the kingdom of God,--and we are that kingdom,--consists not in speech or in words, but in deeds, in works and exercises. God does not want hearers and repeaters of words, but doers and followers who exercise themselves in the faith that worketh by love. For a faith without love is not enough--rather it is not faith at all [1 Cor. 13:12], but a counterfeit of faith, just as a face seen in a mirror is not a real face, but merely the reflection of a face.

[Sidenote: Patience]

Fourthly, We likewise need patience. For whoever has faith, trusts in God and shows love to his neighbor, practicing it day by day, must needs suffer persecution. For the devil never sleeps, and continually molests. But patience works and produces hope, which freely yields itself to God and finds solace in Him [Rom. 5:4]. Thus faith, by much affliction and persecution, ever increases, and is strengthened day by day. And the heart which by God's grace has received such virtues must ever be active and freely expend itself for the benefit and service of the brethren, even as it has received from God.

[Sidenote: Forbearance]

And here, dear friends, one must not insist upon his rights, but must see what may be useful and helpful to his brother, as St. Paul says, _Omnia mihi licent, sed non omnia expediunt_, "All things are lawful for me, but not all things are expedient." [1 Cor. 6:12] We are not all equally strong in faith; some of you have a stronger faith than I. Therefore we must not look upon ourselves, or our strength, or our rank, but upon our neighbor, for God has said through Moses, "I have borne and nourished thee, even as a mother her child." [Deut. 1:31] How does a mother nourish her child? First, she feeds it with milk, then gruel, then eggs and soft food. If she weaned it and at once gave it the ordinary, coarse food, the child would never thrive. So we should also deal with our brother, have patience with him for a time, suffer his weakness and help him bear it; we should give him milk-food [1 Peter 2:2], too, as was done with us, until he likewise grows strong, and thus we do not travel heavenward alone, but bring the brethren, who are not now on our side, with us. If all mothers were to abandon their children, where would we have been? Dear brother, if you have suckled long enough, do not at once cut off the breast, but let thy brother be nourished also. I would not have gone so far as you have done, if I had been here. What you did was good, but you have gone too fast. For there are also brothers and sisters on the other side who belong to us, and must still be won.

Let me illustrate. The sun has two properties, light and heat. No king has power enough to bend or guide the light of the sun; it remains straight in the place where it shines. But the heat may be turned and guided, and yet is ever about the sun. Thus the faith must always remain pure and immovable in the heart, never wavering; but love moves and is guided, according as our neighbors may grasp it or follow us. There are some who can run, others must walk, still others can hardly creep. Therefore we must not look upon our own, but upon our brother's powers, so that he who is weak in faith, and attempts to follow the strong, may not be destroyed of the devil. Therefore, dear brethren, obey me. I have never been a destroyer, and I was also the very first whom God called to this work. Neither can I run away, but must remain as long as it pleases God. I was the first, too, to whom God revealed it, to preach His Word to you; moreover, I am sure that you have the pure Word of God.

[Sidenote: Abolishing the Mass]

Let us, therefore, take up this matter with fear and humility, cast ourselves at one another's feet, join hands with each other, and help one another. I will do my part, which is no more than my duty, for I love you even as I love my own soul. For here we battle not against pope or bishop, but against the devil [Eph. 6:12], and do you imagine he is asleep? He sleeps not, but sees the true light rising, and to keep it from shining into his eyes he would make a flank attack--and he will succeed, if we are not on our guard. I know him well[1], and I hope, too, that with the help of God I am his master. But if we yield him but an inch, we must soon look to it how we may be rid of him. Therefore all those have erred who have consented and helped to abolish the mass--in itself a good undertaking, but not accomplished in an orderly way. You say it was right according to the Scriptures. I agree, but what becomes of order? For it was done in wantonness, with no regard to proper order and with offence to your neighbor. If, beforehand, you had called upon God in earnest prayer, and had obtained the aid of the authorities, one could be certain that it had come from God. I, too, would have taken steps toward the same end if it had been a good thing to do; and if the mass were not so evil a thing, I would introduce it again. For I cannot defend your action, as I have just said. To the papists and the blockheads I could defend it, for I could say: How do you know whether it was done with good or bad intention, since the work in itself was really a good work? But I can find nothing to reply to the devil. For if on their deathbeds the devil reminds those who began this affair of texts like these, "Every plant, which My father hath not planted, shall be rooted up," [Matt. 15:13] or "I have not sent them, yet they ran," [Jer. 23:21] how will they be able to withstand?[2] He will cast them into hell. But I have a weapon to brandish in the devil's face, so that the wide world will become too small for him: I know that in spite of my reluctance I was regularly called by the Council to preach in this place. And I would that you should have the same assurance as I. You could so easily have consulted me about the matter.

[Sidenote: "Must" and "Free"]

I was not so far away that you could not reach me with a letter, especially since I did not interfere with you in any way. Did you want to begin something, and then leave me to shoulder the responsibility? That is more than I can undertake, and I will not do it. Here one can see that you have not the Spirit, in spite of your deep knowledge of the Scriptures. Take note of these two things, "must" and "free." The "must" is that which necessity requires, and which must ever be unyielding; as, for instance, the faith, which I shall never permit any one to take away from me, but which I must always keep in my heart and freely confess before every one. But "free" is that in which I have choice, and may use or not, yet in such wise that it profit my brother and not me. Now do not make a "must" out of what is "free," as you have done, so that you may not be called to account for those who were led astray by your exercise of liberty without love. For if you entice any one to eat meat on Friday, and he is troubled about it on his deathbed, and thinks, Woe is me, for I have eaten meat and I am lost! God will call you to account for that soul. I would like to begin many things, in which but few would follow me; but what is the use? I know that those who have begun this thing, when it comes to the point, cannot maintain themselves, and will be the first to retreat. How would it be, if I brought the people to the point of attack, and though I had been the foremost to exhort others, I would then flee, and not face death with courage? How the poor people would be deceived!

Let us, therefore, feed others also with the milk which we received, until they, too, become strong in the faith. For there are many who are otherwise in accord with us and who would also gladly accept this one thing, but they do not yet fully understand it--all such we drive away. Therefore, let us show love to our neighbors, or our work will not endure. We must have patience with them for a time, and not cast out him who is weak in the faith; much more should we regulate our doing and our not doing according to the demands of love, provided no injury is done to our faith. If we do not earnestly pray to God, and act circumspectly in this matter, the thing looks to me as if all the misery which we have begun to cause the papists will all upon us. Therefore I could no longer remain away, but was compelled to come and say these things to you.

This is enough about the mass; tomorrow we shall treat of the images.

The Second Sermon Monday After Invocavit

THE SECOND SERMON

MONDAY AFTER INVOCAVIT

[Sidenote: Necessity and Choice]

Dear Friends: You heard yesterday the characteristics of a Christian man, how his whole life is faith and love. Faith is directed toward God, love toward man and one's neighbor, and consists in such love and service for him as we have received from God without our work and merit. Thus there are two things: the one, which is the most needful, and which must be done in one way and no other; the other, which is a matter of choice and not of necessity, which may be kept or not, without endangering faith or incurring hell. In both, love must deal with our neighbor in the same manner as God has dealt with us; it must walk the straight road, straying neither to the let nor to the right. In the things which are "musts" and are matters of necessity, such as believing in Christ, love nevertheless never uses force or undue constraint. Thus the mass is an evil thing, and God is displeased with it, because it is performed as a sacrifice and work of merit. Therefore it must be abolished. Here there is no room for question, just as little as if you should ask whether you should pray to God. Here we are entirely agreed: the private mass must be abolished, as I have said in my writings[3]. And I heartily wish it would be abolished everywhere and only the evangelical mass for all the people be retained. Yet Christian love should not employ harshness here nor force the matter. It should be preached and taught with tongue and pen, that to hold mass in such a manner is a sin, but no one should be dragged away from it by force. The matter should be let to God; His word should do the work alone, without our work. Why? Because it is not in my power to fashion the hearts of men as the potter moulds the clay, and to do with them as I please. I can get no farther than to men's ears; their hearts I cannot reach. And since I cannot pour faith into their hearts, I cannot, nor should I, force any one to have faith. That is God's work alone, who causes faith to live in the heart. Therefore we should give free course to the Word, and not add our works to it. We have the _jus verbi_[4], but not the _executio_[5]; we should preach the Word, but the consequences must be let to God's own good pleasure.

[Sidenote: Compulsion and Persuasion]

Now if I should rush in and abolish the mass by force, there are many who would be compelled to consent to it and yet not know their own minds, but say: I do not know if it is right or wrong, I do not know where I stand, I was compelled by force to submit to the majority. And this forcing and commanding results in a mere mockery, an external show, a fool's play, man-made ordinances, sham-saints and hypocrites. For where the heart is not good, I care nothing at all for the work. We must first win the hearts of the people. And that is done when I teach only the Word of God, preach the Gospel and say: "Dear lords or pastors, desist from holding the mass, it is not right, you are sinning when you do it; I cannot refrain from telling you this." But I would not make it an ordinance for them, nor urge a general law; he who would follow me could do so, and he who refused would remain without. In the latter case the Word would sink into the heart and perform its work. Thus he would become convinced and acknowledge his error, and all away from the mass; to-morrow another would do the same, and thus God would accomplish more with His Word than if you and I would forge into one all power and authority. For if you have won the heart, you have won the whole man--and the mass must finally fall of its own weight and come to an end. And if the hearts and minds of all men are united in the purpose--abolish the mass; but if all are not heart and soul for its abolishment--leave it in God's hands, I beseech you, otherwise the result will not be good. Not, indeed, that I would again set up the mass; I let it live in God's name. Faith must not be chained and imprisoned, nor bound by an ordinance to any work. This is the principle by which you must be governed. For I am sure you will not be able to carry out your plans, and if you should carry them out with such general laws, then I will recant all the things that I have written and preached, and I will not support you, and therefore I ask you plainly: What harm can the mass do to you? You have your faith, pure and strong, toward God, and the mass cannot hurt you.

[Sidenote: Paul's Method]

Love, therefore, demands that you have compassion on the weak, as all the apostles had. Once, when Paul came to Athens, a mighty city, he found in the temple many altars, and he went from one to the other and looked at them all [Acts 17:16 ff.], but did not touch any one of them even with his foot. But he stood in the midst of the market-place and said they were all idolatrous works, and begged the people to forsake them; yet he did not destroy one of them by force. When the word took hold of their hearts, they forsook their idols of their own accord, and in consequence idolatry fell of itself. Now, if I had seen that they held mass, I would have preached and admonished them concerning it. Had they heeded my admonition, they would have been won; if not, I would nevertheless not have torn them from it by the hair or employed any force, but simply allowed the Word to act, while I prayed for them. For the Word created heaven and earth and all things; the Word must do this thing, and not we poor sinners.

[Sidenote: Luther's Method]

[Sidenote: Jerome and Augustine]

In conclusion: I will preach it, teach it, write it, but I will constrain no man by force, for faith must come freely without compulsion. Take myself as an example. I have opposed the indulgences and all the papists, but never by force. I simply taught, preached, wrote God's Word; otherwise I did nothing. And then while I slept, or drank Wittenberg beer with my Philip[6] and with Amsdor[7], the Word so greatly weakened the papacy, that never a prince or emperor inflicted such damage upon it. I did nothing; the Word did it all. Had I desired to foment trouble, I could have brought great bloodshed upon Germany, Yea, I could have started such a little game at Worms that even the emperor would not have been safe. But what would it have been? A fool's play. I did nothing; I left it to the Word. What do you suppose is Satan's thought, when an effort is made to do things by violence? He sits back in hell and thinks: How fine a game these fools will make for me! But it brings him distress when we only spread the Word, and let it alone do the work. For it is almighty and takes captive the hearts, and if the hearts are captured the evil work will all of itself. Let me cite an instance. Aforetime there were sects, too, Jewish and Gentile Christians, differing on the law of Moses in respect to circumcision. The former would keep it, the latter not [1 Cor. 7:18 ff.]. Then came Paul and preached that it might be kept or not, it mattered not one way or the other; they should make no "must" of it, but leave it to the choice of the individual; to keep it or not, was immaterial. Later came Jerome, who would have made a "must" out of it, and wanted laws and ordinances to prohibit it. Then came St. Augustine, who held to the opinion of St. Paul: it might be kept or not, as one wished; St. Jerome had missed the meaning of St. Paul by a hundred miles. The two doctors bumped heads rather hard over the proposition. But when St. Augustine died, St. Jerome accomplished his purpose. After that came the popes; they would add something of their own, and they, too, made laws. Thus out of the making of one law grew a thousand laws, until they have completely buried us under laws. And so it will be here; one law will soon make two, two will increase to three, and so forth.

Let this be enough at this time concerning the things that are necessary, and let us beware lest we lead astray those of weak conscience.

The Third Sermon Tuesday After Invocavit

THE THIRD SERMON

TUESDAY AFTER INVOCAVIT

We have heard the things most necessary in Christian life, and what is a necessary result, namely, the doing away with the private mass. For the works which are necessary are those which God has either commanded or forbidden, according to the appointment of the Majesty on high. But no one shall be dragged to them by the hair, or kept from them by force, for I can drive no man to heaven with a club. I said this plainly enough, and I believe you understood what I said.

[Sidenote: Nonessentials]

[Sidenote: Marriage of Monks and Nuns]

We shall now consider the things that are not matters of necessity, but are let to our free choice by God, and which we may keep or not; for instance, whether one shall marry or not, or whether monks and nuns shall leave the cloisters. These things are matters of choice and must not be forbidden by any one, and if they are forbidden, the forbidding is wrong, since it is contrary to God's appointment. In the things that are free, such as being married or remaining single, you should do on this wise: If you can restrain yourself without burdening your conscience thereby, do so by all means, but there must be no general law, and every one shall be perfectly free. Any priest, monk or nun who cannot restrain the desires of the flesh, should marry, and thus relieve the burden of conscience. But see to it that you be well-armed and fortified, so that you can stand before God and the world when you are assailed, and especially when the devil attacks you in the hour of death. It is not enough to say: This man or that has done the same, I followed the example of the crowd, according to the preaching of the provost[8] or Dr. Carlstadt, or Gabriel[9], or Michael[10]. Not so, but every one must stand on his own feet and be prepared to give battle to the devil. You must rest upon a strong and clear text of Scripture if you would stand the test. If you cannot do that, you will never withstand,--the devil will pluck you like a withered leaf. Therefore the priests who have taken wives, and the nuns who have taken husbands, in order to save their consciences must stand squarely upon a clear text of Scripture, such as this one by St. Paul--although there are many more: "In the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils (methinks Paul uses plain language here!) forbidding to marry and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created." This text the devil shall not overthrow nor devour, it shall rather overthrow and devour him. Therefore any monk or nun who is too weak to keep the vow of chastity, should conscientiously examine himself; if heart and conscience are strong, so that he can defend himself with a good conscience, let him marry. Would to God all monks and nuns could hear this sermon and properly understood this matter and would all forsake the cloisters and thus all the cloisters in the world cease to exist--this is my earnest desire. But now they have no understanding of the matter (for no one preaches it to them), and hearing that in other places many are leaving the cloisters, who however are well-prepared or such a step, they would follow their example, but have not yet fortified their consciences and do not know that it is a matter of liberty. This is bad, although it is better that the evil should be outside than inside[11]. Therefore I say, what God has made free shall remain free, and you must not obey if some one forbids it, even as the pope has done, the Antichrist. He who can do so without harm and or love of his neighbor, may wear a cowl or a tonsure, since it will not injure his faith; wearing a cowl will not kill him.

[Sidenote: Monks' Vows]

Thus, dear friends, it is plain enough, and I believe you ought to understand it and not make liberty a law, saying: This priest has taken a wife, therefore all priests must take wives. Not at all. Or this monk or that nun has left the cloister, therefore they must all come out. Not at all. Or this man has broken the images and burnt them, therefore all images must be burned--not at all, dear brother! And again, this priest has no wife, therefore no priest dare marry. Not at all! They who cannot retain their chastity should take wives, and for others who can be chaste, it is good that they restrain themselves, as those who live in the spirit and not in the flesh. Neither should they be troubled about the vows they have made, such as the monks' vows of obedience, chastity and poverty (though they are rich enough withal). For we cannot vow anything that is contrary to God's commands. God has made it a matter of liberty to marry or not to marry, and thou fool undertakest to turn this liberty into a vow against the ordinance of God? Therefore you must leave liberty alone and not make a compulsion out of it; your vow is contrary to God's liberty. Suppose I should vow to strike my father on the mouth, or to steal some one's property, do you believe God would be pleased with such a vow? And as little as I ought to keep a vow to strike my father on the mouth, so little ought I to abstain from marriage because I am bound by a vow of chastity, for in both cases God has ordered it otherwise. God has ordained that I should be free to eat fish or flesh, and there should be no commandment concerning them. Therefore all the Carthusians[12] and all monks and nuns forsake the ordinance and liberty which God has given when they believe that if they eat meat they are defiled.

[Sidenote: The Images]

[Sidenote: Moses and Images]

But we must come to the images, and concerning them also it is true that they are unnecessary, and we are free to have them or not, although it would be much better if we did not have them. I am not partial to them. A great controversy arose on the subject of images between the Roman emperor and the pope; the emperor held that he had the authority to banish the images, but the pope insisted that they should remain, and both were wrong. Much blood was shed, but the pope emerged as victor and the emperor lost[13]. What was it all about? They wished to make a "must" out of that which is free, and that God cannot tolerate. Do you wish to change the ordering of the Majesty on high? Not so; you will not do any such thing. You read in the Law, Exodus xx, "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth." [Ex. 20:4] There you take your stand; that is your ground. Now let us see! When our adversaries shall say: The first commandment aims at this, that we should worship one God alone and not any image, even as it is said immediately following, "Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them nor serve them," and declare that the worship of images is forbidden and not the making of them, they disturb and unsettle our foundation for us. And if you reply: The text says, "Thou shalt not make any images," they answer: It also says, "Thou shalt not worship them." In the face of such uncertainty who would be so bold as to destroy the images? Not I. But let us go farther. They say: Did not Noah, Abraham, Jacob build altars? And who will deny that? We must admit it. Again, did not Moses erect a brazen serpent [Num. 21:9], as we read in his fourth book? How can you say Moses forbids the making of images when he himself makes one? It seems to me, such a serpent is an image, too. How shall we answer that? Again, do we not read that two birds were erected on the mercy-seat, the very place where God willed that He should be worshiped? [Ex. 37:7] Here we must admit, that we may make images and have images but we must not worship them, and when they are worshiped, they should be put away and destroyed, just as King Hezekiah brake in pieces the serpent erected by Moses [2 Kings 18:4]. And who will be so bold as to say, when called to account: They worship the images. They will answer: Art thou the man who dares to accuse us of worshiping the images? Do not believe that they will acknowledge it. To be sure it is true, but we cannot make them admit it. Remember how they acted when I condemned works without faith. They said: Do you believe that we have no faith, or that our works are performed without faith? I can do nothing more than put my lute back in its pocket; give them a hair's breadth, and they take a hundred miles.

[Sidenote: St. Paul and the Twins]

Therefore it should have been preached that images were nothing and that God is not served by their erection, and they would have fallen of themselves. That is what I did; that is what Paul did in Athens, when he went into their churches and saw all their idols[14]. He did not strike at any of them, but stood in the market-place and said, "Ye men of Athens, ye are all idolatrous." [Acts 17;22] He preached against their idols, but he overthrew none by force. And you would rush in, create an uproar, break down the altars and overthrow the images? Do you really believe you can abolish the images on this wise? Nay, you will only set them up more firmly. Even if you overthrew the images in this place, do you think you have overthrown those in Nurnberg and the rest of the world? Not at all, St. Paul, as we read in the Book of Acts, sat in a ship on whose prow were painted or carved the Twin Brothers[15]. He went on board and did not bother about it at all, neither did he break them off. Why must Luke describe the Twins at this place? Without doubt he wanted to show that outward things could do no harm to faith, if only the heart does not cleave to them nor put its trust in them. This is what we must preach and teach, and let the Word alone do the work, as I said before. The Word must first capture the hearts of men and enlighten them,--we cannot do it. Therefore the apostles gloried in their service, _ministerium_, and not in its effect, _executio_.

We will let this be enough or to-day, and pray God for His grace.

The Fourth Sermon Wednesday After Invocavit

THE FOURTH SERMON WEDNESDAY AFTER INVOCAVIT

[Sidenote: The Abuse of Images]

Dear Friends: We have heard the things which are necessary, as for instance, that the mass is regarded as a sacrifice[16]. Then we considered the things which are left to our liberty, such as marriage, the monastic life, the abolishing of images. We have treated these four subjects, and have said that in all these matters love is the captain. On the subject of images, in particular, we saw that they ought to be abolished if they are going to be worshiped, otherwise not, although I wish they were abolished everywhere because they are abused,--it is useless to deny it. For whoever places an image in a church, imagines he has performed a service unto God and a good work, which is downright idolatry. And this, the greatest, foremost and highest reason or abolishing the images, you have neglected, and taken up the very lowest. For I suppose there is scarcely any man who does not understand that yonder crucifix is not my God, for my God is in heaven, but that this is simply a sign. But the world is full of the other abuse, for who would place an image of silver or of wood in a church, if he did not think that in so doing he was doing God a service? Think you that Duke Frederick, the bishop of Halle, and the others would have placed so many silver images in the churches, if they thought it counted nothing before God? Nay, they would not do it. But this is not sufficient reason to abolish, destroy and burn all the images; and why? Because we must admit that there are still people who have not the wrong opinion of them, but to whom they may be useful. Although they are few, yet we cannot and should not condemn anything which is still useful to the devotions of any man. But you should have taught that images are nothing, God cares nothing for them, and that He is not served, nor pleased when we make an image for Him, but that we would do better to give a poor man a gold-piece than to give God a golden image, or God has forbidden the latter, but not the former. If they had heard this teaching, that images count or nothing, they would have ceased of their own accord, and the images would have fallen without any uproar or tumult, even as it was already coming to pass.

[Sidenote: The Devil's Game]

We must, therefore, be on our guard, for the devil is after us, through his apostles, with all his craft and cunning. Now, although it is true, and no one can deny that the images are evil because they are abused, nevertheless we must not on that account reject them, nor condemn anything because it is abused. That would result in utter confusion. God has commanded us not to lift up our eyes unto the sun, etc. [Deut. 4:19], that we may not worship them, for they are created to serve all nations. But there are many people who worship the sun and the stars. Shall we, therefore, essay to pull the sun and stars from the skies? Nay, we will not do it. Again, wine and women bring many a man to misery and make a fool of him. Shall we, therefore, kill all the women and pour out all the wine? Again, gold and silver cause much evil, shall we, therefore, condemn them? Nay, if we would drive away our one worst enemy, who does us the most harm, we would have to kill ourselves, for we have no greater enemy than our own heart, even as Jeremiah says, "The heart of man is crooked," [Jer. 17:9] or, as I take the meaning, "always twisting to one side or the other." And what good would that do us?

He who would blacken the devil must have good charcoal, for he, too, wears fine clothes and goes to the fair. But I can catch him by asking him: Do you not place the images in the churches because you think it a special service of God? and when he says Yes, as he must, you may conclude that what was meant as a service of God he has turned into idolatry by abusing the images; he eagerly sought what God has not commanded and neglected God's positive command, to help the neighbor. But I have not yet caught him; he escapes me by saying: I help the poor, too; cannot I give to my neighbor and at the same time place images in churches? That is not true,--for who would not rather give his neighbor a gold-piece, than God a golden image! Nay, he would not trouble himself about placing images in churches if he believed that God was not served thereby. Therefore I freely admit, images are neither here nor there, neither evil nor good, we may have them or not, as we please. This trouble has been caused by you; the devil would not have accomplished it with me, for I cannot deny that it is possible to find some one to whom images are useful. And if I were asked about it, I would confess that none of these things give offence to me, and if just one man were found upon earth who used the images aright, the devil would soon draw the conclusion against me: Why condemnest thou that which is still useful in worship? This challenge I could not answer; he would have successfully defied me. He would not have got nearly so far if I had been here. He played a bold game, and won, although it does no harm to the Word of God. You wanted to paint the devil black, but forgot the charcoal and used chalk. If you would fight the devil, you must be well versed in the Scriptures, and, besides, use them at the right time.

[Sidenote: Of Meats]

Let us proceed and speak of the eating of meats. It is true that we are free to eat any manner of food, meats, fish, eggs or butter. This no one can deny. God has given us this liberty. That is true; nevertheless we must know how to use our liberty, and treat the weak brother differently from the stubborn. Observe, then, how you must use this liberty.

First of all, If you cannot give up meat without harm to yourself, or if you are sick, you may eat whatever you like, and if any one takes offence, let him be offended. And if the whole world took offence, yet you are not committing a sin, for God can excuse you in view of the liberty He has so graciously bestowed upon you, and of the necessities of your health, which would be endangered by your abstinence.

[Sidenote: Liberty and Law]

Secondly, If you should be pressed to eat fish instead of meat on Friday, and to eat fish and abstain from eggs and butter during Lent, etc., as the pope has done with his fools' laws, then you must in no wise allow yourself to be drawn away from the liberty in which God has placed you, but do just the contrary to spite him, and say: Because you forbid me to eat meat, and presume to turn my liberty into law, I will eat meat in spite of you. And thus you must do in all other things which are matters of liberty. To give you an example: If the pope, or any one else would force me to wear a cowl, just as he prescribes it, I would take of the cowl just to spite him. But since it is left to my own free choice, I wear it or take it off, according to my pleasure.

[Sidenote: Peter and the Gentiles]

Thirdly, There are some who are still weak in faith, who ought to be instructed, and who would gladly believe as we do. But their ignorance prevents them, and if this were faithfully preached to them, as it was to us, they would be one with us. Toward such well-meaning people we must assume an entirely different attitude from that which we assume toward the stubborn. We must bear patiently with them and not use our liberty, since it brings no peril or harm to body or soul, nay, rather is salutary, and we are doing our brothers and sisters a great service besides. But if we use our liberty without need, and deliberately cause offence to our neighbor, we drive away the very one who in time would come to our faith. Thus St. Paul circumcised Timothy because simple-minded Jews had taken offence [Acts 16:3]; he thought, What harm can it do, since they are offended because of their ignorance? But when, in Antioch, they would insist that he ought and must circumcise Titus, Paul withstood them all and to spite them would not have Titus circumcised [Gal. 2:3]. And he held his ground. He did the same when St. Peter by the exercise of his liberty caused a wrong conception in the minds of the unlearned [Gal. 2:11 ff.]. It was on this wise: When Peter was with the Gentiles, he ate pork and sausage with them, but when the Jews came in, he would not touch this food and ate no more with them. Then the Gentiles who had become Christians, thought: Alas! we, too, must be like the Jews, eat no pork and live according to the law of Moses. But when Paul found that it would injure the liberty of the Gospel, he reproved Peter publicly and read him an apostolic lecture, saying: "If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of the Gentiles, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?" [Gal. 2:14] Thus we, too, should order our lives and use our liberty at the proper time, so that Christian liberty may suffer no injury, and no offence be given to our weak brothers and sisters who are still without the knowledge of this liberty.

The Fifth Sermon: A Sermon On The Sacrament Thursday After Invocavit

THE FIFTH SERMON: A SERMON ON THE SACRAMENT THURSDAY AFTER INVOCAVIT

We have heard of the things that are necessary, such as the mass, which is regarded as a sacrifice[17], and of the unnecessary things, such as the leaving of monasteries by monks, the marriage of priests, and the images. We have seen how we must treat these matters, that no compulsion or law must be made of them, and that no one shall be dragged from them by the hair, but that we must let the Word of God alone do the work. Let us now consider how we must observe the blessed sacrament.

[Sidenote: Foolish Law of the Pope]

You have heard how I preached against the foolish law the Pope of the pope and opposed his precept[18], that no woman shall wash the altar-linen on which the body of Christ has lain, even if it be a pure nun, except it first be washed by a pure priest. Likewise, when any one touches the body of Christ with the hand, the priests come running and scrape his fingers, and much more of the same sort. But when a priest is incontinent, the pope winks at it. If the woman bears a child, he lets that pass, too. The altar-linen and the sacrament, however, dare not be touched.

[Sidenote: Handling the Sacrament]

Against such fools' laws we have preached, and set forth that no sin is involved in these foolish prescriptions of the pope, and that a layman does not commit sin if he touch the cup or the body of Christ with his hands. You should give thanks to God that you have come to such clear knowledge, which many great men have lacked. But now you have become just as foolish as the pope, with your notion that you must handle the sacrament; you would prove that you are good Christians by touching the sacrament with your hands. You have dealt with the sacrament, our highest treasure, in such a way that it is a wonder you were not struck down by thunder and lightning. The other things God would have suffered you to do, but to make this a matter of compulsion. He can in no wise tolerate. And if you do not recede from this, neither the emperor nor any one else need drive me from you, I will go without urging; yea, I dare say, none of my enemies, although they have caused me much sorrow, have wounded me as you have wounded me in this matter. If you would show that you are good Christians by handling the sacrament, and boast of it before everybody, then indeed Herod and Pilate are the chief and best Christians. Methinks they handled the body of Christ when they had him nailed to the cross and put to death.

[Sidenote: What does "Take" mean?]

Nay, my dear friends, the kingdom of God consists not in outward things, which can be touched or perceived, but in faith [Luke 17:20]. But you may say: We live and should live in accordance with the Scriptures, and God has instituted the sacrament in such a manner that we should take it with our hands, for He said: "Take and eat, this is my body." [Matt. 26:26] Answer: Though I am convinced beyond a doubt that the disciples of the Lord took it with their hands, and though I admit that you may do the same without committing sin, nevertheless I can neither make it compulsory nor prove that it is the only way. And my reason therefor is this: when the devil, in his seeking after us, argues, Where have you read in the Scriptures that "take" means "seizing with the hands"?--how shall I prove or defend it? Nay, how will I answer him when he cites, from the Scriptures, the very opposite, and proves that "take" does not mean to receive with the hands only, but also to convey to ourselves in other ways? "See, my good fellow," so he says, "how the word 'take' is used by three Evangelists in describing the taking of gall and vinegar by the Lord [Matt. 27:34, Mark 15:23, Luke 23:26]. You must admit that the Lord did not touch or handle it with His hands, for His hands were nailed to the cross." This verse is a strong argument against me. Again, he cites the passage: _Et accepit omnes timor_,--"And fear took hold on all," [Luke 7:16] where again we must admit that fear has no hands. Thus I am driven into a corner and must concede, even against my will, that "take" means not only to receive with the hands, but to convey to myself in any other way in which it can be done. So you see, dear friends, we must be on firm ground, if we are to withstand the devil's attack. Although I must acknowledge that you committed no sin when you touched the sacrament with your hands, nevertheless I must tell you that it was not a good work, because it caused offence everywhere. For the universal custom is, to receive the blessed sacrament directly from the hands of the priest. Why will you not herein also serve those who are weak in the faith and abstain from your liberty? It does not help you if you do it, nor harm you if you do it not.

Therefore no new practices should be introduced, unless the Gospel has first been thoroughly preached and understood, even as it has been with you. On this account, dear friends, let us deal soberly and wisely in the things that pertain to God, or God will not be mocked. You may mock the saints, but with God it is vastly different. Therefore, I pray you, give up this practice.

[Sidenote: Both Kinds in the Sacrament]

Let us now speak of the two kinds. Although I hold that it is necessary that the sacrament should be received in both kinds, according to the institution of the Lord, nevertheless it must not be made compulsory nor a general law. We must occupy ourselves with the Word, practice it and preach it. For the result we should look entirely to the Word, and let every one have his liberty in this matter. Where that is not done, the sacrament becomes an external observance and a hypocrisy, which is just what the devil wants. But when the Word is given free course and is not bound to any observance, it takes hold of one to-day and falls into his heart, to-morrow it touches another, and so on. Thus quietly and soberly it will do its work, and no one will know how it all came about.

I was glad to know when some one wrote me, that some people in this city had begun to receive the sacrament in both kinds. You should have allowed it to remain thus and not have forced it into a law. But now you go at it pell-mell, and headlong force every one to it. Dear friends, you will not succeed in that way. And if you desire to be regarded as better Christians than others, by this that you take the sacrament into your hands and receive it in both kinds, you are really poor Christians indeed! In this way even a sow could be a Christian, for she has a big enough snout to receive the sacrament outwardly. We must deal soberly with such high things. Dear friends, this dare be no mockery, and if you would heed me, give it up. If you will not heed me, no one need drive me away from you--I will leave you unbidden, and I shall regret that I ever preached so much as one sermon in this place. The other things could be passed by, but this cannot be passed by; you have gone so far that men say: "At Wittenberg there are very good Christians, for they take the sacrament with the hands and handle the cup, and then they go to their brandy and drink until they are drunken." Thus are the weak and simple-minded men driven away, who would come to us if as much instruction had been given to them as was given to us.

But if there is any one so stupid that he must touch the sacrament with his hands, let him have it brought home to his house and there let him handle it to his heart's content. But in public let him abstain, since that will not bring him harm and the offence will be avoided which is caused to our brothers, sisters and neighbors, who are now so angry with us that they are ready to kill us. I may say that none of the enemies who have opposed me until now have brought so much grief upon me as you.

This is enough for to-day; we shall continue on the morrow.

The Sixth Sermon Friday After Invocavit

THE SIXTH SERMON FRIDAY AFTER INVOCAVIT

[Sidenote: The Reception of the Sacrament]

In our discussion of the chief things we have come to the reception of the sacrament, which we have not yet finished. To-day we shall see how we must conduct ourselves here, and also who is worthy to receive the sacrament and who belongs there.

It is very necessary here that your hearts and consciences be well instructed, so that you distinguish well between the outward reception and the inner and spiritual reception. This is the bodily and outward reception, when a man receives with his mouth the body of Christ and His blood. Any man can receive the sacrament in this way, for such reception may be without faith and love. But that reception does not make a man a Christian, for if it did, even a mouse would be a Christian, or it can likewise eat the bread and drink out of the cup. It is such a simple thing to do. But the true, inner, spiritual reception is a very different thing, for it consists in the right use of the sacrament and of its fruits.

I would say in the first place that such reception is the true inner one, and is a reception in faith. We Christians have no other outward sign by which we may be distinguished from others than this sacrament and baptism; but a mere outward reception, without faith, amounts to nothing. There must be faith to make one well prepared or the reception and acceptable before God, otherwise it is all sham and a mere external show, which is not Christianity at all. Christianity is a thing of faith, which is never bound to any external work.

[Sidenote: The One Requisite: Faith]

But faith (which we all must have, if we wish to go to the sacrament worthily) is a firm trust, that Christ, the Son of God, stands in our place and has taken all our sins upon Faith His shoulders, that He is the eternal satisfaction for our sin and reconciles us with God the Father. He who has this faith belongs to this sacrament, and neither devil nor hell nor sin can harm him. Do you ask why? Because God is his protector and defender. And when I have this faith, then I am certain God is fighting for me; I can defy devil, death, hell and sin, and all the harm with which they threaten me. This is the great, inestimable treasure given us in Christ, which the words of man fail to describe. Only faith can take hold of the heart, and not every one has such faith. Therefore this sacrament must not be made a law, as the most holy father, the pope, has done with his fools' commandment: All Christians must go to the sacrament at the holy Eastertide, and he who does not go shall not be buried in consecrated ground[19]. Is it not a foolish law which the pope has set up? You ask why? Because we are not all alike; we do not all have equal faith; the faith of one is stronger than that of another. It is therefore impossible that the sacrament can be made a law, and the greatest sins are committed at Easter solely on account of this unchristian command, which would drive everybody to the sacrament. And if all robbery, usury, unchastity and all the other sins were cast upon one great heap, this sin would overtop it--even at the time and place of seeming greatest silliness. And why? Because the pope can look into no one's heart to see whether he has faith or not.

[Sidenote: The Result: Assurance]

But if you believe that God is with you and stakes all His treasures and His blood for you, as if He said: Fall in behind Me without fear or delay, and then let come what may to attempt thy harm, let devil, death, sin and hell and all creation try it, I shall go before thee, for I will be thy captain and thy shield, trust Me and rely upon Me completely--he who believes thus cannot be harmed by devil, hell, sin or death; if God fights for him, what can you do to him?

[Sidenote: Who are Worthy]

He who has such faith is fit for the altar and receives the sacrament as an assurance, or seal, or sign to assure him of God's promises and grace. But such faith we do not all have; would to God one-tenth of the Christians had it! See, such rich, immeasurable treasures, which God in His grace showers upon us, cannot be the possession of every one, but only of those who suffer either bodily or spiritual adversity: the bodily through the persecution of man, and the spiritual by despair of conscience; outwardly or inwardly, when the devil causes your heart to be weak, timid and discouraged, so that you know not how you stand with God, and when he reproaches you with your sins. And in such terrified and trembling hearts alone God desires to dwell, as the prophet Isaiah says [Isa. 66:2]. For he who has not felt the battle within him, is not distressed by his sins nor has a daily quarrel with them, and wishes no protector, defender and shield to stand before him, is not yet ready for this food. This food demands a hungering and longing man, for it delights to enter a hungering soul, one that is in constant battle with its sins and eager to be rid of them. He who is not thus prepared should abstain for a while from this sacrament, for this food is not for a sated and full heart, and if it comes to such, it is harmful. Therefore, if we think upon, and feel within us, such distress of conscience and the fear of a timid heart, we shall come with all humbleness and reverence, and not rush to it pell-mell, with insolence and without fear and humility. We are not always fit for it; to-day I have the grace, and am fit for it, but not to-morrow, yea, it may be that or six months I have no desire nor fitness or it.

Therefore are they the most worthy who are constantly vexed by death and the devil, and they receive it most opportunely, to remind them and strengthen them in the faith that no harm can come unto them, for He is now with them, from Whom no one can take them away; let come death or devil or sin, they cannot do them harm.

This is what Christ did, when He prepared to institute the blessed sacrament. He brought anguish upon His disciples and trembling to their hearts when He said that He would go away from them [Matt. 26:2], and again they were tormented when He said: One of you shall betray me [Matt. 26:21]. Think you not that that cut them to the heart? Truly, they received the word with all fear, and sat there as though they were all traitors to God. And after He had made them all tremble with fear and sorrow, then only did He institute the blessed sacrament as a comfort, and consoled them again. For this bread is a comfort for the sorrowing, a healing for the sick, a life for the dying, a food for all the hungry, and a rich treasure for all the poor and needy[20].

Let this be enough at this time concerning the proper use of this sacrament. I commend you to God.

The Seventh Sermon Saturday Before Reminiscere

THE SEVENTH SERMON SATURDAY BEFORE REMINISCERE

Yesterday we heard of the use of the holy and blessed sacrament and saw who are worthy to receive it, even those in whom is the fear of death, who have timid and despairing consciences and who live in fear of hell. All such come prepared to partake of this food for the strengthening of their weak faith and the comforting of their conscience. This is the true and right use of this sacrament, and whoever does not find himself in this state, let him refrain from coming until God also takes hold of him and draws him through His Word.

[Sidenote: Fruit of the Sacrament: Love]

We shall now speak of the fruit of this sacrament, which is love; that is, that we should treat our neighbor even as God has treated us. Now we have received from God naught but love and favor, for Christ has pledged and given us His righteousness and everything that He has, has poured out upon us all His treasures, which no man can measure and no angel can understand or fathom, for God is a glowing furnace of love, reaching even from the earth to the heavens.

[Sidenote: The Lack of Love]

Love, I say, is a fruit of this sacrament. But I do not yet perceive it among you here in Wittenberg, although there is much preaching of love and you ought to practice it above all other things. This is the principal thing, and alone is seemly in a Christian. But no one shows eagerness for this, and you want to do all sorts of unnecessary things, which are of no account. If you do not want to show yourselves Christians by your love, then leave the other things undone, too, for St. Paul says in I Corinthians, "If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not love, I am as sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal." [1 Cor. 13:1] This is a terrible saying of Paul. And further: "And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries of God, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not love, I am nothing. And if I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and if I give my body to be burned, but have not love, it profiteth me nothing." [1 Cor. 13:2, 3] You have not got so far as that, although you have received great and rich gifts from God, especially a knowledge of the Scriptures. It is true, you have the pure Gospel and the true Word of God, but no one as yet has given his goods to the poor, no one has yet been burned, and even these things would profit nothing without love. You would take all of God's goods in the sacrament, and yet not pour them forth again in love. One will not lend the other a helping hand, no one thinks first of another, but every one looks out or himself and his own gain, seeks but his own and lets everything else go as it will,--if anybody is helped, well and good. No one looks after the poor or seeks how to help them. It is pitiful. You have heard many sermons about it and all my books are full of it and have the one purpose, to urge you to faith and love.

And if you will not love one another, God will send a great plague upon you; let this be a warning to you, for God will not reveal His Word and have it preached in vain. You are tempting God too far, my friends. If some one in times past had preached the Word to our forefathers, they would perchance have acted differently. Or if the Word were preached to-day to many poor children in the cloisters, they would receive it with much greater joy than you. You do not heed it at all, and give yourselves to other things, which are unnecessary and foolish.

I commend you to God.

The Eighth Sermon

THE EIGHTH SERMON

A SHORT SUMMARY[21] OF THE SERMON OF DR. M. LUTHER DELIVERED ON

Reminiscere Sunday On Private Confession

REMINISCERE SUNDAY ON PRIVATE CONFESSION

[Sidenote: Confession before the Congregation]

Now we have heard all the things which ought to be considered here, except confession. Of this we shall speak now. In the first place, There is a confession which is founded on the Scriptures; namely, when some one commits a sin publicly, or with other men's knowledge, and is accused before the congregation. If he abandons his sin, they intercede for him with God. But if he will not hear the congregation, he is excluded from the church and cast out, so that no one will have anything to do with him. And this confession is commanded by God in Matthew xviii, "If thy brother trespass against thee (so that thou and others are offended), go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone." [Matt. 18:15] Of this confession there is no longer even a trace to be found, and in this particular the Gospel is put aside in this place. He who could reestablish it would perform a good work. Here is where you ought to have taken pains and reestablished this kind of confession, and let the other things go. For by this no one would have been offended, and it would have been accomplished without disturbance. It should be done in this way: When you see a usurer, adulterer, thief or drunkard, you should go to him in secret and admonish him to give up his sin. If he will not hear, you should take two others with you and admonish him once more, in a brotherly way, to give up his sin. But if he scorns that, you should tell the pastor before the whole congregation, have your witnesses with you, and accuse him before the pastor in the presence of the people, saying: "Dear pastor, this man has done this and that, and would not receive our brotherly admonition to give up his sin. Therefore I accuse him, together with my witnesses who were present." And then, if he will not give up and willingly acknowledge his guilt, the pastor should exclude him and put him under the ban before the whole assembly, for the sake of the congregation, until he comes to himself and is received back again. This would be Christian. But I cannot undertake to carry it out single-handed.

[Sidneote: Confession to God]

Secondly, A confession is necessary for us, when we go away in a corner by ourselves, and confess to God Himself and pour out before Him all our faults. And this confession is also commanded. From this comes the familiar word of Scripture: "_Facite judicium et justitiam_." [Gen. 18:19] _Judicium acere est nos ipsos accusare et damnare; justitiam autem acere est idere misericordiae Dei_[22]. As it is written, "Blessed are they that keep judgment and do righteousness at all times." [Ps. 106:3] The judgment is nothing else than a man's knowing and judging and condemning himself, and this is true humility and self-abasement. The righteousness is nothing else than a man's knowing himself and praying to God or the mercy and help through which God raises him up again. This is what David means when he says: "I have sinned; I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord," [Ps. 32:5 f.] and, "Thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin; for this all Thy saints shall pray unto Thee."

[Sidenote: Confession to a Brother]

Thirdly, There is also a confession when one takes another aside, and tells him what troubles him, so that he may hear from him a word of comfort; and this confession is commanded by the pope. It is this urging and forcing which I condemned when I wrote concerning confession[23], and I refuse to go to confession just because the pope wishes it and has commanded it. For I wish him to keep his hands of the confession and not make of it a compulsion or command, which he has not the power to do. Yet I will let no man take private confession away from me, and I would not give it up for all the treasures in the world, since I know what comfort and strength it has given me. No one knows what it can do or him except one who has struggled much with the devil. Yea, the devil would have slain me long ago, if the confession had not sustained me. For there are many doubts which a man cannot resolve by himself, and so he takes a brother aside and tells him his trouble. What harm is there, if he humbles himself a little before his neighbor, puts himself to shame, looks or a word of comfort from him, and takes it to himself and believes it, as if he heard it from God himself, as we read in Matthew xviii: "If two of you shall agree as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them." [Matt. 18:19]

[Sidenote: Many Absolutions]

And we must have many absolutions, so that we may strengthen our timid consciences and despairing hearts against the devil and against God. Therefore no man shall forbid the confession nor keep or drive any one away from it. And if any one wrestles with his sins, is eager to be rid of them and looks or some assurance from the Scriptures, let him go and confess to another in secret, and receive what is said to him there as if it came directly from God's own lips. Whoever has the strong and firm faith that his sins are forgiven, may ignore this confession and confess to God alone. But how many have such a strong faith? Therefore, as I have said, I will not let this private confession be taken from me. Yet I would force no one to it, but leave the matter to every one's free will.

[Sidenote: Five Comforts for the Conscience]

For our God is not so miserly that He has left us with only one comfort or strengthening for our conscience, or one absolution, but we have many absolutions in the Gospel, and are showered richly with them. For instance, we have this in the Gospel: "If ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you." [Matt. 6:14] Another comfort we have in the Lord's Prayer: "Forgive us our trespasses," [Matt. 6:12] etc. A third is our baptism, when I reason thus: See, my Lord, I am baptized in Thy name so that I may be assured of Thy grace and mercy. After that we have the private confession, when I go and receive a sure absolution as if God Himself spake it, so that I may be assured that my sins are forgiven. Finally I take to myself the blessed sacrament, when I eat His body and drink His blood as a sign that I am rid of my sins and God has freed me from all my frailties; and in order to make me sure of this, He gives me His body to eat and His blood to drink, so that I shall not and cannot despair: I cannot doubt I have a gracious God. Thus we see that confession must not be despised, but that it is a true comfort. And since we need many absolutions and comforts, because we must fight against the devil, death, hell and sin, we must not allow any of our weapons to be taken away, but keep intact the whole armor and equipment which God has given us or use against our enemies. For you do not yet know what work it is to fight with the devil and to overcome him. I know it well; I have eaten salt with him once or twice[24]. I know him well, and he knows me well, too. I only you knew him, you would not in this manner drive out confession.

I commend you to God. Amen.

FOOTNOTES

[1] Cp. his experiences at the Wartburg. See Kostlin-Kawerau, I, 439 ff.

[2] Carlstadt, without authority, preached, administered the sacrament and brought about the upheaval in the _parish_ church--Luther's own. He was archdeacon and preacher at the _castle_ church. See Muller, _Luther und Karlstadt_, 69 and passim.

[3] In the _Open Letter to the Christian Nobility_ and the _Babylonian Captivity_. See pp. 125 f., 136 f., and 215 f. of this volume.

[4] Right to speak.

[5] Power to do.

[6] Melanchthon.

[7] See above, p. 61.

[8] Justus Jonas, provost at the castle church.

[9] Gabriel Zwilling, an Augustinian, who, next to Carlstadt, was the leader in forcing the reforms which Luther is here discussing. See Introduction, p. 388.

[10] Was Luther led by the name of Gabriel to add a last touch by the mention of the other archangel, in the thought of St. Paul, that even an angel from heaven cannot change the Gospel, Gal. 1:8. See note in _Weimar Ed._, Xc, 438. See also a similar outburst in a letter to Johann Lang in 1516, six years previous, where Gabriel Biel's name furnished the incitement. Enders, I, 54; Smith, I, 42.

[11] Namely, of the monasteries.

[12] A monastic order, founded 1084, noted or the strictness of its rule.

[13] The Iconoclastic controversy in the Eastern church, which called forth the Seventh Ecumenical Council at Nice in 787, whose decrees were favorable to images in the churches. The controversy, which raged for over a century, was finally settled in 843. Since the promulgation of this decree the First Sunday in Lent has been celebrated annually as the "Feast of Orthodoxy." See _Realencyk._, III, 222 ff.

[14] See above, p. 309.

[15] i. e., Castor and Pollux.

[16] Luther's great objection to the mass was its turning of the Sacrament into a sacrifice. This view of the mass was for him an utter perversion of the gospel, and, therefore, comes under the category of essentials. See Vol. I, pp. 309 ff., and above, pp. 211 ff.

[17] See above, p. 407, note 1.

[18] Cf. above, p. 282.

[19] In the canon law, C. 12, X, _de poenitentiis_.

[20] On the last four paragraphs, cf. above, pp. 15 f.

[21] On this title, see Introduction, p. 389.

[22] "Let there be judgment and righteousness." To keep judgment is to accuse and condemn ourselves; but to do righteousness is to trust in the mercy of God.

[23] The treatise _Von der Beichte, ob die der Papst Macht habe zu gebieten_, written during the sojourn on the Wartburg. See _Weimar Ed._, VIII, 129; _Erl. Ed._, XXVII, 318.

[24] See above, p. 394.

THAT DOCTRINES OF MEN ARE TO BE REJECTED

TOGETHER WITH A REPLY TO TEXTS QUOTED IN DEFENCE OF THE DOCTRINES OF MEN (VON MENSCHENLEHREN ZU MEIDEN)

1522

INTRODUCTION

"Silver and gold have I none: but such as I have give I thee." Somewhat in the spirit of these words Luther had planned to dedicate a small book to his host of the Wartburg, Hans von Berlepsch. For a time Luther had thought that von Berlepsch himself was bearing the expense of his entertainment in that retreat, and that he was being more royally treated than he deserved. Not only the material comforts with which he was surrounded appealed to him, however. Von Berlepsch was interested in Luther and in Luther's work. He talked with him seriously on religious questions, and expressed a desire to have more information, particularly concerning the authority of the teachings of the Roman Church which had no direct warrant in Scripture.

To this desire of von Berlepsch we can trace the origin of our treatise, That the Doctrines of Men are to be Rejected. There is no dedication to von Berlepsch, however, and no reference to the months of companionship on the Wartburg. Luther returned from the Wartburg early in March, 1522, and on the 28th of March sent the first part of the treatise to Spalatin, with the request that it be forwarded to von Berlepsch. The second part, the Reply to Texts Quoted in Defence of the Doctrines of Men, was added in a second edition.

This was not the only writing forwarded to von Berlepsch in memory of the pleasant days spent on the Wartburg. Perhaps of even greater interest was the gift sent on September 25, 1522--one of the first complete copies of the German New Testament.

Buchwald has called our treatise "a model of sound explanation of the Scriptures for the purpose of refuting error." We must caution the reader, however, not to think of Luther's occasional statements concerning the authority of Scripture as final. Luther is still largely upon medieval ground, accepting the premise of the Roman Church, and refuting the practice of the popes, priests and monks from the fundamental assumption of the authority of the Scriptures. The succeeding years, the controversies with the leaders of the peasants and with the heavenly prophets, led him to clearer views. Where in this treatise he wrote, "The same things which are found in the Books of Moses are found in the others. For the other books do no more than show how in the course of history the word of Moses was kept or not kept," he was thinking of the one Gospel which he found everywhere in the Scriptures. But he distinguished carefully between the permanent and the temporary in the Books of Moses and elsewhere, and speaks of "that which God has decreed" in the Old Testament as having "come to an end, and no longer binding the consciences of men" (p. 442). That which is permanent is the Gospel, "for it is beyond question that all the Scriptures point to Christ alone" (p. 432). Probably the clearest statement of his views is found in a sermon preached in 1527: "The Word was given in many ways from the beginning. We must not only ask whether it is God's Word, whether God spoke it, but much more, to whom He spoke it, whether it applies to you or to another." "The false prophets rush in and say, 'Dear people, this is God's Word.' It is true, and we cannot deny it; but we are not the people to whom He speaks" (_Erl. Ed._, 33, 16.)

In reading the treatise, therefore, it will be well to consider when it was written and for whom; and not to think of it as a final statement of Luther's views on the authority of the Scriptures.

The treatise is found in the original German in Weimar Ed., X2; in Erlangen, 28, 318-343; in Berlin, 2, 289-314.

W. A. LAMBERT.

South Bethlehem, PA.

THAT WE ARE TO REJECT THE DOCTRINES OF MEN:

TOGETHER WITH A REPLY TO THE TEXTS QUOTED IN DEFENCE OF THE DOCTRINES OF MEN

To all who read or hear this little book may God grant grace and understanding. Amen.

I, Martin Luther, have published this brief book for the comfort and saving of the poor consciences which are by the law of men held in bondage in monasteries and convents; that they may be able to arm and strengthen themselves with the Word of God, so as to be steadfast in the pains of death and other trials. But those who are overbold and unruly, who give no other evidence of being Christians except that they can eat eggs, meat and milk, stay away from confession and break the images, etc.,--these I warn that I do not wish my words to help them. For I regard them as the filthy people who defiled the camp of Israel [Deut. 23:12 f.], although such cleanliness was enjoined upon the people that a man was required to go outside the camp to ease himself and to cover up with earth that which came from him. We also must endure these unclean lapwings in our nest [Deut. 14:18, Lev. 11:19], until God teach them manners. This Christian liberty I would have preached only to poor, humble, captive consciences, so that poor children, nuns and monks, who would like to escape from their bondage may inform their consciences how they may do so with God's approval and without danger, and use their freedom in an orderly and Christian way. May God grant His blessing. Amen.

_That the doctrines of men are to be rejected: proof from the Scriptures_.

I

Moses in Deuteronomy iv, 2 says, "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish aught from it," [Deut. 4:2]

But some one will say that Moses speaks only of his word; but to the books of Moses there have also been added many books of the prophets and the entire New Testament. I answer: True; but nothing new has been added: the same things that are found in the books of Moses are found in the others. For the other books do no more than show how in the course of history the word of Moses was kept or not kept. It is indeed stated in different words and the histories are different, but thoughout there is one and the same teaching. And here we can challenge them to point out anywhere in all the books added to the books of Moses a single word that is not found earlier in the books of Moses. For it is beyond question that all the Scriptures point to Christ alone. Now Christ says, in John V, 46, "Moses wrote of me." [John 5:46] Therefore everything that is in the other books is also in the books of Moses, and these are the original documents.

II

Isaiah xxix, 13, which the Lord quotes in Matthew xv, 8: "This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, but their heart is far from me. But in vain do they worship me, teaching the doctrines and commandments of men." [Isa. 29:13, Matt. 15:8]

Mark the word of Christ, Who calls it vain worship to serve God after the doctrines of men. For Christ is not drunken or a fool; on His word we must build in all things rather than on all angels and creatures [Gal. 1:8].

III

The same Christ in the same chapter, Matthew xv, 11, says, "Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man." [Matt. 15:11]

This saying must be well understood, for it is powerful and mightily overthrows all teaching, custom and manner of life that distinguishes between foods, and it sets all consciences free from all laws concerning food and drink; so that it is allowable to eat milk, butter, eggs, cheese and meat every day, whether it be Sunday or Friday, Lent or Advent; and no one needs to pay butter-money or buy butter-letters. For this word stands firm and does not deceive: "That which goeth into the mouth doth not defile a man."

[Sidenote: Fast-days]

From this it follows, first, that it is a lie when they say that St. Peter instituted the fast-days and that the commandment of the Church has made it a mortal sin to eat eggs, butter, milk and meat on fast-days. For neither St. Peter nor the Church institutes or teaches anything contrary to Christ. And if they did, we must not obey them. To do what they ask would indeed not be wicked; but it is wicked to make a necessity and a commandment of that which is free, and to pretend that something does defile and is sin of which Christ Himself says that it is no sin and does not defile.

[Sidenote: Dispensation]

It follows, secondly, that it is sheer devil's knavery for the pope to sell letters and grant permission to eat butter, meat, etc.; for Christ in this word has already made it a matter of liberty and has permitted it.

[Sidenote: Special Fast-days]

In the third place, it is an error and a lie to say that goldfasts[1], banfasts[2], and the fasts on the eve of Apostles' days and saints' days must be observed and that their non-observance is sin, because the Church has so commanded. For against everything of the kind stands this word of Christ: "That which goeth into the mouth doth not defile the man." Fasting should be free and voluntary, both as to the day and as to the food, forever.

[Sidenote: The Orders]

Fourthly, the orders of St. Benedict, and of St. Bernard, the Carthusians, and all others which avoid the use of meat and other food because they hold that this is necessary and commanded and that not to do so would be sin, contradict Christ. For their law flatly contradicts the word of Christ and says: That which goeth into the mouth defileth. Then they must make Christ a liar when He says: "That which goeth into the mouth defileth not the man." Thus you see that this one saying of Christ mightily condemns all orders and spiritual rules. For if that which goeth into the mouth does not defile, how much less will that defile which is put on the body? whether it be cowl, coat, shirt, hose, shoes, cloak, whether green, yellow, blue, red, white, motley, or whatever one wish. And the same is true of places, whether churches, cells or the rooms of a house.

It follows that he who regards it a sin for a monk to go without the dress of his order, and would not leave it a matter of freedom, also makes Christ a liar and makes that a sin which Christ freed from sin, and says Yes! where Christ says No! What then are such monks but people who say to Christ's very ace. Thou liest! there is sin in that which thou sayest is not sin. It will not help them to quote St. Bernard, St. Gregory, St. Francis and other saints. We must hear what Christ says, Who alone has been made our Teacher by the Father, when on Mount Tabor He said, Matthew xvii, 5, "This is my beloved Son, in Whom I am well pleased; hear ye Him." [Matt. 17:5] He did not say. Hear ye St. Bernard, St. Gregory, etc., but, Hear ye Him, Him, Him, my beloved Son. Who knows how far the saints sinned or did right in this matter? What they did, they did not of necessity nor by commandment. Or if they did it as of necessity and by commandment, they erred, and we must not forsake Christ to follow them.

All this is confirmed by Christ in the words which follow in Matthew xv, 11, "That which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man. For out of the mouth, coming forth from the heart, come evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies, etc. These defile a man." [Matt. 15:11] Here we ask, If that alone is sin and defiles a man, which proceeds from the heart, as Christ here so strongly argues and decides, how then can butter, milk, eggs, cheese defile, which proceed not from the mouth nor from the heart, but come from the belies of cows and of hens? Who has ever seen meat, tonsures, cowls, monasteries, hair-shirts coming out of men's mouths? Then it must be the cows that sin in giving us milk and butter, and in bearing calves.

Therefore, all the laws of monks and of men concerning food, clothing and places and all things that are external, are not only blasphemy of God and lying and deceiving, but the buffoonery of apes. It is true, a man may have an inordinate desire to eat excessively and to dress extravagantly; but that proceeds from the heart, and may refer to fish as well as to meat, to gray homespun as well as to red velvet. In short, Christ does not lie when He says, "That which goeth into the mouth defileth not a man, but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man."

But if it is true that neglect to do what men command neither defiles nor is sin, then on the other hand, the keeping and doing of men's commandments cannot make us clean nor give us merit; since only the opposite of sin and of the unclean is clean and gives merit. Therefore, all of the monastic life neither makes clean nor gives merit. And that is what the Lord Christ means when He says, Matthew XV, 9, "In vain do they worship me with the commandments of men." [Matt. 15:9] Why 'in vain'? Because neglecting them is no sin and keeping them is no merit, but both are free. They deceive themselves, therefore, and make a merit of that which is no merit, and are afraid of sinning where there is no sin, as Psalm xiv, 5, says, "There have they trembled for fear, where there was no fear." [Ps. 14:5]

IV

St. Paul in I Timothy iv, 1-7 says: "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that 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 consciences seared with a hot iron; forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be reused, if it be received with thanksgiving: for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer. If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shat be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained. But refuse profane and old wives' fables." [1 Tim. 4:1-7]

O how this thunders and storms against all the works, doctrines and orders of men. First, if they boast that they have derived their practice from the pope and from holy fathers, what will Christ's judgment be? Will He not say, "Paul, My Apostle, is My chosen vessel, as Luke writes. Acts ix, 15: why then have you not ascribed greater authority to his word than to that of the pope and the fathers, of whom you do not know whose vessels they are?" [Acts 9:15] How will they stand before Him?

Next, we ask them whether butter, eggs, meat, milk and all the food which they avoid on fast-days and in the orders, have not been created by God, and are not God's good creatures? Then it is certain that they are the men of whom Paul here says that they forbid the food which God has created and has given to believers to use. And they also forbid marriage, so that they cannot escape: this passage its them and is spoken of them. Let us see what Paul thinks of them and how he reproves them.

[Sidenote: Departed from the Faith]

I. They have departed from the faith; for they could not have introduced such doctrines and works if they had not thought the doctrines and works would make them pious and save them. But such an opinion is of itself a sure sign that they have fallen away from the faith, since it is the work of faith alone to do that which they expect works to do, as has frequently been said.

[Sidenote: Give Heed to Seducing Spirits]

II. They give heed to seducing spirits. He does not say, "to seducing men," but "to seducing spirits"; and these are they who pretend to be spiritual and bear the name spiritual, and claim to be of the Spirit and in the Spirit. But since they are without faith it is impossible for them not to err in spiritual matters. Hence this is a fitting succession: they depart from the faith and follow after error in the spirit.

[Sidenote: Doctrines of Devils]

III. Their doctrines he calls "doctrines of devils." This also must follow where faith and the true Spirit are wanting: the devil gives them the seducing spirit and leads them on with beautifully varnished doctrines and works, so that they think they are altogether spiritual. But since the doctrine does not originate in the Scriptures, it can be the doctrine of no one but the devil.

[Sidenote: Speakers of Lies]

IV. They are speakers of lies. For they at times quote even the Scriptures and the sayings of the fathers and wrest them to support their doctrines, as we see them do daily. But this is all false and a lie, since the Scriptures are altogether against them.

[Sidenote: Hypocrisy]

V. It is sheer hypocrisy. This is true and needs no comment. For all that they do is only appearance and show, concerned with external matters of food and clothes.

[Sidenote: Seared Conscience]

VI. They have their conscience seared with a hot iron; that is, they have an unnatural conscience. For where there is no sin nor matter of conscience, they make sin and a matter of conscience, as was said above. Just as a scar caused by searing is an unnatural mark on the body.

[Sidenote: Forbid to Marry]

VII. They forbid to marry, by creating an estate in which there shall be no marriage, as we see in the case of both priests and monks. Wherefore, behold the judgment of God upon such doctrines and estates: that they are doctrines of devils, seducing doctrines, false doctrines, faithless doctrines, hypocritical doctrines. God help us! Who would remain in them when God Himself passes such judgment? What would it help you, if you had made a thousand vows and oaths on such doctrines? Nay, the stricter the vow, the more reason to break it, because it was made after the devil's doctrines and against God.

[Sidenote: The Tatianists]

But see how cleverly they worm themselves out and ward off this text from themselves, saying that it does not apply to them, but to the Tatianists[3], the heretics who condemned marriage altogether. Paul, however, does not speak here of those who condemn marriage, but of those who forbid it for the sake of appearing spiritual. Let us grant, however, that Paul speaks against the Tatianists. Then, if the pope does what the Tatianists did, why does it not apply to him as well? Be they Tatianists or the pope, this text speaks of those who forbid marriage. The words of Paul condemn the work, and make no distinction about the person who does it. He who forbids marriage is the devil's disciple and apostle, as the words clearly say. And since the pope does this, he must be the devil's disciple, as must all his followers; otherwise, St. Paul must be a liar.

[Sidenote: Forbid Food]

VIII. They forbid the food which God has created. Here, again, you see that the doctrines of man are ascribed to the devil by God Himself through the mouth of Paul. What greater and more terrible thing would you wish to hear concerning the doctrines of men, than that they are a falling away from the faith, seducing, false, devilish, hypocritical? What will satisfy those whom this text does not satisfy? But if the doctrine that forbids certain kinds of food is devilish and unchristian, that which concerns clothes, tonsures, places and everything external will be just as devilish and unchristian.

[Sidenote: The Manicheans]

But here again they worm themselves out, and say that St. Paul is speaking of the Manicheans[4]. We are not asking about that. St. Paul speaks of the forbidding of meats, and, be they Manicheans or Tatianists, the pope and his followers forbid meats. Paul speaks of the work which we see that the pope does. Therefore we cannot save him from this text. If some other man arose today or tomorrow and forbade meats, would it not apply to him, even if he were no Manichean? If that way of interpreting Scripture were true, we might boldly do what Paul here forbids, and say. It does not apply to us, but to the ancient Manicheans. But that is not the way. Whether the pope with his monks and priests be not a Manichean, I do not discuss; but I do say, that in his teaching and works he contradicts the teaching of St. Paul more than any Manichean.

[Sidenote: Unthankful]

IX. They are unthankful. For God has created meats, says St. Paul, to be received with thanksgiving. And they refuse to receive them, that they may have no occasion to be thankful for God's goodness. The reason for which is, that they have no faith and do not know the truth. For Paul says, I Tim. iv, 3, "To them which believe and to them which know the truth, they are given to be used with thanksgiving." [1 Tim. 4:3] But if they are unbelieving and do not know the truth, as St. Paul here says they are, they are beyond question heathen, non-Christians, blind and foolish. And this, I suppose, they regard as praise of the pope, priests and monks!

[Sidenote: Harmful Preachers]

X. Paul rebukes them as wicked, harmful preachers; for he says that Timothy shall be a good preacher, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, if he will put the brethren in remembrance of these things. It follows that they who teach the contrary must be wicked preachers and be nourished with words of unbelief and of wicked doctrines.

[Sidenote: Old Wives' Fables]

XI. He calls such doctrines profane and old wives' fables. Is not that foolish talk? He says that the great doctors busy themselves with fables such as old wives chatter about behind the stove, and calls them profane, unchristian and unholy idle talk, although the doctors claim that they are the very essence of holiness!

Who has ever heard the doctrines of men so terribly decried in every way? that they are apostate, unbelieving, unchristian, heathen, seducing, devilish, false, hypocritical, searing the conscience, unthankful, that they dishonor God and His creature and are harmful ables and old wives' chatter. Let him who can, flee from beneath this judgment of God.

V

St. Paul in Colossians ii, 16 and the following verses says: "Let no man burden you in meat or in drink or in respect of certain days which are holy days, or days of the new moon or sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is in Christ. Let no one seduce you who follows his own will in the humility and religion of angels, of whom he has never seen even one, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, and does not hold fast the Head, from which all the body, by joints and bands, is supplied with nourishment and is knit together, and so groweth unto a stature given of God. If then you be dead with Christ from the elements of this world, why do you burden yourselves with ordinances as if you were alive? Ordinances which say. This thou shalt not touch, this thou shalt not eat or drink, this thou shalt not put on (which all perish in the using), according to the commandments and doctrines of men, who have a show of wisdom because of their self-chosen spirituality and humility, and because they do not spare the body and do not supply its needs." [Col. 2:16 ff.] Is St. Paul here also speaking of the Manicheans or Tatianists? Or can we find excuse here for the papists? He speaks against those who take captive the consciences of men with the doctrines of men and make matters of conscience of food, drink, clothes, days and everything that is external. And it cannot be denied that the pope, the chapters and monasteries with their rules and statutes do this when they forbid the eating of meat, eggs and butter, and the wearing of ordinary clothes such as other people wear. And here stands St. Paul, and says:

[Sidenote: Burden the Conscience]

I. "Let no man burden your consciences, or judge or condemn you in respect of food, drink, clothes or days." What does this mean if not this: Be not priests nor monks, nor in any way keep the pope's laws; and believe him not when he says that a certain thing is sin or a matter of conscience. See, here God through Paul commands us to despise the laws of the pope and of the monasteries, and to keep them free, so that they do not take captive the conscience. That is as much as to say, Do not become monks or priests, and let him who has become monk or priest turn back, or else retain his position as a matter of freedom without constraint of conscience.

And although Paul wrote this of the Jews, who did such things according to the Law (for he says in Colossians ii, 17, that they have the shadow and type of things to come, but that the body itself is in Christ [Col. 2:17]), yet it holds much more against the decrees of the pope and of the monks. For if that which God has decreed comes to an end and shall no longer bind the consciences of men, how much more shall men neither decree nor keep anything that would bind the conscience? And farther on more will be said of the laws of mere men, for

[Sidenote: By-paths]

II. He says, "Let no one seduce you or lead you toward paths the prize in by-paths." What does this mean but to lead men to works and away from faith, which alone is the one right road by which to gain the prize of salvation, to strive toward heaven by other ways, and to claim that this is the way to gain the prize? And this is what the orders and the pope's doctrines do. And what are the ways they propose? Listen:

[Sidenote: Humility]

III. He says, "In self-willed humility and the religion of angels." What words could better it the orders? Is it not true that the pope and all of them prattle much of their obedience, which is said to be the noblest virtue, that is, the precious spiritual humility of the papists? But who has commanded this humility? They themselves have invented it and sought it out that they might seduce themselves. For with it they have withdrawn themselves from the common humility and obedience which God has commanded, namely, that every one shall humble himself and be subject to his neighbor. But they are subject to no man on earth, and have withdrawn themselves entirely; they have made an obedience and a humility of their own after their statutes. Yet they claim that their obedience is superhuman, perfect and, as it were, angelic, although there are no more disobedient and less humble people on earth than they are.

In the same way they also have their vows of chastity and poverty. They do not work like other people but, like the angels in heaven, they praise and worship God day and night; in short, their life is heavenly, although nowhere on earth can you ind more horrible unchastity, greater wealth, less devotional hearts, or more hardened people than in the spiritual estate, as every one knows. Yet they seduce all the world from the true way to the by-path with their self-willed, beautiful, spiritual and angelic life. All this, it seems to me, is not spoken of the Jews nor of the Manicheans, but of the papists; the works prove it.

[Sidenote: Uncertainty]

IV. He says, "He walks in such religion and in that which he has never seen." This is the very worst feature of the doctrines of men and the life built upon them, that they are without foundation and without warrant in the Scriptures, and that men cannot know whether what they do is good or wicked. For all their life is an uncertain venture. If you ask them whether they are certain that what they are and do is pleasing to God, they say, they do not know, they must take the chances: "the end will show us." And this is all they can say, for they have no faith, and faith alone makes us certain that all that we are is well-pleasing to God, not because of our merit, but because of His mercy. Thus all their humility, obedience and all of their religion is, at the very best, uncertain and in vain.

[Sidenote: Vainly Puffed Up]

V. "Vainly they puff themselves up," that is, they have no reason to do so. For although their practices are uncertain, unbelieving and altogether damnable, yet they make bold to puff themselves up and to claim that they have the best and the only true way, so that in comparison with theirs every other manner of living stinks and is nothing at all. But this puffed-up carnal mind of theirs they neither see nor feel, so great is their angelic humility and obedience! O, the fruit of the doctrines of men!

[Sidenote: Against Christ]

VI. "They do not hold fast the Head," which is Christ. For the doctrines of men and Christ cannot agree; one must destroy the other. If the conscience finds comfort in Christ, the comfort derived from works and doctrines must all; if it finds comfort in works, Christ must fall. The heart cannot build upon a twofold foundation; one must be forsaken. Now we see that all the comfort of the papists rests upon their practices; for if it did not rest upon them, they would not esteem them and would give them up, or else they would use them as matters of freedom, how and when they pleased.

If there were no other misfortune connected with the doctrines of men, this were of itself all too great--that for their sake Christ must be forsaken, the Head must be lost, and the heart must build on such an abomination. For this reason St. Peter calls the orders abominable and damnable heresies, which deny Christ, when he says, in the Second Epistle, ii, I, "There shall arise among you false teachers, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, and deny the Lord that bought them." [2 Pet. 2:1]

[Sidenote: Why Burden the Conscience?]

VII. It is clear enough that he means our spiritual estate when he says, "If ye be dead with Christ, why do ye burden your consciences with ordinances, such as: This thou shalt not touch, this thou shalt not eat, this thou shalt not wear, etc." Who can here deny that God through St. Paul forbids us to teach and to hear all doctrines of men, in so far as they constrain the conscience? Who then can with a good conscience be a monk or a priest, or be subject to the pope? They must confess that their consciences are taken captive with such laws. Thus thou seest what a mighty saying this is against all doctrines of men. It is dreadful to hear that they forsake Christ the Head, deny the faith and so must needs become heathen, and yet think their holiness upholds the world.

VI.

Paul, in Galatians I, 8., says: "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed[5]. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." [Gal. 1:8 f.]

[Sidenote: God's Ban]

In these words you hear a judgment of God against the pope and all doctrines of men, which says that they are under the ban. And this ban is not like the pope's ban; it is eternal and separates a man from God, from Christ, from all salvation and from everything that is good, and makes him the companion of devils. O what a terrible judgment is this! Look now, whether the pope, priests and monks do not proclaim another and a different doctrine than that taught by Christ and His Apostles. We said above that Christ teaches, "What goeth into the mouth doth not defile a man." Contrary to this and beyond it the pope, priests and monks say, "Thou liest, Christ, in so saying; for the eating of meat defiles a Carthusian and condemns him; and the same is true of the other orders." Is not this striking Christ on the mouth, calling Him a liar and blaspheming Him, and teaching other doctrines than He taught? Therefore it is a just judgment, that they in their great holiness are condemned like blasphemers of God with an eternal ban.

VII

Paul, in Titus i, 14, says: "Teach them not to give heed Titus to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn them from the truth." [Titus 1:14]

[Sidenote: Christ, or Men?]

This is a strong command, that we are not at all to regard the commandments of men. Is not this clear enough? And Paul gives his reason: they turn men from the truth, he says. For as has been said above, the heart cannot trust in Christ and at the same time in the doctrines or the works of men. Therefore, as soon as a man turns to the doctrines of men he turns away from the truth, and does not regard it. On the other hand, he who finds his comfort in Christ cannot regard the commandments and the works of men. Look now, whose ban you should fear most! The pope and his followers cast you far beyond hell if you do not heed their commandments, and Christ commands you not to heed them on pain of His ban. Consider whom you wish to obey.

VIII

II Peter ii, 1-3: "There shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of, and through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you."

[Sidenote: The Orders Damnable Heresies]

So then, the orders and monastic houses are damnable heresies. Why? Because they deny Christ, and blaspheme the way of faith. How? Christ says, there is no sin and no righteousness in eating, drinking, clothes, places and works of men; this they condemn, and teach and live the opposite, namely, that sin and righteousness are in these things. Hence Christ must be a liar, He must be denied and blasphemed together with His teaching and faith. And they make use of feigned words, and make much of their obedience, chastity and worship; but only through covetousness, that they may make merchandise of us, until they have brought all the wealth of the world into their possession, on the ground that they are the people who by their worship would help every man to heaven. For this reason they are and remain damnable and blasphemous heresies.

IX

Christ says, in Matthew xxiv, 23 ff.: "Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Behold, I have told you before, Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not."

Tell me, how can a monk be saved? He binds his salvation to a place and says, "Here I find Christ; if I did not remain here, I should be lost." But Christ says, "No, I am not here." Who will reconcile these two? Therefore, it is clear from this word of Christ that all doctrines which bind the conscience to places are contrary to Christ. And if He does not allow the conscience to be bound to places, neither does He allow it to be bound to meats, clothes, postures or anything that is external. There is no doubt then that this passage speaks of the pope and his clergy, and that Christ Himself releases and sets free all priests and monks, in that He condemns all orders and monasteries and says, "Believe not, go not out," etc.

He says the same thing also in Luke xvii, 20 f.: "The kingdom of God cometh not with observation, and men shall not say, Lo here! or, Lo there! For, behold, the kingdom of God is within you." [Luke 17:20 f.]

Is not this also clear enough? The doctrines of men can command nothing but external things; and since the kingdom of God is not external, both teachers and disciples must needs miss the kingdom and go astray. Nor will it help them to say that the holy fathers instituted the orders. For Christ has already destroyed this argument, since He says, that the very elect might be misled, that is, they will err, but not remain in their error. How else would it be an exceeding great error, if the elect were not misled? Let the teaching and the practice of the saints be what it will, the words of Christ are certain and clear. Him we must follow, and not the saints, whose teaching and works are uncertain. What He says stands firm, "The kingdom of God is among[6] you, and not at a distance, either here or there."

X

Solomon, in Proverbs xxx, 5 f., says: "Every word of God is purified: and is a shield unto all them that put their trust in it. Add thou not unto His words, lest He reprove thee, and thou be found a liar." [Prov. 30:5 f.]

With this I will end or the present; or there is much more in the prophets, especially in Jeremiah, of which I have written in the treatise on Confession. Here then Solomon concludes that he is a liar who adds aught to the words of God; for the Word of God alone is to teach us, as Christ says, Matthew xxiii, 8, "Be ye not called masters. One Master is in you, even Christ." [Matt. 23:8] Amen.

A Reply To Texts Quoted In Defense Of The Doctrines Of Men

A REPLY TO TEXTS QUOTED IN DEFENSE OF THE DOCTRINES OF MEN

The first is Luke x, 16, where Christ says, "He that heareth you, heareth Me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth Me." [Luke 10:16] He spoke similar words in Matthew x, 40 [Matt. 10:40], and in John xiii, 20 [John 13:20]. Here, they claim, Christ demands of us that we accept their man-made laws.

[Sidenote: The Command of Christ]

I reply: That is not true. For immediately before speaking these words, Christ says, "Go and say, the kingdom of God is at hand." [Matt. 10:7, Luke 10:9] With these words Christ stops the mouths of all the teachers of the doctrines of men, and commands the apostles what they are to teach, and Himself puts the words in their mouth, saying that they shall preach the kingdom of God. Now he who does not preach the kingdom of God is not sent by Christ, and him these words do not concern. Much rather do these words demand of us that we hear not the doctrines of men. Now to preach of the kingdom of God is nothing else than to preach the Gospel, in which the faith of Christ is taught, by which alone God dwells and rules in us. But the doctrines of men do not preach about faith, but about eating, clothing, times, places, persons and about purely external things which do not profit the soul.

[Sidenote: The Perversion of the Text]

Behold how honestly the pious shepherds and faithful teachers have dealt with the poor common people. This text, "Who hears you, hears me," they have in a masterly fashion torn out of its context and have terrified us with it, until they have made us subject to themselves. But what precedes, "Preach the kingdom of God," they have taken good care not to mention, and have bravely leaped over it, that they might by no means be compelled to preach nothing but the Gospel. The noble, and most excellent teachers! We ought to thank them for it!

In Mark, the last chapter, we read that He sent out the disciples to preach. Let us hear what command He gives them, and how He sets a limit to their teaching and bridles their tongues, saying, "Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature. He that believeth, shall be saved," etc., Mark xvi, 15 [Mark 16:15]. He does not say, Go and preach what you will, or what you think to be good; but He puts His own word into their mouth, and bids them preach the Gospel.

In Matthew, the last chapter, He says, "Go and make disciples of all nations, baptise them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost; and teach them to observe all things which I have commanded you." Here, again. He does not say, Teach them to observe what you devise, but what I have commanded you. Therefore the pope and his bishops and teachers must be wolves and the apostles of the devil; it cannot be otherwise, for they teach not the commands of Christ, but their own words. So also in Matthew xxv, 15, in the parable of the three servants, the Lord points out that the householder bade the servants trade not with their own property, but with his, and gave the first five talents, the second two and the third one. [Matt. 25:15]

Our second text is Matthew xxiii, 2 f., where the Lord says, "The scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do."

Here, here, they say, we have authority to teach what we think to be right.

[Sidenote: Moses' Seat]

I answer: If that is what Christ means, then we are in a sorry plight. Every pope might then create more new laws, until the world could no longer contain all the laws. But they quote this text as they quote the first. What do the words "sit in Moses' seat" mean? Let us ask, what did Moses teach? And if he still sat in his seat today, what would he teach? Beyond a doubt, nothing but what he taught of old, namely, the commandments and the word of God. He never yet spoke the doctrines of men, but what God commanded him to speak, as almost every chapter of his shows. It follows, then, that he who teaches something else than Moses teaches, does not sit in Moses' seat. For the Lord calls it Moses' seat, because from it the doctrines of Moses should be read and taught. The same meaning is contained in the words which follow, in which the Lord says, "But do not ye after their works, for they say, and do not; for they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers." [Matt. 23:3 f.]

See, here He reproves their works, because they add many laws to the doctrines of Moses and lay them on the people, but themselves do not touch them. And afterward He says, in verse 13, "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor! Ye fools and blind; for whether is greater? the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold?" [Matt. 23:13, 16 f.] Is it not clear that Christ here condemns their doctrines of men? He can, therefore, not have confirmed them by speaking of sitting in Moses' seat; else He would have contradicted Himself. Therefore Moses' seat must mean no more than the Law of Moses, and the sitting in it no more than the preaching of the Law of Moses.

This is what Moses himself said of his seat and doctrine, Deuteronomy iv, 2, "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you." [Deut. 4:2] And in Deuteronomy xii, 32, "What thing soever I command you, observe to do it; thou shalt not add thereto nor diminish from it." [Deut. 12:32] These doctrines they were required to teach in Moses' seat; therefore Moses' seat cannot endure any doctrines of men.

[Sidenote: St. Augustine]

St. Augustine is quoted as having written in _the Book against the Letter of the Manicheans_[7], "I would not believe the Gospel if I did not believe the Church."

Here you see, they say, we are to believe the Church more than the Gospel.

[Sidenote: Authority]

I answer: Even if Augustine had used those words, who gave him authority, that we must believe what he says? What Scripture does he quote to prove the statement? What if he erred here, as we know that he frequently did, as did all the fathers? Should one single sentence of Augustine be so mighty as to refute all the texts quoted above? That is not what God wills; St. Augustine must yield to them.

Further, if that were St. Augustine's meaning, he would contradict himself; for in very many places he exalts the Holy Scriptures above the opinions of all teachers, above the decrees of all councils and churches, and will have men judge of him and of the teachings of all men according to the Scriptures. Why then do the faithful shepherds pass by those sayings of St. Augustine, plain and clear as they are, and light on this lonely one, which is so obscure and sounds so unlike Augustine as we know him from all his writings? It can only be because they want to bolster up their tyranny with idle, empty words.

[Sidenote: Words Perverted]

Furthermore, they are deceivers, in that they not only ascribe to St. Augustine an opinion he did not hold, but they also falsify and pervert his words. For St. Augustine's words really are, "I would not have believed the Gospel if the authority of the whole Church had not moved me." Augustine speaks of the whole Church, and says that throughout the world it with one consent preaches the Gospel and not the Letter of the Manicheans; and this unanimous authority of the Church moves him to consider it the true Gospel. But our tyrants apply this name of the Church to themselves, as if the laymen and the common people were not also Christians. And what they teach they want men to consider as the teaching of the Christian Church, although they are a minority, and we, who are universal Christendom, should also be consulted about what is to be taught in the name of universal Christendom. See, so cleverly do they quote the words of St. Augustine: what he says of the Church throughout all the world, they would have us understand of the Roman See.

But how does it follow from this saying that the doctrines of men are also to be observed? What doctrine of men has ever been devised that has been accepted and preached by all of the universal Church throughout the world? Not one; the Gospel alone is accepted by all Christians everywhere.

[Sidenote: Their True Meaning]

But then we must not understand St. Augustine to say that he would not believe the Gospel unless he were moved thereto by the authority of the whole Church. For that were false and unchristian. Every man must believe only because it is God's Word, and because he is convinced in his heart that it is true, although an angel from heaven and all the world preached the contrary. His meaning is rather, as he himself says, that he finds the Gospel nowhere except in the Church, and that this external proof can be given heretics that their doctrine is not right, but that that is right which all the world has with one accord accepted. For the eunuch in Acts viii, 37, believed on the Gospel as preached by Philip, although he did not know whether many or few believed on it [Acts 8:37]. So also Abraham believed the promise of God all by himself, when no man knew of it, Romans iv, 18 [Rom. 4:18]. And Mary, Luke i, 38 [Luke 1:38], believed the message of Gabriel by herself, and there was no one on earth who believed with her. In this way Augustine also had to believe, and all the saints, and we too, every one for himself alone.

For this reason St. Augustine's words cannot bear the interpretation they put upon them; but they must be understood of the external proof of faith, by which heretics are refuted and the weak strengthened in faith, when they see that all the world preaches and regards as Gospel that which they believe. And if this meaning cannot be found in St. Augustine's words, it is better to reject the words; for they are contrary to the Scriptures and to all experience if they have that other meaning.

[Sidenote: The Apostles Also Men]

Finally, when they are refuted with Scripture so that they cannot escape, they begin to blaspheme God and say, "But St. Matthew, Paul and Peter also were men; therefore what they teach is also the doctrine of men. And if their doctrine is to be observed, let the pope's doctrine be observed as well!" Such blasphemy is now being uttered even by some princes and bishops, who count themselves wise. When you hear such utterly hardened and blinded blasphemers, turn away from them or stop your ears; they are not worthy that one should talk with them. If that argument were to hold, then Moses also was a man, and all the prophets were men. Then let us go our way, and believe nothing at all, but regard everything as the doctrine of men, and follow our fancy.

[Sidenote: Answer]

But if you will talk with them, do so, and say, Well, let St. Paul or Matthew be the doctrine of men; then we ask, Whence comes their authority? How will they prove that they have authority to teach and to be bishops? Or how shall we know where the Church is? If they say that St. Matthew has so asserted in Matthew xvi, 19 [Matt. 16:19], or St. Paul in some place or other, do you say, But that does not hold: they are the doctrines of men, as you say; you must have God's Word to confirm you. And then you will find that these hardened blasphemers put themselves to shame and confusion with their own folly. They cannot even distinguish between a man who speaks for himself and one through whom God speaks. The words of the Apostles were commanded them by God, and confirmed and proved by great miracles, such as were never done for the doctrines of men. And if they are certain in themselves, and will prove it to us, that God has commanded them to teach as they do, we will believe them as we believe the Apostles. If it is uncertain whether the words of the Apostles are of God, who will give us certainty that their doctrines of men are of God? _O furor et amentia his saeculis digna!_[8]

[Sidenote: Why Doctrines of Men are Condemned]

But we do not condemn the doctrines of men because they are the doctrines of men, for we would gladly endure them, but because they are contrary to the Gospel and to the Scriptures. The Scriptures set the consciences of men free, and forbid that they be taken captive with the doctrines of men. The doctrines of men take captive the conscience. This conflict between the Scriptures and the doctrines of men we cannot reconcile. Hence, because these two forms of doctrine contradict one another, we allow even young children to judge here whether we are to give up the Scriptures, in which the one Word of God is taught from the beginning of the world, or the doctrines of men which were newly devised yesterday and change daily? And we hope that every one will agree in the decision that the doctrines of men must be forsaken and the Scriptures retained. For they cannot be reconciled, but are by nature opposed to one another, like fire and water, like heaven and earth; As Isaiah Iv, 8 f. says: "As the heavens are exalted above the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways." [Isa. 55:8 f.] Now he who walks on the earth cannot at the same time walk in heaven, and he who walks in heaven cannot walk on the earth.

Therefore we request the papists that they first reconcile their doctrines with the Scriptures. If they accomplish that, we will observe their doctrines. But that they will not do before the Holy Spirit has become a liar. Therefore we say again. The doctrines of men we censure not because they are spoken by men, but because they are lies and blasphemies against the Scriptures. And the Scriptures, although they also were written by men, are not of men nor from men, but from God. Now since Scriptures and the doctrines of men are contrary the one to the other, one must lie and the other be true. Let us see to which of the two they themselves will ascribe the lie. Let this suffice.

FOOTNOTES

[1] Goldfasts are the ember-fasts, on the three ember-days of each of the four seasons of the year; possibly called "goldfasts" because on these days rents were collected. See _Realencyklopadie_, 5: 780, 9.

[2] The fasts enjoined upon a people by a public edict or ban. The term "ban" as here used does not denote the Church's excommunication, but an authoritative proclamation.

[3] The Tatianists, followers of Tatian, who lived in Syria in the middle of the second century. Tatian, apparently basing his view of marriage upon 1 Cor. 7:5, ascribes the institution of marriage and the whole Old Testament Law to the devil. Eusebius held that Tatian was the founder of a sect known as the _Encratites_, or _Abstainers_. Modern historians see in the _Encratites_ groups of ascetic Christians found frequently in the early Church, somewhat similar to the later monks and nuns, so that Harnack can write that Tatian "joined the Encratites." _Dogmengeschichte_3, I, 227 n. See _Realencyklopadie_3, 19, 386-394 on Tatian; 5, 392 f. on the Encratites.

[4] The Manicheans, strictly speaking not a Christian sect, but a rival religious community, which made inroads upon the Christian Church. Founded by the Babylonian Mani, who was born in the third century, they taught the inherent evil of all matter, and consequently had many fasts, averaging seven days in each month, while the "perfect" among them abstained from meat, wine and marriage. See _Realencyklopadie_ 3, 12, 193-228; von Orelli, _Religionsgeschichte_, 279-291.

[5] The Greek _anathema_ Luther here translates _ein Bann_, "let him be a ban." This explains the reference to the ban below.

[6] _Stehet untereuch_, whereas above Luther writes _ist inwendig in euch_.

[7] _Contra Epistolam Manichaei_, vi, _Paris Ed._, 1839, 28: 185: _Ego vero Evangelic non crederem, nisi me ecclesiae catholicae commoveret anctoritas_. On the preceding page Augustine had written: "If the claim of truth be shown to be so evident that it cannot be called into question, it is to be preferred before all those things by which I am held in the Catholic faith."

[8] O raging madness, worthy of our age!

INDEX

SCRIPTURE REFERENCES

INDEX

Abel Abraham Absolution power of Abuses Accident and substance Adam Adjutories Administratio Adversity Agnes, St. Agricola Agriculture Ahasuerus Ahaz d'Ailly Albrecht of Brandenburg Alexander of Hales Alexander VI. Alien sins Allegories Alveld Ambrose Amen, meaning of Amerbach, Boniface Amsdor Angelic Sum Angels Angelus de Clavissio Armas Annates Amie, St. Anniversaries Anniaities Anthony, St. Antichrist Antonius of Florence Antwerp Apostles Apostolic Council Aquinas, Thomas Archbishop Aristotle Articles of faith Attrition Augsburg, Diet of Augustine, St. Augustinian fathers Augustinus Trimnphus Auriaber Avarice

Babylon Babylonian captivity Balaam Balaam's ass Bamberg Ban power of greater and lesser purpose of penalty of Ban, danger of harms no one a medicine to be respected to be loved unjust, to be desired or debt abuses of does not exclude from Gospel Banfasts Baptism grace of makes priests foundation of sacraments a ship God's work formula of by wicked minister efficacy of significance of vows of comfort of Bar to grace Barbara, St. Barnabas Basel, Council of Beer-money Begging Belief and faith Belvidere Benedict, St. Benefit of clergy Berlepsch, Hans von Bernard, St. Bethaven Biel, Gabriel Bigamy Birettas Bishops Bishops' paths Blandina, St. Blasphemy Bohemians Bonaventure Boniace VIII. Both kinds in the sacrament Botschaten Brandenburg Bread, Sacrament of the Altar daily, is Christ Breves Brotherhood, Christian Brotherhoods perversion of kinds of proper conduct of Bull, Coena Domini papal Burer, Albrecht Butter-letters

Caesarini, Cardinal Caiaphas Cairo Cajetan Cambray, Cardinal of Campolore Canaan Canon law Canon of the mass Canonical hours Canonization Canonry Captivity of the Church v. Babylonian Captivity. Cardinals Carlstadt Carmelites Carthusian Castor and Pollux Casus reservati Catechisms Cathedrals Celibacy Ceremonialist Ceremonies Certainty of salvation Chancery, rules in Chapters Character indelebilis Charity Charles the Great Charles V. Chartreuse Chastity Christ spiritual body of as king and priest sacrifice of the altar sacrament faith in Christian nobility, duty of Christian, the name what makes marks of a Christianity Church authority of cannot institute sacraments community of Christians our mother and state Church laws Cicero Circumcision Circumstances Clement V. Clement VI. Clement VII. Clergy Coadjutorships Cognatio legalis and spiritualis Collect Cologne Commandments of God Commandments, Ten Commend Commerce Communio Communion worthy in two kinds of saints Complutensian polyglott Compositions Concordat of Vienna Confession Confessionalia Confirmation Congregations, power to elect priests, Consanguinity, spiritual Conscience Constance, Council of Constantine, Emperor Contested benefices Contrition Corporal cloths Corporations Corpus juris canonici Councils Councils can err Courtesans Creed Cremona Crusades Crying sins Cyprian

Daniel the pope as Datarius David Deacons Death must serve the Christian Decretals Devil Dignities Dionysius, Areopagita Disparihtas religionis Dispensations Divorce Doctorate Doctrines of men Dominic, St. Donation of Constantine Donatus, St. Dress, extravagance in Dims Scotus Durandus

Eck, John Economic reforms Edification of the Church Elevation of the host Elisha Elvira, Council of Emperor Emser England Erasmus Erurt Estates of Christendom Eternal life Eugenius IV. Evil spirit Excesses in eating and drinking Excommunication Executio Exemptions Extortion Extreme unction Ezekiel

Fable quoted Faculties Faith not a work and promise and works alone justifies all things depend on fulfils commandments unites with Christ and love Fasts Fathers of the Church Feast days Feldkirchen Fellowship, twofold spiritual Five senses, sins of Florence, Council of Forgiveness of sins Forma sacramenti Foundations France Francis, St. Franciscans Fraternities Frederick, Duke Frederick, Elector Frederick I. Frederick II. Free will Fruits of the mass Fugger of Augsburg

General Council George of Saxony German knights bishops and princes nation emperors empire mass Germans Germany Gerson, John Gibeonites Gideon Glosses God, faith in God's bosom Golden rule Golden years Goldfasts Gospel Goths Government, good, a gift of grace Grammatical sense of Scripture Gratiae expectivse Greek Church emperor Greeks Grimmenthal

Hadrian VI. Halberstadt Halle Hamburg Henry IV. and V. Henry VIII Heresy Heretics Herod Hess, John Hezekiah Himmelsbriee Hindrance of crime error Holy Ghost, faith in Hubert, St. Huss, John Hussites Hutten, Ulrich von Hymns of praise

Iconoclastic controversy Idolatry Ignorance Images Immersion Impediments Impedimentum criminis erroris ligaminis ordinis Impotence Incarnation Incompatibilia Incorporation Indulgences Indulta Infant baptism Ingenwinkel, Joh. Innocent I. Innocent III. Innocent VIII. Inquisition Intercessions Interdict Investiture Irregular monks Isaiah Isolani, Isidore Israel Italy

Jahrmarkt James, St., Epistle of Jehu Jereboam Jeremiah Jerome of Prague John XXII. Jonas, Justus Jordan, crossing of Joseph, affliction of Jubilee years Judas Judgment day Julius II. Jus patronum Jus verbi Justification by faith

Kessler, John Keys, power of Kingdom of God Kingship of the Christian Kirchweihen Koran

Laity Lang, Johan Lateran Council Law, the Law in the universities Laws as snares for souls of men V. Doctrines of men. Lay-baptism Legal relationships Leipzig Disputation Leo III. Leo X. Letters of confession Liberty not external and service Licenses Link, Wenceslaus Livings Lombard, Peter Lord's Prayer Lord's Supper Lotther, Melchior Louis, King of France Louvain Love Luther pastoral concern the German as a fool knowledge of Aristotle not a mathematician as a musician compelled to speak his progress his duty recantation appeal to a council zeal separation from Rome appeal to the pope friend of the pope his faith as a reformer purpose of writing

Magdeburg Magistrate Mainz Man, nature of inward outward of sin Manichaeans Manoah Marcus Aurelius Margaret of Braunschweig Marriage of the clergy forbidden degrees a type a sacrament hindrances Martyrs Mass sacrifice of letters anniversary mortuary endowed Maximilian, Emperor Mecklenburg Medicine in universities Meissen Melanchthon Melchizedek Memorial days Mendicants orders Merchants Merseburg Miltitz, Carl von Ministerium Ministry Miracles Missa catechumenorum and fidelium Monasteries Monastic life Monstrance Moses Moses' seat Mother of God Muhlphort, Hieronymus Murner, Thomas Mute sins Mystery and sacrament Mystics

Name of God Naples and Sicily, Kingdom of Nathan Natural law revelation New Testament Nicaea, Council of Nimrod Noah Nobility, German Nurnberg, Diet of

Oblations Observance Occam, William of Officia of the pope Officials Old Testament Opus operantis Opus operatum Order to be observed Orders, monastic Ordinaries Ordination Origen Ottilia, St. Our Lady

Pallium Palmers Papacy Papal court secretaries months family servant letters homage Parents, duty toward Participations Passover Patience Patron saints Paul, St. Penalties to be abolished Penance second plank Penitence Persia Peter, St. Pfeffinger, D. Philip of Hesse Philosophy Picards Pilate Pilgrimages Pius, Pope Pope power of can be deposed errors of tyranny an idol compared with Christ wealth of infallibility of worldliness of vicar of crucified Christ vicar of absent Christ duty of temporal power of letter to Power not to be trusted Prague Prayer Preachers Preaching, true Prebend Precepts of the Church Presbyters Prierias, Sylvester Priesthood of believers why men seek is ministry of the Word Priests Priests, officeholders duty of Primate Private confession mass Privilegium fori Promise of God Proprius motus Prostitution Proverbs quoted Purgatory

Quedunburg, convent

Real presence Reason Reformation Reforms suggested Regeneration Regensburg Regression Remission of sins Rentenkauf Repentance Res sacramenti Reservatio pectoralis Reservation, right of Reserved cases Rhine-toll Rods, three Roman curia Roman Empire Roman See Romanists Rome Rulers, wicked

Sacrament of the Altar institution of reception of not a law not a sacrifice daily use of significance of preparation for benefit of a sign purpose of misuse of faith of right use of necessity of Sacrament, types of and the pope Sacraments parts of signs of two principal grace of fount of love not a good work efficacy of of Old and New Law significance of not effective signs of grace institution of Sacramentum is mystery Sacrifices Safe conduct Saints Saints' days Samuel Sardica, Council of Satisfactions Saul Schism Schismatics Schools, Christian for girls Scrinium pectoris Scriptures commands and promises Sebastian, St. Secret sin Sects Sedulius, Coelius Sentences Sententious theologians Sermons Signatura gratiae and justitiae Signiicasti, Chapter Simony Sins demand punishment seven deadly Siricius, Pope Sixtus IV. Slanderers Social evil Sodalities Solite, Chapter Solomon Soul immortality of Spalatin Spice trade Spiritual, what makes us duties relationship law States of the Church Stationaries Staupitz Stephen, St. Sternberg Strassburg Students, restriction of Substance and accident Sycophants Synaxis

Tatianists Teachings of men, v. Doctrines of men. Temporal estate power Temptations Ten Commandments Testament Testament, words of Tetzel Teufelsbriefe Theodidacti Theodosius Theology in the universities text-books Theses, XCV Thomists Timothy Titus Transaccidentation Transubstantiation, of communicant Trent, Council of Trier Triple crown Truth Tulich, Herman Turks worst in Rome Types Tyranny, Roman

Unbelief Unchastity Unio Unity of the Church Universities Usury

Valentine, St. Valla, Laurentius Varna, Battle of Venice Vergil Vienna, Council, of Virgin Mary Visions Votaries Votive masses Vows of celibacy ceremonial laws triple

Wallbruder Walls, the three, of Rome Wartburg Wicked, success of Will of God Wilsnack Witchcraft Wittenberg Wladislav Word of God Works measure of good, are sins do not justify Works of love six, of mercy World Worms, Diet of Worship, true Wurzburg, 82 Wyclif

Zedekiah Zink, Johaimes Zinskau Zwickau Prophets Zwilling, Gabriel

Scripture References

SCRIPTURE REFERENCES

Genesis-- 1:31 2:15 3:15 3:17 3:19 4:5 9:12 9:15 12:3 13:5 17:10ff 18:19 19:24 21:12 49:3

Exodus-- 12:8, 11 12:35ff 13:2 13:13 20:4 20:12 20:17 22:28 23:15 34:20 37:7

Leviticus-- 8:27 11:19 18:6ff

Numbers-- 3:13 21:9 22:28 24:24

Deuteronomy-- 1:31 4:2 4:19 8:3 10:16 12:32 14:18 16:16. 23:12f. 24:1 25:5 28:14 32:35

Joshua-- 3:7 6:20 9:19

Judges-- 6:36ff 9:2 13:19 20:21

I. Samuel-- 2:30 16:13

II. Samuel 7:16

I. Kings-- 1:38 12:26 12:31 18:21 19:20

II. Kings-- 9:1 18:4 24:20 25:4

Esther 1:5

Job 31:27

Psalms-- 13:3f 14:5 18;8 18:26 19:1ff 19:8 23:5 30:5 32:5f 33:16 44:23 58:4 63:5 64:1 67:1f 104:15 106:3 107:20 109:28 111:2 112:7 115:1 119 119:85 134:2 137:1 143:2

Proverbs-- 6:27 15:8 30:5f 30:15

Ecclesiastes-- 1:2 3:7

Song of Solomon 2:16

Isaiah-- 2:8 3:4 3:10 5:4 3:13f 7:10ff 9:20 10:22 28:14 28:21 29:13 37:4 55:8 56:10 61:8 66:2

Jeremiah-- 2:32 4:4 5:3 17:9 23:21 29:7 48:10 51:9

Lamentations-- 1:1f 1:11 2:11ff

Ezekiel 2:6

Daniel-- 1:6 2:21 3:30 4:14 4:35 5:29 6:16 11:39,43

Hosea-- 2:19 4:6 4:15 10:5 13:9

Joel 1:5

Amos-- 6:1 6:4-6 8:11

Jonah 3:5

Habakkuk 2:4

Zechariah 2:8

Malachi 2:7

Matthew-- 3:2 3:6 4:1ff 4:4 4:17 5:3 5:16 5:18 5:22 5:25 5:29 5:32 5:40 5:45 6:7 6:12 6:14 7:3 7:12 7:15 7:18 7:20 8:13 9:1 10:7 10:8 10:10 10:16 10:40 11:23 12:1ff 12:33 13:14 13:52 15:4 15:8 15:9 15:11 15:13 15:14 16:19 17:5 17:24ff 17:33 18:4 18:10 18:15 18:18 18:19f 18:20 18:24, 28 19:6 123, 263. 19:6 21:13 22:2f 20 23:3f 23:8 23:13 23:14 23:15 23:16f 24:5 24:15 24:23f 24:24 25:15 25:40 26 26:2 26:21ff 26:26 26:27 26:28 26:29 26:41 27:34 27:35 28:19

Mark-- 2:27 6:13 9:23 10:16 11:24 14 14:22 14:23 15:23 16:15 16:16 16:17 16:18

Luke-- 1:38 1:52 1:53 2:22 2:34 6:30 7:16 9:48 9:56 10:7 10:9 10:16 11:5ff 11:16 11:28 12:14 12:32 16:22 17:20f 21:34 22 22:19f 22:25 22:32 22:20 23:26

John-- 1:12 1:51 4:14 5:46 6:9 6:27 6:35, 41, 51 6:37,39 6:45 6:53, 55 6:54 6:63 7:38 8:7 8:11 8:26 8:44 8:50 9:31 10:27 11:25 13:1ff 13:20 14:6 17:9, 20 17:12 17:36 18:36 20:15-17 20:22ff 20:23

Acts-- 2:46f 3:6 4:34f 5:5 5:9 5:39 6:4 6:6 8:18 8:17 8:37 9:15 9:19 13:10 14:11-16 15:6 16:3 17:16ff 17:22 17:54 18:6 28:11

Romans-- 1:11 1:5 1:17 1:28 1:32 3:10ff 3:23 4:3 4 4:11 4:18 5:3 5:4 5:5 6:4,6 7:22 8:23 8:28 8:31 8:35, 3 8:36 9:16 9:33 10:4 10:9 10:10 10:17 11:32 12:4ff 12:17 12:19 13 13:1, 4 13:4 13:8 13:10 14:1ff 14:3 14:5 14:7f 14:14f 14:22 14:23

I. Corinthians-- 1:1 1:2 1:7 1:21 1:23 2:2 2:7 2:12 2:15 3:18 3:22 4:1 4:15 4:20 5:5 5:11 6:1ff 6:7 6:12 7:5 7:7 7:9 7:15 7:18ff 7:23 8:4 8:13 9:4ff 9:14 9:19 9:27 10 10:5 10:16 10:17 10:23 10:25ff 11 11:20 11:21 11:23 11:24 11:25 11:29 11:30 12:12ff 12:25f 13:1 13:2 13:5 13:12 14:23 14:30 15:55ff

II. Corinthians-- 2:17 3:17 4 4:13 4:16 10:3 10:8 11:13 11:31 12:9 13:8 13:10

Galatians-- 1:8 2:3 2:11 2:14 2:20 3:4 4:4 5:1 5:6 5:17 5:22 5:24 6:2 6:5

Ephesians-- 2:3 2:8 3:20 4:4 4:14 4:28 5:9 5:27 5:29 5:31 6:12 6:17

Philippians-- 1:21 2:1 2:4 2:5 2:6 2:7 3:2 4:13

Colossians-- 2:16 2:20 2:22

I. Thessalonians-- 2:16 4:6 5:21 5:22

II. Thessalonians-- 2:3 2:3-10 2:9 2:11 3:10 3:14 3:15

I. Timothy-- 1:7 1:9 2:1 2:8 3:2 3:16 4:1ff 4:2f 4:3 4:4f 4:5 4:8 5:22

II. Timothy-- 2:3 2:9 2:13 3:2 3:5-7 3:7 3:8 3:13

Titus-- 1:6 1:14 3:1 3:5

Hebrews-- 1:3 6 9:16 10:19, 22 10:23 11 11:6 12:15

James-- 1:6 1:18 5:14 5:16

I. Peter-- 2:11 2:2 2:9 2:10 2:13, 15 2:14 2:18 3:13 5:3 5:5 5:10

II. Peter-- 1:9 2:1 2:1-3 2:3

I. John-- 1:9 2:18, 22 3:2 4:3

II. John 10

Revelation-- 2:9 5:10 13 22:11

Old Testament Apocrypha

OLD TESTAMENT APOCRYPHA

Judith 6:15

Wisdom 6:8

Ecclesiasticus-- 10:13 32:27

Baruch-- 1:11 3:38

II. Maccabees 4:8, 12

The Large Catechism (trans. Bente and Dau, 1921)

# The Large Catechism (trans. Bente and Dau, 1921)

Ver.04.29.93*END*

This Etext prepared by Rev. Bob Smith <bob_smith@mail.ctsfw.edu>

The Large Catechism by Dr. Martin Luther

Translated by F. Bente and W. H. T. Dau

Published in: Triglot Concordia: The Symbolical Books of the Ev. Lutheran Church. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921), pp. 565-773

Preface

A Christian, Profitable, and Necessary Preface and Faithful, Earnest Exhortation of Dr. Martin Luther to All Christians, but Especially to All Pastors and Preachers, that They Should Daily Exercise Themselves in the Catechism, which is a Short Summary and Epitome of the Entire Holy Scriptures, and that they May Always Teach the Same.

We have no slight reasons for treating the Catechism so constantly [in Sermons] and for both desiring and beseeching others to teach it, since we see to our sorrow that many pastors and preachers are very negligent in this, and slight both their office and this teaching; some from great and high art [giving their mind, as they imagine, to much higher matters], but others from sheer laziness and care for their paunches, assuming no other relation to this business than if they were pastors and preachers for their bellies' sake, and had nothing to do but to [spend and] consume their emoluments as long as they live, as they have been accustomed to do under the Papacy.

And although they have now everything that they are to preach and teach placed before them so abundantly, clearly, and easily, in so many [excellent and] helpful books, and the true Sermones per se loquentes, Dormi secure, Paratos et Thesauros, as they were called in former times; yet they are not so godly and honest as to buy these books, or even when they have them, to look at them or read them. Alas! they are altogether shameful gluttons and servants of their own bellies who ought to be more properly swineherds and dog-tenders than care-takers of souls and pastors.

And now that they are delivered from the unprofitable and burdensome babbling of the Seven Canonical Hours, oh, that, instead thereof, they would only, morning, noon, and evening, read a page or two in the Catechism, the Prayer-book, the New Testament, or elsewhere in the Bible, and pray the Lord's Prayer for themselves and their parishioners, so that they might render, in return, honor and thanks to the Gospel, by which they have been delivered from burdens and troubles so manifold, and might feel a little shame because like pigs and dogs they retain no more of the Gospel than such a lazy, pernicious, shameful, carnal liberty! For, alas! as it is, the common people regard the Gospel altogether too lightly, and we accomplish nothing extraordinary even though we use all diligence. What, then, will be achieved if we shall be negligent and lazy as we were under the Papacy?

To this there is added the shameful vice and secret infection of security and satiety, that is, that many regard the Catechism as a poor, mean teaching, which they can read through at one time, and then immediately know it, throw the book into a corner, and be ashamed, as it were, to read in it again.

Yea, even among the nobility there may be found some louts and scrimps, who declare that there is no longer any need either of pastors or preachers; that we have everything in books, and every one can easily learn it by himself; and so they are content to let the parishes decay and become desolate, and pastors and preachers to suffer distress and hunger a plenty, just as it becomes crazy Germans to do. For we Germans have such disgraceful people, and must endure them.

But for myself I say this: I am also a doctor and preacher, yea, as learned and experienced as all those may be who have such presumption and security; yet I do as a child who is being taught the Catechism, and every morning, and whenever I have time, I read and say, word for word, the Ten Commandments, the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, the Psalms, etc. And I must still read and study daily, and yet I cannot master it as I wish, but must remain a child and pupil of the Catechism, and am glad so to remain. And yet these delicate, fastidious fellows would with one reading promptly be doctors above all doctors, know everything and be in need of nothing. Well, this, too, is indeed a sure sign that they despise both their office and the souls of the people, yea, even God and His Word. They do not have to fall, they are already fallen all too horribly, they would need to become children, and begin to learn their alphabet, which they imagine that they have long since outgrown.

Therefore I beg such lazy paunches or presumptuous saints to be persuaded and believe for God's sake that they are verily, verily! not so learned or such great doctors as they imagine; and never to presume that they have finished learning this [the parts of the Catechism], or know it well enough in all points, even though they think that they know it ever so well. For though they should know and understand it perfectly (which, however, is impossible in this life), yet there are manifold benefits and fruits still to be obtained, if it be daily read and practiced in thought and speech; namely, that the Holy Ghost is present in such reading and repetition and meditation, and bestows ever new and more light and devoutness, so that it is daily relished and appreciated better, as Christ promises, Matt. 18, 20: Where two or three are gathered together in My name, there am I in the midst of them.

Besides, it is an exceedingly effectual help against the devil, the world, and the flesh and all evil thoughts to be occupied with the Word of God, and to speak of it, and meditate upon it, so that the First Psalm declares those blessed who meditate upon the law of God day and night. Undoubtedly, you will not start a stronger incense or other fumigation against the devil than by being engaged upon God's commandments and words, and speaking, singing, or thinking of them. For this is indeed the true holy water and holy sign from which he flees, and by which he may be driven away.

Now, for this reason alone you ought gladly to read, speak, think and treat of these things if you had no other profit and fruit from them than that by doing so you can drive away the devil and evil thoughts. For he cannot hear or endure God's Word; and God's Word is not like some other silly prattle, as that about Dietrich of Berne, etc., but as St. Paul says, Rom. 1, 16, the power of God. Yea, indeed, the power of God which gives the devil burning pain, and strengthens, comforts, and helps us beyond measure.

And what need is there of many words ? If I were to recount all the profit and fruit which God's Word produces, whence would I get enough paper and time? The devil is called the master of a thousand arts. But what shall we call God's Word, which drives away and brings to naught this master of a thousand arts with all his arts and power? It must indeed be the master of more than a hundred thousand arts. And shall we frivolously despise such power, profit, strength, and fruit -- we, especially, who claim to be pastors and preachers? If so, we should not only have nothing given us to eat, but be driven out, being baited with dogs, and pelted with dung, because we not only need all this every day as we need our daily bread but must also daily use it against the daily and unabated attacks and lurking of the devil, the master of a thousand arts.

And if this were not sufficient to admonish us to read the Catechism daily, yet we should feel sufficiently constrained by the command of God alone, who solemnly enjoins in Deut. 6, 6 ff. that we should always meditate upon His precepts, sitting, walking, standing, Lying down, and rising, and have them before our eyes and in our hands as a constant mark and sign. Doubtless He did not so solemnly require and enjoin this without a purpose; but because He knows our danger and need, as well as the constant and furious assaults and temptations of devils, He wishes to warn, equip, and preserve us against them, as with a good armor against their fiery darts and with good medicine against their evil infection and suggestion.

Oh, what mad, senseless fools are we that, while we must ever live and dwell among such mighty enemies as the devils are, we nevertheless despise our weapons and defense, and are too lazy to look at or think of them! And what else are such supercilious, presumptuous saints, who are unwilling to read and study the Catechism daily, doing than esteeming themselves much more learned than God Himself with all His saints, angels [patriarchs], prophets, apostles, and all Christians For inasmuch as God Himself is not ashamed to teach these things daily, as knowing nothing better to teach, and always keeps teaching the same thing, and does not take up anything new or different, and all the saints know nothing better or different to learn, and cannot finish learning this, are we not the finest of all fellows to imagine, if we have once read or heard it, that we know it all, and have no further need to read and learn, but can finish learning in one hour what God Himself cannot finish teaching, although He is engaged in teaching it from the beginning to the end of the world, and all prophets, together with all saints, have been occupied with learning it and have ever remained pupils, and must continue to be such ?

For it needs must be that whoever knows the Ten Commandments perfectly must know all the Scriptures, so that, in all affairs and cases, he can advise, help, comfort, judge, and decide both spiritual and temporal matters and is qualified to sit in judgment upon all doctrines, estates, spirits, laws, and whatever else is in the world. And what, indeed, is the entire Psalter but thoughts and exercises upon the First Commandment? Now I know of a truth that such lazy paunches and presumptuous spirits do not understand a single psalm, much less the entire Holy Scriptures; and yet they pretend to know and despise the Catechism, which is a compend and brief summary of all the Holy Scriptures.

Therefore I again implore all Christians, especially pastors and preachers, not to be doctors too soon, and imagine that they know everything (for imagination and cloth unshrunk [and false weights] fall far short of the measure), but that they daily exercise themselves well in these studies and constantly treat them; moreover, that they guard with all care and diligence against the poisonous infection of such security and vain imagination, but steadily keep on reading, teaching, learning, pondering, and meditating, and do not cease until they have made a test and are sure that they have taught the devil to death and have become more learned than God Himself and all His saints.

If they manifest such diligence, then I will promise them, and they shall also perceive, what fruit they will obtain, and what excellent men God will make of them, so that in due time they themselves will acknowledge that the longer and the more they study the Catechism, the less they know of it, and the more they find yet to learn; and then only, as hungry and thirsty ones, will they truly relish that which now they cannot endure because of great abundance and satiety. To this end may God grant His grace! Amen.

Short Preface Of Dr. Martin Luther

SHORT PREFACE OF DR. MARTIN LUTHER.

This sermon is designed and undertaken that it might be an instruction for children and the simple-minded. Hence of old it was called in Greek catechism, i.e., instruction for children, what every Christian must needs know, so that he who does not know this could not be numbered with the Christians nor be admitted to any Sacrament, just as a mechanic who does not understand the rules and customs of his trade is expelled and considered incapable. Therefore we must have the young learn the parts which belong to the Catechism or instruction for children well and fluently and diligently exercise themselves in them and keep them occupied with them.

Therefore it is the duty of every father of a family to question and examine his children and servants at least once a week and to ascertain what they know of it, or are learning and, if they do not know it, to keep them faithfully at it. For I well remember the time, indeed, even now it is a daily occurrence that one finds rude, old persons who knew nothing and still know nothing of these things, and who, nevertheless, go to Baptism and the Lord's Supper, and use everything belonging to Christians, notwithstanding that those who come to the Lord's Supper ought to know more and have a fuller understanding of all Christian doctrine than children and new scholars. However, for the common people we are satisfied with the three parts, which have remained in Christendom from of old, though little of it has been taught and treated correctly until both young and old who are called and wish to be Christians, are well trained in them and familiar with them. These are the following:

First.

The Ten Commandments Of God

THE TEN COMMANDMENTS OF GOD.

1. Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.

2. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord, thy God, in vain [for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh His name in vain].

3. Thou shalt sanctify the holy-day. [Remember the Sabbath-day to keep it holy.]

4. Thou shalt honor thy father and mother [that thou mayest live long upon the earth].

5. Thou shalt not kill.

6. Thou shalt not commit adultery.

7. Thou shalt not steal.

8. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

9. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house.

10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his man-servant, nor his maidservant, nor his cattle [ox, nor his ass], nor anything that is his.

Secondly.

The Chief Articles Of Our Faith

THE CHIEF ARTICLES OF OUR FAITH.

1. I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth.

2. And in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord; who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary; suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead and buried; He descended into hell; the third day He rose again from the dead; He ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead.

3. I believe in the Holy Ghost, the holy Christian Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. Amen.

Thirdly.

THE PRAYER, OR "OUR FATHER," WHICH CHRIST TAUGHT

Our Father who art in heaven.

1. Hallowed be Thy name.

2. Thy kingdom come.

3. Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.

4. Give us this day our daily bread.

5. And forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.

6. And lead us not into temptation.

7. But deliver us from evil. [For Thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory, forever and ever.] Amen.

These are the most necessary parts which one should first learn to repeat word for word and which our children should be accustomed to recite daily when they arise in the morning when they sit down to their meals, and when they retire at night; and until they repeat them, they should be given neither food nor drink. Likewise every head of a household is obliged to do the same with respect to his domestics, ma-servants and maid-servants and not to keep them in his house if they do not know these things and are unwilling to learn them. For a person who is so rude and unruly as to be unwilling to learn these things is not to be tolerated, for in these three parts everything that we have in the Scriptures is comprehended in short, pain, and simple terms. For the holy Fathers or apostles (whoever they were) have thus embraced in a summary the doctrine, life, wisdom, and art of Christians, of which they speak and treat, and with which they are occupied. Now, when these three arts are apprehended, it behooves a person also to know what to say concerning our Sacraments, which Christ Himself instituted, Baptism and the holy body and blood of Christ, namely, the text which Matthew [28, 19 ff.] and Mark [16, 15 f.] record at the close of their Gospels when Christ said farewell to His disciples and sent them forth.

Of Baptism

OF BAPTISM.

Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. So much is sufficient for a simple person to know from the Scriptures concerning Baptism. In like manner, also, concerning the other Sacrament in short, simple words, namely the text of St. Paul [1 Cor. 11, 23 f.].

Of The Sacrament

OF THE SACRAMENT

Our Lord Jesus Christ, the same night in which He was betrayed, took bread; and when He had given thanks, He brake it, and gave it to His disciples and said, Take, eat; this is My body, which is given for you: this do in remembrance of Me.

After the same manner also He took the cup, when He had supped, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; this cup is the new testament in My blood, which is shed for you for the remission of sins: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of Me.

Thus, ye would have, in all, five parts of the entire Christian doctrine which should be constantly treated and required [of children] and heard recited word for word. For you must not rely upon it that the young people will learn and retain these things from the sermon alone. When these parts have been well learned, you may, as a supplement and to fortify them. lay before them also some psalms or hymns, which have been composed on these parts, and thus lead the young into the Scriptures, and make daily progress therein.

However, it is not enough for them to comprehend and recite these parts according to the words only, but the young people should also be made to attend the preaching, especially during the time which is devoted to the Catechism, that they may hear it explained and may learn to understand what every part contains, so as to be able to recite it as they have heard it, and, when asked, may give a correct answer, so that the preaching may not be without profit and fruit. For the reason why we exercise such diligence in preaching the Catechism so often is that it may be inculcated on our youth, not in a high and subtle manner, but briefly and with the greatest simplicity, so as to enter the mind readily and be fixed in the memory. Therefore we shall now take up the above mentioned articles one by one and in the plainest manner possible say about them as much as is necessary.

Part First. The Ten Commandments.

The First Commandment.

Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.

That is: Thou shalt have [and worship] Me alone as thy God. What is the force of this, and how is it to be understood? What does it mean to have a god? or, what is God? Answer: A god means that from which we are to expect all good and to which we are to take refuge in all distress, so that to have a God is nothing else than to trust and believe Him from the [whole] heart; as I have often said that the confidence and faith of the heart alone make both God and an idol. If your faith and trust be right, then is your god also true; and, on the other hand, if your trust be false and wrong, then you have not the true God; for these two belong together faith and God. That now, I say, upon which you set your heart and put your trust is properly your god.

Therefore it is the intent of this commandment to require true faith and trust of the heart which settles upon the only true God and clings to Him alone. That is as much as to say: "See to it that you let Me alone be your God, and never seek another," i.e.: Whatever you lack of good things, expect it of Me, and look to Me for it, and whenever you suffer misfortune and distress, creep and cling to Me. I, yes, I, will give you enough and help you out of every need; only let not your heart cleave to or rest in any other.

This I must unfold somewhat more plainly, that it may be understood and perceived by ordinary examples of the contrary. Many a one thinks that he has God and everything in abundance when he has money and possessions; he trusts in them and boasts of them with such firmness and assurance as to care for no one. Lo, such a man also has a god, Mammon by name, i.e., money and possessions, on which he sets all his heart, and which is also the most common idol on earth. He who has money and possessions feels secure, and is joyful and undismayed as though he were sitting in the midst of Paradise. On the other hand, he who has none doubts and is despondent, as though he knew of no God. For very few are to be found who are of good cheer, and who neither mourn nor complain if they have not Mammon. This [care and desire for money] sticks and clings to our nature, even to the grave.

So, too, whoever trusts and boasts that he possesses great skill, prudence, power, favor friendship, and honor has also a god, but not this true and only God. This appears again when you notice how presumptuous, secure, and proud people are because of such possessions, and how despondent when they no longer exist or are withdrawn. Therefore I repeat that the chief explanation of this point is that to have a god is to have something in which the heart entirely trusts.

Besides, consider what in our blindness, we have hitherto been practicing and doing under the Papacy. If any one had toothache, he fasted and honored St. Apollonia [lacerated his flesh by voluntary fasting to the honor of St. Apollonia]; if he was afraid of fire, he chose St. Lawrence as his helper in need; if he dreaded pestilence, he made a vow to St. Sebastian or Rochio, and a countless number of such abominations, where every one selected his own saint, worshiped him, and called for help to him in distress. Here belong those also, as, e.g., sorcerers and magicians, whose idolatry is most gross, and who make a covenant with the devil, in order that he may give them plenty of money or help them in love-affairs, preserve their cattle, restore to them lost possessions, etc. For all these place their heart and trust elsewhere than in the true God, look for nothing good to Him nor seek it from Him.

Thus you can easily understand what and how much this commandment requires, namely, that man's entire heart and all his confidence be placed in God alone, and in no one else. For to have God, you can easily perceive, is not to lay hold of Him with our hands or to put Him in a bag [as money], or to lock Him in a chest [as silver vessels]. But to apprehend Him means when the heart lays hold of Him and clings to Him. But to cling to Him with the heart is nothing else than to trust in Him entirely. For this reason He wishes to turn us away from everything else that exists outside of Him, and to draw us to Himself, namely, because He is the only eternal good. As though He would say: Whatever you have heretofore sought of the saints, or for whatever [things] you have trusted in Mammon or anything else, expect it all of Me, and regard Me as the one who will help you and pour out upon you richly all good things.

Lo, here you have the meaning of the true honor and worship of God, which pleases God, and which He commands under penalty of eternal wrath, namely, that the heart know no other comfort or confidence than in Him, and do not suffer itself to be torn from Him, but, for Him, risk and disregard everything upon earth. On the other hand, you can easily see and judge how the world practices only false worship and idolatry. For no people has ever been so reprobate as not to institute and observe some divine worship; every one has set up as his special god whatever he looked to for blessings, help, and comfort.

Thus, for example, the heathen who put their trust in power and dominion elevated Jupiter as the supreme god; the others, who were bent upon riches, happiness, or pleasure, and a life of ease, Hercules, Mercury, Venus or others; women with child, Diana or Lucina, and so on; thus every one made that his god to which his heart was inclined, so that even in the mind of the heathen to have a god means to trust and believe. But their error is this that their trust is false and wrong for it is not placed in the only God, besides whom there is truly no God in heaven or upon earth. Therefore the heathen really make their self-invented notions and dreams of God an idol, and put their trust in that which is altogether nothing. Thus it is with all idolatry; for it consists not merely in erecting an image and worshiping it, but rather in the heart, which stands gaping at something else, and seeks help and consolation from creatures saints, or devils, and neither cares for God, nor looks to Him for so much good as to believe that He is willing to help, neither believes that whatever good it experiences comes from God.

Besides, there is also a false worship and extreme idolatry, which we have hitherto practiced, and is still prevalent in the world, upon which also all ecclesiastical orders are founded, and which concerns the conscience alone that seeks in its own works help, consolation, and salvation, presumes to wrest heaven from God, and reckons how many bequests it has made, how often it has fasted, celebrated Mass, etc. Upon such things it depends, and of them boasts, as though unwilling to receive anything from God as a gift, but desires itself to earn or merit it superabundantly, just as though He must serve us and were our debtor, and we His liege lords. What is this but reducing God to an idol, yea, [a fig image or] an apple-god, and elevating and regarding ourselves as God ? But this is slightly too subtle, and is not for young pupils.

But let this be said to the simple, that they may well note and remember the meaning of this commandment, namely, that we are to trust in God alone, and look to Him and expect from Him naught but good, as from one who gives us body, life, food, drink, nourishment, health, protection, peace, and all necessaries of both temporal and eternal things. He also preserves us from misfortune, and if any evil befall us, delivers and rescues us, so that it is God alone (as has been sufficiently said) from whom we receive all good, and by whom we are delivered from all evil. Hence also, I think, we Germans from ancient times call God (more elegantly and appropriately than any other language) by that name from the word good as being an eternal fountain which gushes forth abundantly nothing but what is good, and from which flows forth all that is and is called good.

For even though otherwise we experience much good from men, still whatever we receive by His command or arrangement is all received from God. For our parents, and all rulers, and every one besides with respect to his neighbor, have received from God the command that they should do us all manner of good, so that we receive these blessings not from them, but, through them, from God. For creatures are only the hands, channels, and means whereby God gives all things, as He gives to the mother breasts and milk to offer to her child, and corn and all manner of produce from the earth for nourishment, none of which blessings could be produced by any creature of itself.

Therefore no man should presume to take or give anything except as God has commanded, in order that it may be acknowledged as God's gift, and thanks may be rendered Him for it, as this commandment requires. On this account also these means of receiving good gifts through creatures are not to be rejected, neither should we in presumption seek other ways and means than God has commanded. For that would not be receiving from God, hut seeking of ourselves.

Let every one, then, see to it that he esteem this commandment great and high above all things, and do not regard it as a joke. Ask and examine your heart diligently, and you will find whether it cleaves to God alone or not. If you have a heart that can expect of Him nothing but what is good, especially in want and distress, and that, moreover renounces and forsakes everything that is not God, then you have the only true God. If on the contrary, it cleaves to anything else, of which it expects more good and help than of God, and does not take refuge in Him, but in adversity flees from Him, then you have an idol, another god.

In order that it may be seen that God will not have this commandment thrown to the winds, but will most strictly enforce it, He has attached to it first a terrible threat, and then a beautiful, comforting promise which is also to be urged and impressed upon young people, that they may take it to heart and retain it:

[Exposition of the Appendix to the First Commandment.]

For I am the Lord, thy God, strong and jealous, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me; and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love Me and keep My commandments.

Although these words relate to all the commandments (as we shall hereafter learn), yet they are joined to this chief commandment because it is of first importance that men have a right head; for where the head is right, the whole life must be right, and vice versa. Learn, therefore, from these words how angry God is with those who trust in anything but Him, and again, how good and gracious He is to those who trust and believe in Him alone with the whole heart; so that His anger does not cease until the fourth generation, while, on the other hand, His blessing and goodness extend to many thousands lest you live in such security and commit yourself to chance, as men of brutal heart, who think that it makes no great difference [how they live]. He is a God who will not leave it unavenged if men turn from Him, and will not cease to be angry until the fourth generation, even until they are utterly exterminated. Therefore He is to be feared, and not to be desisted.

He has also demonstrated this in all history, as the Scriptures abundantly show and daily experience still teaches. For from the beginning He has utterly extirpated all idolatry, and, on account of it, both heathen and Jews; even as at the present day He overthrows all false worship, so that all who remain therein must finally perish. Therefore, although proud, powerful, and rich worldlings [Sardanapaluses and Phalarides, who surpass even the Persians in wealth] are now to be found, who boast defiantly of their Mammon, with utter disregard whether God is angry at or smiles on them, and dare to withstand His wrath, yet they shall not succeed, but before they are aware, they shall be wrecked, with all in which they trusted; as all others have perished who have thought themselves more secure or powerful. And just because of such hardened heads who imagine because God connives and allows them to rest in security, that He either is entirely ignorant or cares nothing about such matters, He must deal a smashing blow and punish them, so that He cannot forget it unto children's children; so that every one may take note and see that this is no joke to Him. For they are those whom He means when He says: Who hate Me, i.e., those who persist in their defiance and pride; whatever is preached or said to them, they will not listen; when they are reproved, in order that they may learn to know themselves and amend before the punishment begins, they become mad and foolish so as to fairly merit wrath, as now we see daily in bishops and princes.

But terrible as are these threatenings, so much the more powerful is the consolation in the promise, that those who cling to God alone should be sure that He will show them mercy that is, show them pure goodness and blessing not only for themselves, but also to their children and children's children, even to the thousandth generation and beyond that. This ought certainly to move and impel us to risk our hearts in all confidence with God, if we wish all temporal and eternal good, since the Supreme Majesty makes such sublime offers and presents such cordial inducements and such rich promises.

Therefore let everyone seriously take this to heart, lest it be regarded as though a man had spoken it. For to you it is a question either of eternal blessing, happiness, and salvation, or of eternal wrath, misery, and woe. What more would you have or desire than that He so kindly promises to be yours with every blessing, and to protect and help you in all need?

But, alas! here is the failure, that the world believes nothing of this, nor regards it as God's Word, because it sees that those who trust in God and not in Mammon suffer care and want, and the devil opposes and resists them, that they have neither money, favor, nor honor, and, besides, can scarcely support life; while, on the other hand, those who serve Mammon have power, favor, honor, possessions, and every comfort in the eyes of the world. For this reason, these words must be grasped as being directed against such appearances; and we must consider that they do not lie or deceive, but must come true.

Reflect for yourself or make inquiry and tell me: Those who have employed all their care and diligence to accumulate great possessions and wealth, what have they finally attained? You will find that they have wasted their toil and labor, or even though they have amassed great treasures, they have been dispersed and scattered, so that the themselves have never found happiness in their wealth, and afterwards never reached the third generation. Instances of this you will find a plenty in all histories, also in the memory of aged and experienced people. Only observe and ponder them.

Saul was a great king, chosen of God and a godly man; but when he was established on his throne, and let his heart decline from God, and put his trust in his crown and power, he had to perish with all that he had, so that none even of his children remained. David, on the other hand, was a poor, despised man, hunted down and chased, so that he nowhere felt secure of his life; yet he had to remain in spite of Saul, and become king. For these words had to abide and come true, since God cannot lie or deceive. Only let not the devil and the world deceive you with their show, which indeed remains for a time, but finally is nothing.

Let us, then, learn well the First Commandment, that we may see how God will tolerate no presumption nor any trust in any other object, and how He requires nothing higher of us than confidence from the heart for everything good, so that we may proceed right and straightforward and use all the blessings which God gives no farther than as a shoemaker uses his needle, awl, and thread for work, and then lays them aside, or as a traveler uses an inn, and food, and his bed only for temporal necessity, each one in his station, according to God's order, and without allowing any of these things to be our food or idol. Let this suffice with respect to the First Commandment, which we have had to explain at length, since it is of chief importance, because, as before said, where the heart is rightly disposed toward God and this commandment is observed, all the others follow.

The Second Commandment.

Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord, thy God, in vain.

As the First Commandment has instructed the heart and taught [the basis of] faith, so this commandment leads us forth and directs the mouth and tongue to God. For the first objects that spring from the heart and manifest themselves are words. Now, as I have taught above how to answer the question, what it is to have a god, so you must learn to comprehend simply the meaning of this and all the commandments, and to apply it to yourself. If, then, it be asked: How do you understand the Second Commandment, or what is meant by taking in vain, or misusing God's name? answer briefly thus: It is misusing God's name when we call upon the Lord God no matter in what way, for purposes of falsehood or wrong of any kind. Therefore this commandment enjoins this much, that God's name must not be appealed to falsely, or taken upon the lips while the heart knows well enough, or should know, differently; as among those who take oaths in court, where one side lies against the other. For God's name cannot be misused worse than for the support of falsehood and deceit. Let4this remain the exact German and simplest meaning of this commandment.

From this every one can readily infer when and in how many ways God's name is misused, although it is impossible to enumerate all its misuses. Yet, to tell it in a few words, all misuse of the divine name occurs, first, in worldly business and in matters which concern money, possessions, honor, whether it be publicly in court, in the market, or wherever else men make false oaths in God's name, or pledge their souls in any matter. And this is especially prevalent in marriage affairs where two go and secretly betroth themselves to one another, and afterward abjure [their plighted troth].

But. the greatest abuse occurs in spiritual matters, which pertain to the conscience, when false preachers rise up and offer their Lying vanities as God's Word. Behold, all this is decking one's self out with God's name, or making a pretty show, or claiming to be right, whether it occur in gross, worldly business or in sublime, subtle matters of faith and doctrine. And among liars belong also blasphemers, not alone the very gross, well known to every one, who disgrace God's name without fear (these are not for us, but for the hangman to discipline); but also those who publicly traduce the truth and God's Word and consign it to the devil. Of this there is no need now to speak further.

Here, then, let us learn and take to heart the great importance of this commandment, that with all diligence we may guard against and dread every misuse of the holy name, as the greatest sin that can be outwardly committed. For to lie and deceive is in itself a great sin, but is greatly aggravated when we attempt to justify it, and seek to confirm it by invoking the name of God and using it as a cloak for shame, so that from a single lie a double lie, nay, manifold lies, result.

For this reason, too, God has added a solemn threat to this commandment, to wit: For the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh His name in van. That is: It shall not be condoned to any one nor pass unpunished. For as little as He will leave it unavenged if any one turn his heart from Him, as little will He suffer His name to be employed for dressing up a lie. Now alas! it is a common calamity in all the word that there are as few who are not using the name of God for purposes of Lying and all wickedness as there are those who with their heart trust alone in God. For by nature we all have within us this beautiful virtue, to wit, that whoever has committed a wrong would like to cover up and adorn his disgrace, so that no one may see it or know it; and no one is so bold as to boast to all the world of the wickedness he has perpetrated, all wish to act by stealth and without any one being aware of what thy do. Then, if any one be arraigned, the name of God is dragged into the affair and must make the villainy look like godliness, and the shame like honor. This is the common course of the world, which, like a great deluge, has flooded all lands. Hence we have also as our reward what we seek and deserve: pestilences wars, famines, conflagrations, floods, wayward wives, children, servants, and all sorts of defilement. Whence else should so much misery come? It is still a great mercy that the earth bears and supports us.

Therefore, above all things, our young people should have this commandment earnestly enforced upon them, and they should be trained to hold this and the First Commandment in high regard; and whenever they transgress, we must at once be after them with the rod and hold the commandment before them, and constantly inculcate it, so as to bring them up not only with punishment, but also in the reverence and fear of God.

Thus you now understand what. it is to take God's name in vain, that is (to recapitulate briefly), either simply for purposes of falsehood, and to allege God's name for something that is not so, or to curse, swear, conjure, and, in short, to practice whatever wickedness one may. Besides this you must also know how to use the name [of God] aright. For when saying: Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God, in vain, He gives us to understand at the same time that it is to be used properly. For it has been revealed and given to us for the very purpose that it may be of constant use and profit. Hence it is a natural inference, since using the holy name for falsehood or wickedness is here forbidden, that we are, on the other hand, commanded to employ it for truth and for all good, as when one swears truly where there is need and it is demanded. So also when there is right teaching, and when the name is invoked in trouble or praised and thanked in prosperity etc.; all of which is comprehended summarily and commanded in the passage Ps. 50, 15: Call upon Me in the days of trouble; I will deliver thee, and thou shalt glorify Me. For all this is bringing 't into the service of truth, and using it in a blessed way, and thus His name is hallowed, as we pray in the Lord's Prayer.

Thus you have the sum of the entire commandment explained. And with this understanding the question with which many teachers have troubled themselves has been easily solved, to wit, why swearing is prohibited in the Gospel, and yet Christ, St. Paul, and other saints often swore. The explanation is briefly this: We are not to swear in support of evil, that is, of falsehood, and where there is no need or use; but for the support of good and the advantage of our neighbor we should swear. For it is a truly good work, by which God is praised, truth and right are established, falsehood is refuted, peace is made among men, obedience is rendered, and quarrels are settled. For in this way God Himself interposes and separates between right and wrong, good and evil. If one part swears falsely, he has his sentence that he shall not escape punishment, ad though it be deferred a long time, he shall not succeed; that all that he may gain thereby will slip out of his hands, and he will never enjoy it; as I have seen in the case of many who perjured themselves in their marriage-vows, that they have never had a happy hour or a healthful day, and thus perished miserably in body, soul, and possessions.

Therefore I advise and exhort as before that by means of warning and threatening, restraint and punishment, the children be trained betimes to shun falsehood, and especially to avoid the use of God's name in its support. For where they are allowed to do as they please, no good will result, as is even now evident that the world is worse than it has ever been and that there is no government, no obedience, no fidelity, no faith, but only daring, unbridled men, whom no teaching or reproof helps; all of which is God's wrath and punishment for such wanton contempt of this commandment.

On the other hand, they should be constantly urged and incited to honor God's name, and to have it always upon their lips in everything that may happen to them or come to their notice: For that is the true honor of His Name, to look to it and implore it for all consolation, so that (as we have heard above) first the heart by faith gives God the honor due Him, and afterwards the lips by confession.

This is also a blessed and useful habit and very effectual against the devil, who is ever about us, and lies in wait to bring us into sin and shame, calamity and trouble, but who is very loath to hear God's name, and cannot remain long where it is uttered and called upon from the heart. And, indeed, many a terrible and shocking calamity would befall us if, by our calling upon His name, God did not preserve us. I have myself tried it, and learned by experience that often sudden great calamity was immediately averted and removed during such invocation. To vex the devil, I say, we should always have this holy name in our mouth, so that he may not be able to injure us as he wishes.

For this end it is also of service that we form the habit of daily commending ourselves to God, with soul and body, wife, children, servants, and all that we have, against every need that may occur; whence also the blessing and thanksgiving at meals, and other prayers, morning and evening, have originated and remain in use. Likewise the practices of children to cross themselves when anything monstrous or terrible is seen or heard, and to exclaim: "Lord God, protect us!" "Help, dear Lord Jesus!" etc. Thus, too, if any one meets with unexpected good fortune, however trivial, that he say: "God be praised and thanked; this God has bestowed on me!" etc., as formerly the children were accustomed to fast and pray to St. Nicholas and other saints. This would be more pleasing and acceptable to God than all monasticism and Carthusian sanctity.

Behold, thus we might train our youth in a childlike way and playfully in the fear and honor of God, so that the First and Second Commandments might be well observed and in constant practice. Then some good might take root, spring up and bear fruit, and men grow up whom an entire land might relish and enjoy. Moreover, this would be the true way to bring Up children well as long as they can become trained with kindness and delight. For what must be enforced with rods and blows only will not develop into a good breed and at best they will remain godly under such treatment no longer than while the rod is upon their back.

But this [manner of training] so spreads its roots in the heart that they fear God more than rods and clubs. This I say with such simplicity for the sake of the young, that it may penetrate their minds. For since we are preaching to children, we must also prattle with them. Thus we have prevented the abuse and have taught the right use of the divine name, which should consist not only in words, but also in practices and life, so that we may know that God is well pleased with this and will as richly reward it as He will terribly punish the abuse.

The Third Commandment.

Thou shalt sanctify the holy day. [Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.]

The word holy day (Feiertag) is rendered from the Hebrew word Sabbath which properly signifies to rest, that is, to abstain from labor. Hence we are accustomed to say, Feierbend machen [that is, to cease working], or heiligen Abend geben [sanctify the Sabbath]. Now, in the Old Testament, God separated the seventh day, and appointed it for rest, and commanded that it should be regarded as holy above all others. As regards this external observance, this commandment was given to the Jews alone, that they should abstain from toilsome work, and rest, so that both man and beast might recuperate, and not be weakened by unremitting labor. Although they afterwards restricted this too closely, and grossly abused it, so that they traduced and could not endure in Christ those works which they themselves were accustomed to do on that day, as we read in the Gospel just as though the commandment were fulfilled by doing no external [manual] work whatever, which, however, was not the meaning, but, as we shall hear, that they sanctify the holy day or day of rest.

This commandment, therefore, according to its gross sense, does not concern us Christians; for it is altogether an external matter, like other ordinances of the Old Testament, which were attached to particular customs, persons, times, and places, and now have been made free through Christ. But to grasp a Christian meaning for the simple as to what God requires in this commandment, note that we keep holy days not for the sake of intelligent and learned Christians (for they have no need of it [holy days]), but first of all for bodily causes and necessities, which nature teaches and requires; for the common people, man-servants and maid-servants, who have been attending to their work and trade the whole week, that for a day they may retire in order to rest and be refreshed.

Secondly, and most especially, that on such day of rest (since we can get no other opportunity) freedom and time be taken to attend divine service, so that we come together to hear and treat of God's and then to praise God, to sing and pray.

However, this, I say, is not so restricted to any time, as with the Jews, that it must be just on this or that day; for in itself no one day is better than another; but this should indeed be done daily; however, since the masses cannot give such attendance, there must be at least one day in the week set apart. But since from of old Sunday [the Lord's Day] has been appointed for this purpose, we also should continue the same, in order that everything be done in harmonious order, and no one create disorder by unnecessary innovation.

Therefore this is the simple meaning of the commandment: since holidays are observed anyhow, such observance should be devoted to hearing God's Word, so that the special function of this day should be the ministry of the Word for the young and the mass of poor people, yet that the resting be not so strictly interpreted as to forbid any other incidental work that cannot be avoided.

Accordingly, when asked, What is meant by the commandment: Thou shalt sanctify the holy day? answer: To sanctify the holy day is the same as to keep it holy. But what is meant by keeping it holy? Nothing else than to be occupied in holy words, works, and life. For the day needs no sanctification for itself; for in itself it has been created holy [from the beginning of the creation it was sanctified by its Creator]. But God desires it to be holy to you. Therefore it becomes holy or unholy on your account, according as you are occupied on the same with things that are holy or unholy.

How, then, does such sanctification take place? Not in this manner, that [with folded hands] we sit behind the stove and do no rough [external] work, or deck ourselves with a wreath and put on our best clothes, but (as has been said) that we occupy ourselves with God's Word, and exercise ourselves therein.

And, indeed, we Christians ought always to keep such a holy day, and be occupied with nothing but holy things, i.e., daily be engaged upon God's Word, and carry it in our hearts and upon our lips. But (as has been said) since we do not at all times have leisure, we must devote several hours a week for the sake of the young, or at least a day for the sake of the entire multitude, to being concerned about this alone, and especially urge the Ten Commandments, the Creed, and the Lord's Prayer, and thus direct our whole life and being according to God's Word. At whatever time, then, this is being observed and practiced, there a true holy day is being kept; otherwise it shall not be called a Christians' holy day. For, indeed, non-Christians can also cease from work and be idle, just as the entire swarm of our ecclesiastics, who stand daily in the churches, singing, and ringing bells but keeping no holy day holy, because they neither preach nor practices God's Word, but teach and live contrary to it.

For the Word of God is the sanctuary above all sanctuaries, yea, the only one which we Christians know and have. For though we had the bones of all the saints or all holy and consecrated garments upon a heap, still that would help us nothing; for all that is a dead thing which can sanctify nobody. But God's Word is the treasure which sanctifies everything, and by which even all the saints themselves were sanctified. At whatever hour then, God's Word is taught, preached, heard, read or meditated upon, there the person, day, and work are sanctified thereby, not because of the external work, but because of the Word which makes saints of us all. Therefore I constantly say that all our life and work must be ordered according to God's Word, if it is to be God-pleasing or holy. Where this is done, this commandment is in force and being fulfilled.

On the contrary, any observance or work that is practiced without God's Word is unholy before God, no matter how brilliantly it may shine! even though it be covered with relics, such as the fictitious spiritual orders which know nothing of God's Word and seek holiness in their own works. Note, therefore, that the force and power of this commandment lies not in the resting but in the sanctifying so that to this day belongs a special holy exercise. For other works and occupations are not properly called holy exercises, unless the man himself be first holy. But here a work is to be done by which man is himself made holy, which is done (as we have heard ) alone through God's Word. For this, then, fixed places, times, persons, and the entire external order of worship have been created and appointed, so that it may be publicly in operation.

Since, therefore, so much depends upon God's Word that without it no holy day can be sanctified, we must know that God insists upon a strict observance of this commandment, and will punish all who despise His Word and are not willing to hear and learn it, especially at the time appointed for the purpose.

Therefore not only those sin against this commandment who grossly misuse and desecrate the holy day, as those who on account of their greed or frivolity neglect to hear God's Word or lie in taverns and are dead drunk like swine; but also that other crowd, who listen to God's Word as to any other trifle, and only from custom come to preaching, and go away again, and at the end of the year know as little of it as at the beginning. For hitherto the opinion prevailed that you had properly hallowed Sunday when you had heard a mass or the Gospel read; but no one cared for God's Word, as also no one taught it. Now, while we have God's Word we nevertheless do not correct the abuse; we suffer ourselves to be preached to and admonished, but we listen without seriousness and care.

Know, therefore, that you must be concerned not only about hearing, but also about learning and retaining it in memory, and do not think that it is optional with you or of no great importance, but that it is God's commandment, who will require of you how you have heard, learned, and honored His Word.

Likewise those fastidious spirits are to be reproved who, when they have heard a sermon or two, find it tedious and dull, thinking that they know all that well enough, and need no more instruction. For just that is the sin which has been hitherto reckoned among mortal sins, and is called _achedia_, i.e., torpor or satiety, a malignant, dangerous plague with which the devil bewitches and deceives the hearts of many, that he may surprise us and secretly withdraw God's Word from us.

For let me tell you this, even though you know it perfectly and be already master in all things, still you are daily in the dominion of the devil, who ceases neither day nor night to steal unawares upon you, to kindle in your heart unbelief and wicked thoughts against the foregoing and all the commandments. Therefore you must always have God's Word in your heart, upon your lips, and in your ears. But where the heart is idle, and the Word does not sound, he breaks in and has done the damage before we are aware. On the other hand, such is the efficacy of the Word, whenever it is seriously contemplated heard, and used, that it is bound never to be without fruit, but always awakens new understanding, pleasure, and devoutness, and produces a pure heart and pure thoughts. For these words are not inoperative or dead, but creative, living words. And even though no other interest or necessity impel us, yet this ought to urge every one thereunto, because thereby the devil is put to flight and driven away, and, besides, this commandment is fulfilled, and [this exercise in the Word] is more pleasing to God than any work of hypocrisy, however brilliant.

The Fourth Commandment.

Thus far we have learned the first three commandments, which relate to God. First that with our whole heart we trust in Him, and fear and love Him throughout all our life. Secondly, that we do not misuse His holy name in the support of falsehood or any bad work, but employ it to the praise of God and the profit and salvation of our neighbor and ourselves. Thirdly, that on holidays and when at rest we diligently treat and urge God's Word, so that all our actions and our entire life be ordered according to it. Now follow the other seven, which relate to our neighbor among which the first and greatest is:

Thou shalt honor thy father and thy mother.

To this estate of fatherhood and motherhood God has given the special distinction above all estates that are beneath it that He not simply commands us to love our parents, but to honor them. For with respect to brothers, sisters, and our neighbors in general He commands nothing higher than that we love them, so that He separates and distinguishes father and mother above all other persons upon earth, and places them at His side. For it is a far higher thing to honor than to love one, inasmuch as it comprehends not only love, but also modesty, humility, and deference as to a majesty there hidden, and requires not only that they be addressed kindly and with reverence, but, most of all that both in heart and with the body we so act as to show that we esteem them very highly, and that, next to God, we regard them as the very highest. For one whom we are to honor from the heart we must truly regard as high and great.

We must, therefore impress it upon the young that they should regard their parents as in God's stead, and remember that however lowly, poor, frail, and queer they may be, nevertheless they are father and mother given them by God. They are not to be deprived of their honor because of their conduct or their failings. Therefore we are not to regard their persons, how they may be, but the will of God who has thus created and ordained. In other respects we are, indeed, all alike in the eyes of God; but among us there must necessarily be such inequality and ordered difference, and therefore God commands it to be observed, that you obey me as your father, and that I have the supremacy.

Learn, therefore, first, what is the honor towards parents required by this commandment to wit, that they be held in distinction and esteem above all things, as the most precious treasure on earth. Furthermore, that also in our words we observe modesty toward them, do not accost them roughly, haughtily, and defiantly, but yield to them and be silent even though they go too far. Thirdly, that we show them such honor also by works, that is, with our body and possessions, that we serve them, help them, and provide for them when they are old, sick, infirm, or poor, and all that not only gladly, but with humility and reverence, as doing it before God. For he who knows how to regard them in his heart will not allow them to suffer want or hunger, but will place them above him and at his side, and will share with them whatever he has and possesses.

Secondly, notice how great, good, and holy a work is here assigned children, which is alas! utterly neglected and disregarded, and no one perceives that God has commanded it or that it is a holy, divine Word and doctrine. For if it had been regarded as such, every one could have inferred that they must be holy men who live according to these words. Thus there would have been no need of inventing monasticism nor spiritual orders, but every child would have abided by this commandment, and could have directed his conscience to God and said: "If I am to do good and holy works, I know of none better than to render all honor and obedience to my parents, because God has Himself commanded it. For what God commands must be much and far nobler than everything that we may devise ourselves, and since there is no higher or better teacher to be found than God, there can be no better doctrine, indeed, than He gives forth. Now, He teaches fully what we should do if we wish to perform truly good works, and by commanding them, He shows that they please Him. If, then, it is God who commands this, and who knows not how to appoint anything better, I will never improve upon it."

Behold, in this manner we would have had a godly child properly taught, reared in true blessedness, and kept at home in obedience to his parents and in their service, so that men should have had blessing and joy from the spectacle. However, God's commandment was not permitted to be thus [with such care and diligence] commended, but had to be neglected and trampled under foot, so that a child could not lay it to heart, and meanwhile gaped [like a panting wolf] at the devices which we set up, without once [consulting or] giving reverence to God.

Let us, therefore, learn at last, for God's sake, that, placing all other things out of sight, our youths look first to this commandment, if they wish to serve God with truly good works, that they do what is pleasing to their fathers and mothers, or to those to whom they may be subject in their stead. For every child that knows and does this has, in the first place, this great consolation in his heart that he can joyfully say and boast (in spite of and against all who are occupied with works of their own choice): "Behold, this work is well pleasing to my God in heaven that I know for certain." Let them all come together with their many great, distressing, and difficult works and make their boast, we will see whether they can show one that is greater and nobler than obedience to father and mother, to whom God has appointed and commanded obedience next to His own majesty; so that if God's Word and will are in force and being accomplished nothing shall be esteemed higher than the will and word of parents; yet so that it, too, is subordinated to obedience toward God and is not opposed to the preceding commandments.

Therefore you should be heartily glad and thank God that He has chosen you and made you worthy to do a work so precious and pleasing to Him. Only see that, although it be regarded as the most humble and despised you esteem it great and precious, not on account of our worthiness, but because it is comprehended in, and controlled by, the jewel and sanctuary, namely, the Word and commandment of God. Oh, what a high price would all; Carthusians, monks, and nuns pay, if in all their religious doings they could bring into God's presence a single work done by virtue of His commandment, and be able before His face to say with joyful heart: "Now I know that this work is well pleasing to Thee." Where will these poor wretched persons hide when in the sight of God and all the world they shall blush with shame before a young child who has lived according to this commandment, and shall have to confess that with their whole life they are not worthy to give it a drink of water? And it serves them right for their devilish perversion in treading God's commandment under foot that they must vainly torment themselves with works of their own device, and, in addition, have scorn and loss for their reward.

Should not the heart, then, leap and melt for joy when going to work and doing what is commanded, saying: Lo, this is better than all holiness of the Carthusians, even though they kill themselves fasting and praying upon their knees without ceasing? For here you have a sure text and a divine testimony that He has enjoined this, but concerning the other He did not command a word. But this is the plight and miserable blindness of the world that no one believes these things; to such an extent the devil has deceived us with false holiness and the glamour of our own works.

Therefore I would be very glad (I say it again) if men would open their eyes and ears and take this to heart, lest some time we may again be led astray from the pure Word of God to the lying vanities of the devil. Then, too, all would be well; for parents would have more joy, love, friendship, and concord in their houses; thus the children could captivate their parents' hearts. On the other hand, when they are obstinate, and will not do what they ought until a rod is laid upon their back, they anger both God and their parents, whereby they deprive themselves of this treasure and joy of conscience and lay up for themselves only misfortune. Therefore, as every one complains, the course of the world now is such that both young and old are altogether dissolute and beyond control, have no reverence nor sense of honor, do nothing except as they are driven to it by blows, and perpetrate what wrong and detraction they can behind each other's back; therefore God also punishes them, that they sink into all kinds of filth and misery. As a rule, the parents, too, are themselves stupid and ignorant; one fool trains [teaches] another, and as they have lived, so live their children after them.

This, now, I say should be the first and most important consideration to urge us to the observance of this commandment; on which account, even if we had no father and mother we ought to wish that God would set up wood and stone before Us, whom we might call father and mother. How much more, since He has given us living parents, should we rejoice to show them honor and obedience, because we know it is so highly pleasing to the Divine Majesty and to all angels, and vexes all devils, and is, besides, the highest work which we can do, after the sublime divine worship comprehended in the previous commandments, so that giving of alms and every other good work toward our neighbor are not equal to this. For God has assigned this estate the highest place, yea, has set it up in His own stead, upon earth. This will and pleasure of God ought to be a sufficient reason and incentive to us to do what we can with good will and pleasure.

Besides this, it is our duty before the world to be grateful for benefits and every good which we have of our parents. But here again the devil rules in the world, so that the children forget their parents, as we all forget God, and no one considers how God nourishes, protects, and defends us, and bestows so much good on body and soul; especially when an evil hour comes we are angry and grumble with impatience and all the good which we have received throughout our life is wiped out [from our memory]. Just so we do also with our parents, and there is no child that understands and considers this [what the parents have endured while nourishing and fostering him], except the Holy Ghost grant him this grace.

God knows very well this perverseness of the world; therefore He admonishes and urges by commandments that every one consider what his parents have done for him and he will find that he has from them body and life, moreover, that he has been fed and reared when otherwise he would have perished a hundred times in his own filth. Therefore it is a true and good saying of old and wise men: Deo, parentibus et magistris non potest satis gratiae rependi, that is, To God, to parents, and to teachers we can never render sufficient gratitude and compensation. He that regards and considers this will indeed without compulsion do all honor to his parents, and bear them up on his hands as those through whom God has done him all good.

Over and above all this, another great reason that should incite us the more [to obedience to this commandment] is that God attaches to this commandment a temporal promise and says: That thou mayest live long upon the land which the Lord, thy God, giveth thee.

Here you can see yourself how much God is in earnest in respect to this commandment, inasmuch as He not only declares that it is well pleasing to Him, and that He has joy and delight therein; but also that it shall be for our prosperity and promote our highest good; so that we may have a pleasant and agreeable life, furnished with every good thing. Therefore also St. Paul greatly emphasizes the same and rejoices in it when he says, Eph. 6, 2. 3: This is the first commandment with promise: That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth. For although the rest also have their promises contained in them, yet in none is it so plainly and explicitly stated.

Here, then, you have the fruit and the reward, that whoever observes this commandment shall have happy days, fortune, and prosperity; and on the other hand, the punishment, that whoever is disobedient shall the sooner perish, and never enjoy life. For to have long life in the sense of the Scriptures is not only to become old, but to have everything which belongs to long life, such as health, wife, and children, livelihood, peace, good government, etc., without which this life can neither be enjoyed in cheerfulness nor long endure. If, therefore, you will not obey father and mother and submit to their discipline, then obey the hangman; if you will not obey him, then submit to the skeleton-man, i.e., death [death the all-subduer, the teacher of wicked children]. For on this God insists peremptorily: Either if you obey Him rendering love and service, He will reward you abundantly with all good, or if you offend Him, He will send upon you both death and the hangman.

Whence come so many knaves that must daily be hanged, beheaded, broken upon the wheel, but from disobedience [to parents], because they will not submit to discipline in kindness, so that, by the punishment of God, they bring it about that we behold their misfortune and grief? For it seldom happens that such perverse people die a natural or timely death.

But the godly and obedient have this blessing, that they live long in pleasant quietness and see their children's children (as said above) to the third and fourth generation. Thus experience also teaches, that where there are honorable, old families who fare well and have many children, they owe their origin to the fact, to be sure, that some of them were brought up well and were regardful of their parents. On the other hand, it is written of the wicked, Ps. 109,13: Let his posterity be cut off; and in the generation following let their name be blotted out. Therefore heed well how great a thing in God's sight obedience is since He so highly esteems it, is so highly pleased with it, and rewards it so richly, and besides enforces punishment so rigorously on those who act contrariwise.

All this I say that it may be well impressed upon the young. For no one believes how necessary this commandment is, although it has not been esteemed and taught hitherto under the papacy. These are simple and easy words, and everybody thinks he knew them a fore; therefore men pass them lightly by, are gaping after other matters, and do not see and believe that God is so greatly offended if they be disregarded, nor that one does a work so well pleasing and precious if he follows them.

In this commandment belongs a further statement regarding all kinds of obedience to persons in authority who have to command and to govern. For all authority flows and is propagated from the authority of parents. For where a father is unable alone to educate his [rebellious and irritable] child, he employs a schoolmaster to instruct him; if he be too weak, he enlists the aid of his friends and neighbors; if he departs this life, he delegates and confers his authority and government upon others who are appointed for the purpose. Likewise, he must have domestics, man-servants and maid-servants, under himself for the management of the household, so that all whom we call masters are in the place of parents and must derive their power and authority to govern from them. Hence also they are all called fathers in the Scriptures, as those who in their government perform the functions of a father, and should have a paternal heart toward their subordinates. As also from antiquity the Romans and other nations called the masters and mistresses of the household patres- et matresfamiliae that is, housefathers and housemothers. So also they called their national rulers and overlords patres patriae, that is fathers of the entire country, for a great shame to us who would be Christians that we do not likewise call them so, or, at least do not esteem and honor them as such.

Now, what a child owes to father and mother, the same owe all who are embraced in the household. Therefore man-servants and maid-servants should be careful not only to be obedient to their masters and mistresses but also to honor them as their own fathers and mothers, and to do everything which they know is expected of them, not from compulsion and with reluctance, but with pleasure and joy for the cause just mentioned, namely that it is God's command and is pleasing to Him above all other works. Therefore they ought rather to pay wages in addition and be glad that they may obtain masters and mistresses to have such joyful consciences and to know how they may do truly golden works; a matter which has hitherto been neglected and despised, when, instead, everybody ran in the devil's name, into convents or to pilgrimages and indulgences, with loss [of time and money] and with an evil conscience.

If this truth, then, could be impressed upon the poor people, a servant-girl would leap and praise and thank God; and with her tidy work for which she receives support and wages she would acquire such a treasure as all that are esteemed the greatest saints have not obtained. Is it not an excellent boast to know and say that, if you perform your daily domestic task, this is better than all the sanctity and ascetic life of monks? And you have the promise, in addition, that you shall prosper in all good and fare well. How can you lead a more blessed or holier life as far as your works are concerned? For in the sight of God faith is what really renders a person holy, and alone serves Him, but the works are for the service of man. There you have everything good, protection and defense in the Lord, a joyful conscience and a gracious God besides, who will reward you a hundredfold, so that you are even a nobleman if you be only pious and obedient. But if not, you have, in the first place, nothing but the wrath and displeasure of God, no peace of heart, and afterwards all manner of plagues and misfortunes.

Whoever will not be influenced by this and inclined to godliness we hand over to the hangman and to the skeleton-man. Therefore let every one who allows himself to be advised remember that God is not making sport, and know that it is God who speaks with you and demands obedience. If you obey Him, you are His dear child; but if you despise to do it, then take shame, misery, and grief for your reward.

The same also is to be said of obedience to civil government, which (as we have said) is all embraced in the estate of fatherhood and extends farthest of all relations. For here the father is not one of a single family, but of as many people as he has tenants, citizens, or subjects. For through them, as through our parents, God gives to us food, house and home, protection and security. Therefore since they bear such name and title with all honor as their highest dignity, it is our duty to honor them and to esteem them great as the dearest treasure and the most precious jewel upon earth.

He, now, who is obedient here, is willing and ready to serve, and cheerfully does all that pertains to honor, knows that he is pleasing God and that he will receive joy and happiness for his reward. If he will not do it in love, but despises and resists [authority] or rebels, let him also know, on the other hand, that he shall have no favor nor blessing, and where he thinks to gain a florin thereby, he will elsewhere lose ten times as much, or become a victim to the hangman, perish by war, pestilence, and famine, or experience no good in his children, and be obliged to suffer injury, injustice, and violence at the hands of his servants, neighbors, or strangers and tyrants; so that what we seek and deserve is paid back and comes home to us.

If we would ever suffer ourselves to be persuaded that such works are pleasing to God and have so rich a reward, we would be established in altogether abundant possessions and have what our heart desires. But because the word and command of God are so lightly esteemed, as though some babbler had spoken it, let us see whether you are the man to oppose Him. How difficult, do you think, it will be for Him to recompense you! Therefore you would certainly live much better with the divine favor, peace, and happiness than with His displeasure and misfortune. Why, think you, is the world now so full of unfaithfulness, disgrace, calamity, and murder, but because every one desires to be his own master and free from the emperor, to care nothing for any one, and do what pleases him? Therefore God punishes one knave by another, so that, when you defraud and despise your master, another comes and deals in like manner with you, yea, in your household you must suffer ten times more from wife, children, or servants.

Indeed, we feel our misfortune, we murmur and complain of unfaithfulness, violence, and injustice, but will not see that we ourselves are knaves who have fully deserved this punishment, and yet are not thereby reformed. We will have no favor and happiness, therefore it is but fair that we have nothing but misfortune without mercy. There must still be somewhere upon earth some godly people because God continues to grant us so much good! On our own account we should not have a farthing in the house nor a straw in the field. All this I have been obliged to urge with so many words, in hope that some one may take it to heart, that we may be relieved of the blindness and misery in which we are steeped so deeply, and may truly understand the Word and will of God, and earnestly accept it. For thence we would learn how we could have joy, happiness, and salvation enough, both temporal and eternal.

Thus we have two kinds of fathers presented in this commandment, fathers in blood and fathers in office, or those to whom belongs the care of the family, and those to whom belongs the care of the country. Besides these there are yet spiritual fathers; not like those in the Papacy, who have indeed had themselves called thus, but have performed no function of the paternal office. For those only are called spiritual fathers who govern and guide us by the Word of God; as St. Paul boasts his fatherhood 1 Cor. 4, 15, where he says: In Christ Jesus I hove begotten you through the Gospel. Now, since they are fathers they are entitled to their honor, even above all others. But here it is bestowed least; for the way which the world knows for honoring them is to drive them out of the country and to grudge them a piece of bread and, in short, they must be (as says St. Paul 1 Cor. 4, 13) as the filth of the world and everybody's refuse and footrag.

Yet there is need that this also be urged upon the populace, that those who would be Christians are under obligation in the sight of God to esteem them worthy of double honor who minister to their souls, that they deal well with them and provide for them. For that, God is willing to add to you sufficient blessing and will not let you come to want. But in this matter every one refuses and resists, and all are afraid that they will perish from bodily want, and cannot now support one respectable preacher, where formerly they filled ten fat paunches. In this we also deserve that God deprive us of His Word and blessing, and again allow preachers of lies to arise to lead us to the devil, and, in addition, to drain our sweat and blood.

But those who keep in sight God's will and commandment have the promise that everything which they bestow upon temporal and spiritual fathers, and whatever they do to honor them, shall be richly recompensed to them, so that they shall have, not bread, clothing, and money for a year or two, but long life, support, and peace, and shall be eternally rich and blessed. Therefore only do what is your duty, and let God take care how He is to support you and provide for you sufficiently. Since He has promised it, and has never yet lied, He will not be found lying to you.

This ought indeed to encourage us, and give us hearts that would melt in pleasure and love toward those to whom we owe honor, so that we would raise our hands and joyfully thank God who has given us such promises, for which we ought to run to the ends of the world [to the remotest parts of India]. For although the whole world should combine, it could not add an hour to our life or give us a single grain from the earth. But God wishes to give you all exceeding abundantly according to your heart's desire. He who despises and casts this to the winds is not worthy ever to hear a word of God. This has now been stated more than enough for all who belong under this commandment.

In addition, it would be well to preach to the parents also, and such as bear their office, as to how they should deport themselves toward those who are committed to them for their government. For although this is not expressed in the Ten Commandments, it is nevertheless abundantly enjoined in many places in the Scriptures. And God desires to have it embraced in this commandment when He speaks of father and mother. For He does not wish to have in this office and government knaves and tyrants; nor does He assign to them this honor, that is, power and authority to govern, that they should have themselves worshiped; but they should consider that they are under obligations of obedience to God; and that, first of all, they should earnestly and faithfully discharge their office, not only to support and provide for the bodily necessities of their children, servants, subjects, etc., but, most of all, to train them to the honor and praise of God. Therefore do not think that this is left to your pleasure and arbitrary will, but that it is a strict command and injunction of God, to whom also you must give account for it.

But here again the sad plight arises that no one perceives or heeds this, and all live on as though God gave us children for our pleasure or amusement, and servants that we should employ them like a cow or ass, only for work, or as though we were only to gratify our wantonness with our subjects, ignoring them, as though it were no concern of ours what they learn or how they live; and no one is willing to see that this is the command of the Supreme Majesty, who will most strictly call us to account and punish us for it; nor that there is so great need to be so seriously concerned about the young. For if we wish to have excellent and apt persons both for civil and ecclesiastical government we must spare no diligence, time, or cost in teaching and educating our children, that they may serve God and the world, and we must not think only how we may amass money and possessions for them. For God can indeed without us support and make them rich, as He daily does. But for this purpose He has given us children, and issued this command that we should train and govern them according to His will, else He would have no need of father and mother. Let every one know therefore, that it is his duty, on peril of losing the divine favor, to bring up his children above all things in the fear and knowledge of God, and if they are talented, have them learn and study something, that they may be employed for whatever need there is [to have them instructed and trained in a liberal education, that men may be able to have their aid in government and in whatever is necessary].

If that were done, God would also richly bless us and give us grace to train men by whom land and people might be improved and likewise well educated citizens, chaste and domestic wives, who afterwards would rear godly children and servants. Here consider now what deadly injury you are doing if you be negligent and fail on your part to bring up your child to usefulness and piety, and how you bring upon yourself all sin and wrath, thus earning hell by your own children, even though you be otherwise pious and holy. And because this is disregarded, God so fearfully punishes the world that there is no discipline, government, or peace, of which we all complain, but do not see that it is our fault; for as we train them, we have spoiled and disobedient children and subjects. Let this be sufficient exhortation; for to draw this out at length belongs to another time.

The Fifth Commandment.

Thou shalt not kill.

We have now completed both the spiritual and the temporal government, that is, the divine and the paternal authority and obedience. But here now we go forth from our house among our neighbors to learn how we should live with one another, every one himself toward his neighbor. Therefore God and government are not included in this commandment nor is the power to kill, which they have taken away. For God has delegated His authority to punish evil-doers to the government instead of parents, who aforetime (as we read in Moses) were required to bring their own children to judgment and sentence them to death. Therefore, what is here forbidden is forbidden to the individual in his relation to any one else, and not to the government.

Now this commandment is easy enough and has been often treated, because we hear it annually in the Gospel of St. Matthew, 5, 21 ff., where Christ Himself explains and sums it up, namely, that we must not kill neither with hand, heart, mouth, signs, gestures, help, nor counsel. Therefore it is here forbidden to every one to be angry, except those (as we said) who are in the place of God, that is, parents and the government. For it is proper for God and for every one who is in a divine estate to be angry, to reprove and punish, namely, on account of those very persons who transgress this and the other commandments.

But the cause and need of this commandment is that God well knows that the world is evil, and that this life has much unhappiness; therefore He has placed this and the other commandments between the good and the evil. Now, as there are many assaults upon all commandments, so it happens also in this commandment that we must live among many people who do us harm, so that we have cause to be hostile to them.

As when your neighbor sees that you have a better house and home [a larger family and more fertile fields], greater possessions and fortune from God than he, he is sulky, envies you, and speaks no good of you.

Thus by the devil's incitement you will get many enemies who cannot bear to see you have any good, either bodily or spiritual. When we see such people, our hearts, in turn, would rage and bleed and take vengeance. Then there arise cursing and blows, from which follow finally misery and murder. Here, now, God like a kind father steps in ahead of Us, interposes and wishes to have the quarrel settled, that no misfortune come of it, nor one destroy another. And briefly He would hereby protect, set free, and keep in peace every one against the crime and violence of every one else; and would have this commandment placed as a wall, fortress, and refuge about our neighbor, that we do him no hurt nor harm in his body.

Thus this commandment aims at this, that no one offend his neighbor on account of any evil deed, even though he have fully deserved it. For where murder is forbidden, all cause also is forbidden whence murder may originate. For many a one, although he does not kill, yet curses and utters a wish, which would stop a person from running far if it were to strike him in the neck [makes imprecations, which if fulfilled with respect to any one, he would not live long]. Now since this inheres in every one by nature and it is a common practice that no one is willing to suffer at the hands of another, God wishes to remove the root and source by which the heart is embittered against our neighbor, and to accustom us ever to keep in view this commandment, always to contemplate ourselves in it as in a mirror, to regard the will of God, and with hearty confidence and invocation of His name to commit to Him the wrong which we suffer. Thus we shall suffer our enemies to rage and be angry, doing what they can, and we learn to calm our wrath, and to have a patient, gentle heart, especially toward those who give us cause to be angry, that is, our enemies.

Therefore the entire sum of what it means not to kill is to be impressed most explicitly upon the simple-minded. In the first place that we harm no one, first, with our hand or by deed. Then, that we do not employ our tongue to instigate or counsel thereto. Further, that we neither use nor assent to any kind of means or methods whereby any one may be injured. And finally, that the heart be not ill disposed toward any one, nor from anger and hatred wish him ill, so that body and soul may be innocent in regard to every one, but especially those who wish you evil or inflict such upon you. For to do evil to one who wishes and does you good is not human, but diabolical.

Secondly, under this commandment not only he is guilty who does evil to his neighbor, but he also who can do him good, prevent, resist evil, defend and save him, so that no bodily harm or hurt happen to him and yet does not do it. If, therefore, you send away one that is naked when you could clothe him, you have caused him to freeze to death; you see one suffer hunger and do not give him food, you have caused him to starve. So also, if you see any one innocently sentenced to death or in like distress, and do not save him, although you know ways and means to do so, you have killed him. And it will not avail you to make the pretext that you did not afford any help, counsel, or aid thereto for you have withheld your love from him and deprived him of the benefit whereby his life would have been saved.

Therefore God also rightly calls all those murderers who do not afford counsel and help in distress and danger of body and life, and will pass a most terrible sentence upon them in the last day, as Christ Himself has announced when He shall say, Matt.25, 42f.: I was an hungered, and ye gave Me no meat; I was thirsty, and ye gave Me no drink; I was a stranger, and ye took Me not in; naked, and ye clothed Me not; sick and in prison and ye visited Me not. That is: You would have suffered Me and Mine to die of hunger thirst, and cold, would have suffered the wild beasts to tear us to pieces, or left us to rot in prison or perish in distress. What else is that but to reproach them as murderers and bloodhounds? For although you have not actually done all this, you have nevertheless, so far as you were concerned, suffered him to pine and perish in misfortune.

It is just as if I saw some one navigating and laboring in deep water [and struggling against adverse winds] or one fallen into fire, and could extend to him the hand to pull him out and save him, and yet refused to do it. What else would I appear, even in the eyes of the world, than as a murderer and a criminal?

Therefore it is God's ultimate purpose that we suffer harm to befall no man, but show him all good and love; and, as we have said it is specially directed toward those who are our enemies. For to do good to our friends is but an ordinary heathen virtue as Christ says Matt. 5, 46.

Here we have again the Word of God whereby He would encourage and urge us to true noble and sublime works, as gentleness patience, and, in short, love and kindness to our enemies, and would ever remind us to reflect upon the First Commandment, that He is our God, that is, that He will help, assist, and protect us, in order that He may thus quench the desire of revenge in us.

This we ought to practice and inculcate and we would have our hands full doing good works. But this would not be preaching for monks; it would greatly detract from the religious estate, and infringe upon the sanctity of Carthusians, and would even be regarded as forbidding good works and clearing the convents. For in this wise the ordinary state of Christians would be considered just as worthy, and even worthier, and everybody would see how they mock and delude the world with a false, hypocritical show of holiness, because they have given this and other commandments to the winds, and have esteemed them unnecessary, as though they were not commandments but mere counsels, and have at the same time shamelessly proclaimed and boasted their hypocritical estate and works as the most perfect life, in order that they might lead a pleasant, easy life, without the cross and without patience, for which reason, too, they have resorted to the cloisters, so that they might not be obliged to suffer any wrong from any one or to do him any good. But know now that these are the true, holy, and godly works, in which, with all the angels He rejoices, in comparison with which all human holiness is but stench and filth, and besides, deserves nothing but wrath and damnation.

The Sixth Commandment.

Thou shalt not commit adultery.

These commandments now [that follow] are easily understood from [the explanation of] the preceding; for they are all to the effect that we [be careful to] avoid doing any kind of injury to our neighbor. But they are arranged in fine [elegant] order. In the first place, they treat of his own person. Then they proceed to the person nearest him, or the closest possession next after his body namely, his wife, who is one flesh and blood with him, so that we cannot inflict a higher injury upon him in any good that is his. Therefore it is explicitly forbidden here to bring any disgrace upon him in respect to his wife. And it really aims at adultery, because among the Jews it was ordained and commanded that every one must be married. Therefore also the young were early provided for [married], so that the virgin state was held in small esteem, neither were public prostitution and lewdness tolerated (as now). Therefore adultery was the most common form of unchastity among them.

But because among us there is such a shameful mess and the very dregs of all vice and lewdness, this commandment is directed also against all manner of unchastity, whatever it may be called; and not only is the external act forbidden, but also every kind of cause, incitement, and means, so that the heart, the lips, and the whole body may be chaste and afford no opportunity, help, or persuasion to unchastity. And not only this, but that we also make resistance, afford protection and rescue wherever there is danger and need; and again, that we give help and counsel, so as to maintain our neighbor's honor. For whenever you omit this when you could make resistance, or connive at it as if it did not concern you, you are as truly guilty as the one perpetrating the deed. Thus, to state it in the briefest manner, there is required this much, that every one both live chastely himself and help his neighbor do the same, so that God by this commandment wishes to hedge round about and protect [as with a rampart] every spouse that no one trespass against them.

But since this commandment is aimed directly at the state of matrimony and gives occasion to speak of the same, you must well understand and mark, first, how gloriously God honors and extols this estate, inasmuch as by His commandment He both sanctions and guards it. He has sanctioned it above in the Fourth Commandment: Honor thy father and thy mother; but here He has (as we said ) hedged it about and protected it. Therefore He also wishes us to honor it, and to maintain and conduct it as a divine and blessed estate; because, in the first place, He has instituted it before all others, and therefore created man and woman separately (as is evident), not for lewdness, but that they should [legitimately] live together, be fruitful, beget children, and nourish and train them to the honor of God.

Therefore God has also most richly blessed this estate above all others, and, in addition, has bestowed on it and wrapped up in it everything in the world, to the end that this estate might be well and richly provided for. Married life is therefore no jest or presumption; but it is an excellent thing and a matter of divine seriousness. For it is of the highest importance to Him that persons be raised who may serve the world and promote the knowledge of God, godly living, and all virtues, to fight against wickedness and the devil.

Therefore I have always taught that this estate should not be despised nor held in disrepute, as is done by the blind world and our false ecclesiastics, but that it be regarded according to God's Word, by which it is adorned and sanctified, so that it is not only placed on an equality with other estates, but that it precedes and surpasses them all, whether they be that of emperor, princes, bishops, or whoever they please. For both ecclesiastical and civil estates must humble themselves and all be found in this estate as we shall hear. Therefore it is not a peculiar estate, but the most common and noblest estate, which pervades all Christendom, yea which extends through all the world.

In the second place, you must know also that it is not only an honorable, but also a necessary state, and it is solemnly commanded by God that, in general, in all conditions, men and women, who were created for it, shall be found in this estate; yet with some exceptions (although few) whom God has especially excepted, so that they are not fit for the married estate, or whom He has released by a high, supernatural gift that they can maintain chastity without this estate. For where nature has its course, as it is implanted by God, it is not possible to remain chaste without marriage. For flesh and blood remain flesh and blood, and the natural inclination and excitement have their course without let or hindrance, as everybody sees and feels. In order, therefore, that it may be the more easy in some degree to avoid unchastity, God has commanded the estate of matrimony, that every one may have his proper portion and be satisfied therewith; although God's grace besides is required in order that the heart also may be pure.

From this you see how this popish rabble, priests, monks, and nuns, resist God's order and commandment, inasmuch as they despise and forbid matrimony, and presume and vow to maintain perpetual chastity, and, besides, deceive the simple-minded with lying words and appearances [impostures]. For no one has so little love and inclination to chastity as just those who because of great sanctity avoid marriage, and either indulge in open and shameless prostitution, or secretly do even worse, so that one dare not speak of it, as has, alas! been learned too fully. And, in short, even though they abstain from the act, their hearts are so full of unchaste thoughts and evil lusts that there is a continual burning and secret suffering, which can be avoided in the married life. Therefore all vows of chastity out of the married state are condemned by this commandment, and free permission is granted, yea, even the command is given, to all poor ensnared consciences which have been deceived by their monastic vows to abandon the unchaste state and enter the married life, considering that even if the monastic life were godly, it would nevertheless not be in their power to maintain chastity, and if they remain in it, they must only sin more and more against this commandment.

Now, I speak of this in order that the young may be so guided that they conceive a liking for the married estate, and know that it is a blessed estate and pleasing to God. For in this way we might in the course of time bring it about that married life be restored to honor, and that there might be less of the filthy, dissolute, disorderly doings which now run riot the world over in open prostitution and other shameful vices arising from disregard of married life. Therefore it is the duty of parents and the government to see to it that our youth be brought up to discipline and respectability, and when they have come to years of maturity, to provide for them [to have them married] in the fear of God and honorably; He would not fail to add His blessing and grace, so that men would have joy and happiness from the same.

Let me now say in conclusion that this commandment demands not only that every one live chastely in thought, word, and deed in his condition, that is, especially in the estate of matrimony, but also that every one love and esteem the spouse given him by God. For where conjugal chastity is to be maintained, man and wife must by all means live together in love and harmony, that one may cherish the other from the heart and with entire fidelity. For that is one of the principal points which enkindle love and desire of chastity, so that, where this is found, chastity will follow as a matter of course without any command. Therefore also St. Paul so diligently exhorts husband and wife to love and honor one another. Here you have again a precious, yea, many and great good works, of which you can joyfully boast, against all ecclesiastical estates, chosen without God's Word and commandment.

The Seventh Commandment.

Thou shalt not steal.

After your person and spouse temporal property comes next. That also God wishes to have protected, and He has commanded that no one shall subtract from, or curtail, his neighbor's possessions. For to steal is nothing else than to get possession of another's property wrongfully, which briefly comprehends all kinds of advantage in all sorts of trade to the disadvantage of our neighbor. Now, this is indeed quite a wide-spread and common vice, but so little regarded and observed that it exceeds all measure, so that if all who are thieves, and yet do not wish to be called such, were to be hanged on gallows the world would soon be devastated and there would be a lack both of executioners and gallows. For, as we have just said, to steal is to signify not only to empty our neighbor's coffer and pockets, but to be grasping in the market, in all stores, booths, wine- and beer-cellars, workshops, and, in short, wherever there is trading or taking and giving of money for merchandise or labor.

As, for instance, to explain this somewhat grossly for the common people, that it may be seen how godly we are: When a manservant or maid-servant does not serve faithfully in the house, and does damage, or allows it to be done when it could be prevented, or otherwise ruins and neglects the goods entrusted to him, from indolence idleness, or malice, to the spite and vexation of master and mistress, and in whatever way this can be done purposely (for I do not speak of what happens from oversight and against one's will), you can in a year abscond thirty, forty florins, which if another had taken secretly or carried away, he would be hanged with the rope. But here you [while conscious of such a great theft] may even bid defiance and become insolent, and no one dare call you a thief.

The same I say also of mechanics, workmen, and day-laborers, who all follow their wanton notions, and never know enough ways to overcharge people, while they are lazy and unfaithful in their work. All these are far worse than sneak-thieves, against whom we can guard with locks and bolts, or who, if apprehended, are treated in such a manner that they will not do the same again. But against these no one can guard, no one dare even look awry at them or accuse them of theft, so that one would ten times rather lose from his purse. For here are my neighbors, good friends, my own servants, from whom I expect good [every faithful and diligent service], who defraud me first of all.

Furthermore, in the market and in common trade likewise, this practice is in full swing and force to the greatest extent, where one openly defrauds another with bad merchandise, false measures, weights, coins, and by nimbleness and queer finances or dexterous tricks takes advantage of him; likewise, when one overcharges a person in a trade and wantonly drives a hard bargain, skins and distresses him. And who can recount or think of all these things? To sum up, this is the commonest craft and the largest guild on earth, and if we regard the world throughout all conditions of life, it is nothing else than a vast, wide stall, full of great thieves.

Therefore they are also called swivel-chair robbers, land- and highway-robbers, not pick-locks and sneak-thieves who snatch away the ready cash, but who sit on the chair [at home] and are styled great noblemen, and honorable, pious citizens, and yet rob and steal under a good pretext.

Yes, here we might be silent about the trifling individual thieves if we were to attack the great, powerful arch-thieves with whom lords and princes keep company, who daily plunder not only a city or two, but all Germany. Yea, where should we place the head and supreme protector of all thieves, the Holy Chair at Rome with all its retinue, which has grabbed by theft the wealth of all the world, and holds it to this day?

This is, in short, the course of the world: whoever can steal and rob openly goes free and secure, unmolested by any one, and even demands that he be honored. Meanwhile the little sneak-thieves, who have once trespassed, must bear the shame and punishment to render the former godly and honorable. But let them know that in the sight of God they are the greatest thieves, and that He will punish them as they are worthy and deserve.

Now, since this commandment is so far-reaching [and comprehensive], as just indicated, it is necessary to urge it well and to explain it to the common people, not to let them go on in their wantonness and security, but always to place before their eyes the wrath of God, and inculcate the same. For we have to preach this not to Christians, but chiefly to knaves and scoundrels, to whom it would be more fitting for judges, jailers, or Master Hannes [the executioner] to preach. Therefore let every one know that it is his duty, at the risk of God's displeasure, not only to do no injury to his neighbor, nor to deprive him of gain, nor to perpetrate any act of unfaithfulness or malice in any bargain or trade, but faithfully to preserve his property for him, to secure and promote his advantage, especially when one accepts money, wages, and one's livelihood for such service.

He now who wantonly despises this may indeed pass along and escape the hangman, but he shall not escape the wrath and punishment of God; and when he has long practiced his defiance and arrogance, he shall yet remain a tramp and beggar, and, in addition, have all plagues and misfortune. Now you are going your way [wherever your heart's pleasure calls you] while you ought to preserve the property of your master and mistress, for which service you fill your crop and maw, take your wages like a thief, have people treat you as a nobleman; for there are many that are even insolent towards their masters and mistresses, and are unwilling to do them a favor or service by which to protect them from loss.

But reflect what you will gain when, having come into your own property and being set up in your home (to which God will help with all misfortunes), it [your perfidy] will bob up again and come home to you, and you will find that where you have cheated or done injury to the value of one mite, you will have to pay thirty again.

Such shall be the lot also of mechanics and day-laborers of whom we are now obliged to hear and suffer such intolerable maliciousness, as though they were noblemen in another's possessions, and every one were obliged to give them what they demand. Just let them continue practicing their exactions as long as they can; but God will not forget His commandment, and will reward them according as they have served, and will hang them, not upon a green gallows, but upon a dry one so that all their life they shall neither prosper nor accumulate anything. And indeed, if there were a well-ordered government in the land, such wantonness might soon be checked and prevented, as was the custom in ancient times among the Romans, where such characters were promptly seized by the pate in a way that others took warning.

No more shall all the rest prosper who change the open free market into a carrion-pit of extortion and a den of robbery, where the poor are daily overcharged, new burdens and high prices are imposed, and every one uses the market according to his caprice, and is even defiant and brags as though it were his fair privilege and right to sell his goods for as high a price as he please, and no one had a right to say a word against it. We will indeed look on and let these people skin, pinch, and hoard, but we will trust in God -- who will, however, do this of His own accord, -- that, after you have been skinning and scraping for a long time, He will pronounce such a blessing on your gains that your grain in the garner, your beer in the cellar, your cattle in the stalls shall perish; yea, where you have cheated and overcharged any one to the amount of a florin, your entire pile shall be consumed with rust, so that you shall never enjoy it.

And indeed, we see and experience this being fulfilled daily before our eyes, that no stolen or dishonestly acquired possession thrives. How many there are who rake and scrape day and night, and yet grow not a farthing richer! And though they gather much, they must suffer so many plagues and misfortunes that they cannot relish it with cheerfulness nor transmit it to their children. But as no one minds it, and we go on as though it did not concern us, God must visit us in a different way and teach us manners by imposing one taxation after another, or billeting a troop of soldiers upon us, who in one hour empty our coffers and purses, and do not quit as long as we have a farthing left, and in addition, by way of thanks, burn and devastate house and home, and outrage and kill wife and children.

And, in short, if you steal much, depend upon it that again as much will be stolen from you; and he who robs and acquires with violence and wrong will submit to one who shall deal after the same fashion with him. For God is master of this art, that since every one robs and steals from the other, He punishes one thief by means of another. Else where should we find enough gallows and ropes?

Now, whoever is willing to be instructed let him know that this is the commandment of God, and that it must not be treated as a jest. For although you despise us, defraud, steal, and rob, we will indeed manage to endure your haughtiness, suffer, and, according to the Lord's Prayer, forgive and show pity; for we know that the godly shall nevertheless have enough, and you injure yourself more than another.

But beware of this: When the poor man comes to you (of whom there are so many now) who must buy with the penny of his daily wages and live upon it, and you are harsh to him, as though every one lived by your favor, and you skin and scrape to the bone, and, besides, with pride and haughtiness turn him off to whom you ought to give for nothing, he will go away wretched and sorrowful, and since he can complain to no one he will cry and call to heaven, -- then beware (I say again) as of the devil himself. For such groaning and calling will be no jest, but will have a weight that will prove too heavy for you and all the world. For it will reach Him who takes care of the poor sorrowful hearts, and will not allow them to go unavenged. But if you despise this and become defiant, see whom you have brought upon you: if you succeed and prosper, you may before all the world call God and me a liar.

We have exhorted, warned, and protested enough; he who will not heed or believe it may go on until he learns this by experience Yet it must be impressed upon the young that they may be careful not to follow the old lawless crowd, but keep their eyes fixed upon God's commandment, lest His wrath and punishment come upon them too. It behooves us to do no more than to instruct and reprove with God's Word; but to check such open wantonness there is need of the princes and government, who themselves would have eyes and the courage to establish and maintain order in all manner of trade and commerce, lest the poor be burdened and oppressed nor they themselves be loaded with other men's sins.

Let this suffice as an explanation of what stealing is, that it be not taken too narrowly but made to extend as far as we have to do with our neighbors. And briefly, in a summary, as in the former commandments, it is herewith forbidden, in the first place, to do our neighbor any injury or wrong (in whatever manner supposable, by curtailing, forestalling, and withholding his possessions and property), or even to consent or allow such a thing, but to interpose and prevent it. And, on the other hand, it is commanded that we advance and improve his possessions, and in case he suffers want, that we help, communicate, and lend both to friends and foes.

Whoever now seeks and desires good works will find here more than enough such as are heartily acceptable and pleasing to God, and in addition are favored and crowned with excellent blessings, that we are to be richly compensated for all that we do for our neighbor's good and from friendship; as King Solomon also teaches Prov. 19, 17: He that hath pity upon the poor lendeth unto the Lord; and that which he hath given will He pay him again. Here, then you have a rich Lord, who is certainly sufficient for you, and who will not suffer you to come short in anything or to want; thus you can with a joyful conscience enjoy a hundred times more than you could scrape together with unfaithfulness and wrong. Now, whoever does not desire the blessing will find wrath and misfortune enough.

The Eighth Commandment.

Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

Over and above our own body, spouse, and temporal possessions, we have yet another treasure, namely, honor and good report [the illustrious testimony of an upright and unsullied name and reputation], with which we cannot dispense. For it is intolerable to live among men in open shame and general contempt. Therefore God wishes the reputation, good name, and upright character of our neighbor to be taken away or diminished as little as his money and possessions, that every one may stand in his integrity before wife, children, servants, and neighbors. And in the first place, we take the plainest meaning of this commandment according to the words (Thou shalt not bear false witness), as pertaining to the public courts of justice, where a poor innocent man is accused and oppressed by false witnesses in order to be punished in his body, property, or honor.

Now, this appears as if it were of little concern to us at present; but with the Jews it was quite a common and ordinary matter. For the people were organized under an excellent and regular government; and where there is still such a government, instances of this sin will not be wanting. The cause of it is that where judges, burgomasters, princes, or others in authority sit in judgment, things never fail to go according to the course of the world; namely, men do not like to offend anybody, flatter, and speak to gain favor, money, prospects, or friendship; and in consequence a poor man and his cause must be oppressed, denounced as wrong, and suffer punishment. And it is a common calamity in the world that in courts of justice there seldom preside godly men.

For to be a judge requires above all things a godly man, and not only a godly, but also a wise, modest, yea, a brave and bold man; likewise, to be a witness requires a fearless and especially a godly man. For a person who is to judge all matters rightly and carry them through with his decision will often offend good friends, relatives, neighbors, and the rich and powerful, who can greatly serve or injure him. Therefore he must be quite blind, have his eyes and ears closed, neither see nor hear, but go straight forward in everything that comes before him, and decide accordingly.

Therefore this commandment is given first of all that every one shall help his neighbor to secure his rights, and not allow them to be hindered or twisted, but shall promote and strictly maintain them, no matter whether he be judge or witness, and let it pertain to whatsoever it will. And especially is a goal set up here for our jurists that they be careful to deal truly and uprightly with every case, allowing right to remain right, and, on the other hand, not perverting anything [by their tricks and technical points turning black into white and making wrong out to be right], nor glossing it over or keeping silent concerning it, irrespective of a person's money, possession, honor, or power. This is one part and the plainest sense of this commandment concerning all that takes place in court.

Next, it extends very much further, if we are to apply it to spiritual jurisdiction or administration; here it is a common occurrence that every one bears false witness against his neighbor. For wherever there are godly preachers and Christians, they must bear the sentence before the world that they are called heretics, apostates, yea, seditious and desperately wicked miscreants. Besides the Word of God must suffer in the most shameful and malicious manner, being persecuted blasphemed, contradicted, perverted and falsely cited and interpreted. But let this pass; for it is the way of the blind world that she condemns and persecutes the truth and the children of God, and yet esteems it no sin.

In the third place, what concerns us all, this commandment forbids all sins of the tongue whereby we may injure or approach too closely to our neighbor. For to bear false witness is nothing else than a work of the tongue. Now, whatever is done with the tongue against a fellow-man God would have prohibited, whether it be false preachers with their doctrine and blasphemy, false judges and witnesses with their verdict, or outside of court by lying and evil-speaking. Here belongs particularly the detestable, shameful vice of speaking behind a person's back and slandering, to which the devil spurs us on and of which there would be much to be said. For it is a common evil plague that every one prefers hearing evil to hearing good of his neighbor; and although we ourselves are so bad that we cannot suffer that any one should say anything bad about us, but every one would much rather that all the world should speak of him in terms of gold, yet we cannot bear that the best is spoken about others.

Therefore, to avoid this vice we should note that no one is allowed publicly to judge and reprove his neighbor, although he may see him sin, unless he have a command to judge and to reprove. For there is a great difference between these two things, judging sin and knowing sin. You may indeed know it, but you are not to judge it. I can indeed see and hear that my neighbor sins, but I have no command to report it to others. Now, if I rush in, judging and passing sentence, I fall into a sin which is greater than his. But if you know it, do nothing else than turn your ears into a grave and cover it, until you are appointed to be judge and to punish by virtue of your office.

Those, then, are called slanderers who are not content with knowing a thing, but proceed to assume jurisdiction, and when they know a slight offense of another, carry it into every corner, and are delighted and tickled that they can stir up another's displeasure [baseness], as swine roll themselves in the dirt and root in it with the snout. This is nothing else than meddling with the judgment and office of God, and pronouncing sentence and punishment with the most severe verdict. For no judge can punish to a higher degree nor go farther than to say: "He is a thief, a murderer, a traitor," etc. Therefore, whoever presumes to say the same of his neighbor goes just as far as the emperor and all governments. For although you do not wield the sword, you employ your poisonous tongue to the shame and hurt of your neighbor.

God therefore would have it prohibited that any one speak evil of another even though he be guilty, and the latter know it right well; much less if he do not know it, and have it only from hearsay. But you say: Shall I not say it if it be the truth? Answer: Why do you not make accusation to regular judges? Ah, I cannot prove it publicly, and hence I might be silenced and turned away in a harsh manner [incur the penalty of a false accusation]. "Ah, indeed, do you smell the roast?" If you do not trust yourself to stand before the proper authorities and to make answer, then hold your tongue. But if you know it, know it for yourself and not for another. For if you tell it to others, although it be true, you will appear as a liar, because you cannot prove it, and you are, besides acting like a knave. For we ought never to deprive any one of his honor or good name unless it be first taken away from him publicly.

False witness, then, is everything which cannot be properly proved. Therefore, what is not manifest upon sufficient evidence no one shall make public or declare for truth; and in short, whatever is secret should be allowed to remain secret, or, at any rate, should be secretly reproved, as we shall hear. Therefore, if you encounter an idle tongue which betrays and slanders some one, contradict such a one promptly to his face, that he may blush thus many a one will hold his tongue who else would bring some poor man into bad repute from which he would not easily extricate himself. For honor and a good name are easily taken away, but not easily restored.

Thus you see that it is summarily forbidden to speak any evil of our neighbor, however the civil government, preachers, father and mother excepted, on the understanding that this commandment does not allow evil to go unpunished. Now, as according to the Fifth Commandment no one is to be injured in body, and yet Master Hannes [the executioner] is excepted, who by virtue of his office does his neighbor no good, but only evil and harm, and nevertheless does not sin against God's commandment, because God has on His own account instituted that office; for He has reserved punishment for His own good pleasure, as He threatens in the First Commandment, -- just so also, although no one has a right in his own person to judge and condemn anybody, yet if they to whose office it belongs fail to do it, they sin as well as he who would do so of his own accord, without such office. For here necessity requires one to speak of the evil, to prefer charges, to investigate and testify; and it is not different from the case of a physician who is sometimes compelled to examine and handle the patient whom he is to cure in secret parts. Just so governments, father and mother, brothers and sisters, and other good friends, are under obligation to each other to reprove evil wherever it is needful and profitable.

But the true way in this matter would be to observe the order according to the Gospel, Matt. 18, 15, where Christ says: If thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone. Here you have a precious and excellent teaching for governing well the tongue, which is to be carefully observed against this detestable misuse. Let this, then, be your rule, that you do not too readily spread evil concerning your neighbor and slander him to others, but admonish him privately that he may amend [his life]. Likewise, also, if some one report to you what this or that one has done, teach him, too, to go and admonish him personally if he have seen it himself; but if not, that he hold his tongue.

The same you can learn also from the daily government of the household. For when the master of the house sees that the servant does not do what he ought, he admonishes him personally. But if he were so foolish as to let the servant sit at home, and went on the streets to complain of him to his neighbors, he would no doubt be told: "You fool, what does that concern us? Why do you not tell it to him ?" Behold, that would be acting quite brotherly, so that the evil would be stayed, and your neighbor would retain his honor. As Christ also says in the same place: If he hear thee, thou host gained thy brother. Then you have done a great and excellent work; for do you think it is a little matter to gain a brother? Let all monks and holy orders step forth, with all their works melted together into one mass, and see if they can boast that they have gained a brother.

Further, Christ teaches: But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. So he whom it concerns is always to be treated with personally, and not to be spoken of without his knowledge. But if that do not avail, then bring it publicly before the community, whether before the civil or the ecclesiastical tribunal. For then you do not stand alone, but you have those witnesses with you by whom you can convict the guilty one, relying on whom the judge can pronounce sentence and punish. This is the right and regular course for checking and reforming a wicked person. But if we gossip about another in all corners and stir the filth, no one will be reformed, and afterwards when we are to stand up and bear witness, we deny having said so. Therefore it would serve such tongues right if their itch for slander were severely punished, as a warning to others. If you were acting for your neighbor's reformation or from love of the truth, you would not sneak about secretly nor shun the day and the light.

All this has been said regarding secret sins. But where the sin is quite public so that the judge and everybody know it you can without any sin avoid him and let him go, because he has brought himself into disgrace, and you may also publicly testify concerning him. For when a matter is public in the light of day, there can be no slandering or false judging or testifying; as, when we now reprove the Pope with his doctrine, which is publicly set forth in books and proclaimed in all the world. For where the sin is public, the reproof also must be public, that every one may learn to guard against it.

Thus we have now the sum and general understanding of this commandment, to wit, that no one do any injury with the tongue to his neighbor, whether friend or foe, nor speak evil of him, no matter whether it be true or false, unless it be done by commandment or for his reformation, but that every one employ his tongue and make it serve for the best of every one else, to cover up his neighbor's sins and infirmities, excuse them, palliate and garnish them with his own reputation. The chief reason for this should be the one which Christ alleges in the Gospel, in which He comprehends all commandments respecting our neighbor, Matt. 7, 12: Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them.

Even nature teaches the same thing in our own bodies, as St. Paul says, 1 Cor. 12, 22: Much more, those members of the body which seem to be more feeble are necessary; and those members of the body which we think to be less honorable, upon these we bestow more abundant honor; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness. No one covers his face, eyes, nose, and mouth, for they, being in themselves the most honorable members which we have, do not require it. But the most infirm members, of which we are ashamed, we cover with all diligence; hands, eyes, and the whole body must help to cover and conceal them. Thus also among ourselves should we adorn whatever blemishes and infirmities we find in our neighbor, and serve and help him to promote his honor to the best of our ability, and, on the other hand, prevent whatever may be discreditable to him. And it is especially an excellent and noble virtue for one always to explain advantageously and put the best construction upon all he may hear of his neighbor (if it be not notoriously evil), or at any rate to condone it over and against the poisonous tongues that are busy wherever they can pry out and discover something to blame in a neighbor, and that explain and pervert it in the worst way; as is done now especially with the precious Word of God and its preachers.

There are comprehended therefore in this commandment quite a multitude of good works which please God most highly, and bring abundant good and blessing, if only the blind world and the false saints would recognize them. For there is nothing on or in entire man which can do both greater and more extensive good or harm in spiritual and in temporal matters than the tongue, though it is the least and feeblest member.

The Ninth and Tenth Commandments

Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his man-servant, nor his maid-servant, nor his cattle, nor anything that is his.

These two commandments are given quite exclusively to the Jews; nevertheless, in part they also concern us. For they do not interpret them as referring to unchastity or theft, because these are sufficiently forbidden above. They also thought that they had kept all those when they had done or not done the external act. Therefore God has added these two commandments in order that it be esteemed as sin and forbidden to desire or in any way to aim at getting our neighbor's wife or possessions; and especially because under the Jewish government man-servants and maid-servants were not free as now to serve for wages as long as they pleased, but were their master's property with their body and all they had, as cattle and other possessions. Moreover, every man had power over his wife to put her away publicly by giving her a bill of divorce, and to take another. Therefore they were in constant danger among each other that if one took a fancy to another's wife, he might allege any reason both to dismiss his own wife and to estrange the other's wife from him, that he might obtain her under pretext of right. That was not considered a sin nor disgrace with them; as little as now with hired help, when a proprietor dismisses his man-servant or maid-servant, or takes another's servants from him in any way.

Therefore (I say) they thus interpreted these commandments, and that rightly (although their scope reaches somewhat farther and higher), that no one think or purpose to obtain what belongs to another, such as his wife, servants, house and estate, land meadows, cattle, even with a show of right or by a subterfuge, yet with injury to his neighbor. For above, in the Seventh Commandment, the vice is forbidden where one wrests to himself the possessions of others, or withholds them from his neighbor, which he cannot do by right. But here it is also forbidden to alienate anything from your neighbor, even though you could do so with honor in the eyes of the world, so that no one could accuse or blame you as though you had obtained it wrongfully.

For we are so inclined by nature that no one desires to see another have as much as himself, and each one acquires as much as he can; the other may fare as best he can. And yet we pretend to be godly, know how to adorn ourselves most finely and conceal our rascality, resort to and invent adroit devices and deceitful artifices (such as now are daily most ingeniously contrived) as though they were derived from the law codes; yea, we even dare impertinently to refer to it, and boast of it, and will not have it called rascality, but shrewdness and caution. In this lawyers and jurists assist, who twist and stretch the law to suit it to their cause, stress words and use them for a subterfuge, irrespective of equity or their neighbor's necessity. And, in short, whoever is the most expert and cunning in these affairs finds most help in law, as they themselves say: Vigilantibus iura subveniunt [that is, The laws favor the watchful].

This last commandment therefore is given not for rogues in the eyes of the world, but just for the most pious, who wish to be praised and be called honest and upright people, since they have not offended against the former commandments, as especially the Jews claimed to be, and even now many great noblemen, gentlemen, and princes. For the other common masses belong yet farther down, under the Seventh Commandment, as those who are not much concerned whether they acquire their possessions with honor and right.

Now, this occurs most frequently in cases that are brought into court, where it is the purpose to get something from our neighbor and to force him out of his own. As (to give examples), when people quarrel and wrangle about a large inheritance, real estate, etc., they avail themselves of, and resort to, whatever has the appearance of right, so dressing and adorning everything that the law must favor their side, and they keep the property with such title that no one can make complaint or lay claim thereto. In like manner, if any one desire to have a castle, city, duchy, or any other great thing, he practices so much financiering through relationships, and by any means he can, that the other is judicially deprived of it, and it is adjudicated to him, and confirmed with deed and seal and declared to have been acquired by princely title and honestly.

Likewise also in common trade where one dexterously slips something out of another's hand, so that he must look after it, or surprises and defrauds him in a matter in which he sees advantage and benefit for himself, so that the latter, perhaps on account of distress or debt, cannot regain or redeem it without injury, and the former gains the half or even more; and yet this must not be considered as acquired by fraud or stolen, but honestly bought. Here they say: First come, first served, and every one must look to his own interest, let another get what he can. And who can be so smart as to think of all the ways in which one can get many things into his possession by such specious pretexts? This the world does not consider wrong [nor is it punished by laws], and will not see that the neighbor is thereby placed at a disadvantage, and must sacrifice what he cannot spare without injury. Yet there is no one who wishes this to be done to him; from which we can easily perceive that such devices and pretexts are false.

Thus it was done formerly also with respect to wives: they knew such devices that if one were pleased with another woman, he personally or through others (as there were many ways and means to be invented) caused her husband to conceive a displeasure toward her, or had her resist him and so conduct herself that he was obliged to dismiss her and leave her to the other. That sort of thing undoubtedly prevailed much under the Law, as also we read in the (Gospel of King Herod that he took his brother's wife while he was yet living, and yet wished to be thought an honorable, pious man, as St. Mark also testifies of him. But such an example, I trust, will not occur among us, because in the New Testament those who are married are forbidden to be divorced, except in such a case where one [shrewdly] by some stratagem takes away a rich bride from another. But it is not a rare thing with us that one estranges or alienates another's man-servant or maid-servant, or entices them away by flattering words.

In whatever way such things happen, we must know that God does not wish that you deprive your neighbor of anything that belongs to him so that he suffer the loss and you gratify your avarice with it, even if you could keep it honorably before the world; for it is a secret and insidious imposition practiced under the hat, as we say, that it may not be observed. For although you go your way as if you had done no one any wrong, you have nevertheless injured your neighbor; and if it is not called stealing and cheating, yet it is called coveting your neighbor's property, that is, aiming at possession of it, enticing it away from him without his will, and being unwilling to see him enjoy what God has granted him. And although the judge and every one must leave you in possession of it, yet God will not leave you therein; for He sees the deceitful heart and the malice of the world, which is sure to take an ell in addition wherever you yield to her a finger's breadth, and at length public wrong and violence follow.

Therefore we allow these commandments to remain in their ordinary meaning, that it is commanded, first, that we do not desire our neighbor's damage, nor even assist, nor give occasion for it, but gladly wish and leave him what he has, and, besides, advance and preserve for him what may be for his profit and service, as we should wish to be treated. Thus these commandments are especially directed against envy and miserable avarice, God wishing to remove all causes and sources whence arises everything by which we do injury to our neighbor, and therefore He expresses it in plain words: Thou shalt not covet, etc. For He would especially have the heart pure, although we shall never attain to that as long as we live here; so that this commandment will remain, like all the rest, one that will constantly accuse us and show how godly we are in the sight of God!

Conclusion of the Ten Commandments.

Thus we have the Ten Commandments, a compend of divine doctrine, as to what we are to do in order that our whole life may be pleasing to God, and the true fountain and channel from and in which everything must arise and flow that is to be a good work, so that outside of the Ten Commandments no work or thing can be good or pleasing to God, however great or precious it be in the eyes of the world. Let us see now what our great saints can boast of their spiritual orders and their great and grievous works which they have invented and set up, while they let these pass, as though they were far too insignificant, or had long ago been perfectly fulfilled.

I am of opinion indeed, that here one will find his hands full, [and will have enough] to do to observe these, namely, meekness, patience, and love towards enemies, chastity, kindness, etc., and what such virtues imply. But such works are not of value and make no display in the eyes of the world; for they are not peculiar and conceited works and restricted to particular times, places, rites, and customs, but are common, every-day domestic works which one neighbor can practice toward another; therefore they are not of high esteem.

But the other works cause people to open their eyes and ears wide, and men aid to this effect by the great display, expense, and magnificent buildings with which they adorn them, so that everything shines and glitters. There they waft incense, they sing and ring bells, they light tapers and candles, so that nothing else can be seen or heard. For when a priest stands there in a surplice embroidered with gilt, or a layman continues all day upon his knees in church, that is regarded as a most precious work which no one can sufficiently praise. But when a poor girl tends a little child and faithfully does what she is told that is considered nothing; for else what should monks and nuns seek in their cloisters?

But see, is not that a cursed presumption of those desperate saints who dare to invent a higher and better life and estate than the Ten Commandments teach, pretending (as we have said) that this is an ordinary life for the common man, but that theirs is for saints and perfect ones? And the miserable blind people do not see that no man can get so far as to keep one of the Ten Commandments as it should be kept, but both the Apostles' Creed and the Lord's Prayer must come to our aid (as we shall hear), by which that [power and strength to keep the commandments] is sought and prayed for and received continually. Therefore all their boasting amounts to as much as if I boasted and said: To be sure, I have not a penny to make payment with, but I confidently undertake to pay ten florins.

All this I say and urge in order that men might become rid of the sad misuse which has taken such deep root and still cleaves to everybody, and in all estates upon earth become used to looking hither only, and to being concerned about these matters. For it will be a long time before they will produce a doctrine or estates equal to the Ten Commandments, because they are so high that no one can attain to them by human power; and whoever does attain to them is a heavenly, angelic man far above all holiness of the world. Only occupy yourself with them, and try your best, apply all power and ability and you will find so much to do that you will neither seek nor esteem any other work or holiness.

Let this be sufficient concerning the first part of the common Christian doctrine, both for teaching and urging what is necessary. In conclusion, however, we must repeat the text which belongs here, of which we have treated already in the First Commandment, in order that we may learn what pains God requires to the end we may learn to inculcate and practice the Ten Commandments:

For I the Lord, thy God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me, and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love Me and keep My commandments.

Although (as we have heard above) this appendix was primarily attached to the First Commandment, it was nevertheless [we cannot deny that it was] laid down for the sake of all the commandments, as all of them are to be referred and directed to it. Therefore I have said that this, too, should be presented to and inculcated upon the young, that they may learn and remember it, in order to see what is to urge and compel us to keep these Ten Commandments. And it is to be regarded as though this part were specially added to each, so that it inheres in, and pervades, them all.

Now, there is comprehended in these words (as said before) both an angry word of threatening and a friendly promise to terrify and warn us, and, moreover to induce and encourage us to receive and highly esteem His Word as a matter of divine earnestness, because He Himself declares how much He is concerned about it, and how rigidly He will enforce it, namely, that He will horribly and terribly punish all who despise and transgress His commandments; and again, how richly He will reward, bless, and do all good to those who hold them in high esteem, and gladly do and live according to them. Thus He demands that all our works proceed from a heart which fears and regards God alone, and from such fear avoids everything that is contrary to His will, lest it should move Him to wrath; and, on the other hand, also trusts in Him alone, and from love to Him does all He wishes, because he speaks to us as friendly as a father, and offers us all grace and every good.

Just this is also the meaning and true interpretation of the first and chief commandment, from which all the others must flow and proceed, so that this word: Thou shalt have no other gods before Me, in its simplest meaning states nothing else than this demand: Thou shalt fear, love, and trust in Me as thine only true God. For where there is a heart thus disposed towards God, the same has fulfilled this and all the other commandments. On the other hand, whoever fears and loves anything else in heaven and upon earth will keep neither this nor any. Thus the entire scriptures have everywhere preached and inculcated this commandment, aiming always at these two things: fear of God and trust in Him. And especially the prophet David throughout the Psalms, as when he says [Ps. 147,11]: The Lord taketh pleasure in them that fear Him, in those that hope in His mercy. As if the entire commandment were explained by one verse, as much as to say: The Lord taketh pleasure in those who have no other gods.

Thus the First Commandment is to shine and impart its splendor to all the others. Therefore you must let this declaration run through all the commandments, like a hoop in a wreath, joining the end to the beginning and holding them all together, that it be continually repeated and not forgotten; as, namely, in the Second Commandment, that we fear God and do not take His name in vain for cursing, lying, deceiving, and other modes of leading men astray, or rascality, but make proper and good use of it by calling upon Him in prayer, praise, and thanksgiving, derived from love and trust according to the First Commandment. In like manner such fear, love, and trust is to urge and force us not to despise His Word, but gladly to learn, hear, and esteem it holy, and honor it.

Thus continuing through all the following commandments towards our neighbor likewise, everything is to proceed by virtue of the First Commandment, to wit, that we honor father and mother, masters, and all in authority and be subject and obedient to them, not on their own account, but for God's sake. For you are not to regard or fear father or mother, or from love of them do or omit anything. But see to that which God would have you do, and what He will quite surely demand of you; if you omit that, you have an angry Judge, but in the contrary case a gracious Father.

Again, that you do your neighbor no harm, injury, or violence, nor in any wise encroach upon him as touching his body, wife, property, honor, or rights, as all these things are commanded in their order, even though you have opportunity and cause to do so and no man would reprove you; but that you do good to all men, help them, and promote their interest, howsoever and wherever you can, purely from love of God and in order to please Him, in the confidence that He will abundantly reward you for everything. Thus you see how the First Commandment is the chief source and fountainhead which flows into all the rest, and again, all return to that and depend upon it, so that beginning and end are fastened and bound to each other.

This (I say) it is profitable and necessary always to teach to the young people, to admonish them and to remind them of it, that they may be brought up not only with blows and compulsion, like cattle, but in the fear and reverence of God. For where this is considered and laid to heart that these things are not human trifles, but the commandments of the Divine Majesty, who insists upon them with such earnestness, is angry with, and punishes those who despise them, and, on the other hand, abundantly rewards those who keep them, there will be a spontaneous impulse and a desire gladly to do the will of God. Therefore it is not in vain that it is commanded in the Old Testament to write the Ten Commandments on all walls and corners, yes, even on the garments, not for the sake of merely having them written in these places and making a show of them, as did the Jews, but that we might have our eyes constantly fixed upon them, and have them always in our memory, and that we might practice them in all our actions and ways, and every one make them his daily exercise in all cases, in every business and transaction, as though they were written in every place wherever he would look, yea, wherever he walks or stands. Thus there would be occasion enough, both at home in our own house and abroad with our neighbors, to practice the Ten Commandments, that no one need run far for them.

From this it again appears how highly these Ten Commandments are to be exalted and extolled above all estates, commandments, and works which are taught and practiced aside from them. For here we can boast and say: Let all the wise and saints step forth and produce, if they can, a [single] work like these commandments, upon which God insists with such earnestness, and which He enjoins with His greatest wrath and punishment, and, besides, adds such glorious promises that He will pour out upon us all good things and blessings. Therefore they should be taught above all others, and be esteemed precious and dear, as the highest treasure given by God.

Part Second. OF THE CREED.

Thus far we have heard the first part of Christian doctrine, in which we have seen all that God wishes us to do or to leave undone. Now, there properly follows the Creed, which sets forth to us everything that we must expect and receive from God, and, to state it quite briefly, teaches us to know Him fully. And this is intended to help us do that which according to the Ten Commandments we ought to do. For (as said above) they are set so high that all human ability is far too feeble and weak to [attain to or] keep them. Therefore it is as necessary to learn this part as the former in order that we may know how to attain thereto, whence and whereby to obtain such power. For if we could by our own powers keep the Ten Commandments as they are to be kept, we would need nothing further, neither the Creed nor the Lord's Prayer. But before we explain this advantage and necessity of the Creed, it is sufficient at first for the simple-minded that they learn to comprehend and understand the Creed itself.

In the first place, the Creed has hitherto been divided into twelve articles, although, if all points which are written in the Scriptures and which belong to the Creed were to be distinctly set forth, there would be far more articles, nor could they all be clearly expressed in so few words. But that it may be most easily and clearly understood as it is to be taught to children, we shall briefly sum up the entire Creed in three chief articles, according to the three persons in the Godhead, to whom everything that we believe is related, So that the First Article, of God the Father, explains Creation, the Second Article, of the Son, Redemption, and the Third, of the Holy Ghost, Sanctification. Just as though the Creed were briefly comprehended in so many words: I believe in God the Father, who has created me; I believe in God the Son, who has redeemed me; I believe in the Holy Ghost, who sanctifies me. One God and one faith, but three persons, therefore also three articles or confessions. Let us briefly run over the words.

Article I.

I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth.

This portrays and sets forth most briefly what is the essence, will, activity, and work of God the Father. For since the Ten Commandments have taught that we are to have not more than one God, the question might be asked, What kind of a person is God? What does He do? How can we praise or portray and describe Him, that He may be known? Now, that is taught in this and in the following article, so that the Creed is nothing else than the answer and confession of Christians arranged with respect to the First Commandment. As if you were to ask a little child: My dear, what sort of a God have you? What do you know of Him? he could say: This is my God: first, the Father, who has created heaven and earth; besides this only One I regard nothing else as God; for there is no one else who could create heaven and earth.

But for the learned, and those who are somewhat advanced [have acquired some Scriptural knowledge], these three articles may all be expanded and divided into as many parts as there are words. But now for young scholars let it suffice to indicate the most necessary points, namely, as we have said, that this article refers to the Creation: that we emphasize the words: Creator of heaven and earth But what is the force of this, or what do you mean by these words: I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker, etc.? Answer: This is what I mean and believe, that I am a creature of God; that is, that He has given and constantly preserves to me my body, soul, and life, members great and small, all my senses, reason, and understanding, and so on, food and drink, clothing and support, wife and children, domestics, house and home, etc. Besides, He causes all creatures to serve for the uses and necessities of life -- sun, moon and stars in the firmament, day and night, air, fire, water, earth, and whatever it bears and produces, birds and fishes, beasts, grain, and all kinds of produce, and whatever else there is of bodily and temporal goods, good government, peace, security. Thus we learn from this article that none of us has of himself, nor can preserve, his life nor anything that is here enumerated or can be enumerated, however small and unimportant a thing it might be, for all is comprehended in the word Creator.

Moreover, we also confess that God the Father has not only given us all that we have and see before our eyes, but daily preserves and defends us against all evil and misfortune, averts all sorts of danger and calamity; and that He does all this out of pure love and goodness, without our merit, as a benevolent Father, who cares for us that no evil befall us. But to speak more of this belongs in the other two parts of this article, where we say: Father Almighty Now, since: all that we possess, and, moreover, whatever, in addition, is in heaven and upon the earth, is daily given, preserved, and kept for us by God, it is readily inferred and concluded that it is our duty to love, praise, and thank Him for it without ceasing, and, in short, to serve Him with all these things as He demands and has enjoined in the Ten Commandments.

Here we could say much if we were to expatiate, how few there are that believe this article. For we all pass over it, hear it and say it, but neither see nor consider what the words teach us. For if we believed it with the heart, we would also act accordingly, and not stalk about proudly, act defiantly, and boast as though we had life, riches, power, and honor, etc., of ourselves, so that others must fear and serve us, as is the practice of the wretched, perverse world, which is drowned in blindness, and abuses all the good things and gifts of God only for its own pride, avarice, lust, and luxury, and never once regards God, so as to thank Him or acknowledge Him as Lord and Creator.

Therefore, this article ought to humble and terrify us all, if we believed it. For we sin daily with eyes, ears, hands, body and soul, money and possessions, and with everything we have, especially those who even fight against the Word of God. Yet Christians have this advantage, that they acknowledge themselves in duty bound to serve God for all these things, and to be obedient to Him [which the world knows not how to do].

We ought, therefore, daily to practice this article, impress it upon our mind, and to remember it in all that meets our eyes, and in all good that falls to our lot, and wherever we escape from calamity or danger, that it is God who gives and does all these things, that therein we sense and see His paternal heart and His transcendent love toward us. Thereby the heart would be warmed and kindled to be thankful, and to employ all such good things to the honor and praise of God.

Thus we have most briefly presented the meaning of this article, as much as is at first necessary for the most simple to learn, both as to what we have and receive from God, and what we owe in return, which is a most excellent knowledge, but a far greater treasure. For here we see how the Father has given Himself to us, together with all creatures, and has most richly provided for us in this life, besides that He has overwhelmed us with unspeakable, eternal treasures by His Son and the Holy Ghost, as we shall hear.

Article II.

And in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary; suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried; He descended into hell; the third day He rose again from the dead; He ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead.

Here we learn to know the Second Person of the Godhead, so that we see what we have from God over and above the temporal goods aforementioned; namely, how He has completely poured forth Himself and withheld nothing from us that He has not given us. Now, this article is very rich and broad; but in order to expound it also briefly and in a childlike way, we shall take up one word and sum up in that the entire article, namely (as we have said), that we may here learn how we have been redeemed; and we shall base this on these words: In Jesus Christ, our Lord.

If now you are asked, What do you believe in the Second Article of Jesus Christ? answer briefly: I believe that Jesus Christ, true Son of God, has become my Lord. But what is it to become Lord? It is this, that He has redeemed me from sin, from the devil, from death, and all evil. For before I had no Lord nor King, but was captive under the power of the devil, condemned to death, enmeshed in sin and blindness.

For when we had been created by God the Father, and had received from Him all manner of good, the devil came and led us into disobedience, sin, death, and all evil, so that we fell under His wrath and displeasure and were doomed to eternal damnation, as we had merited and deserved. There was no counsel, help, or comfort until this only and eternal Son of God in His unfathomable goodness had compassion upon our misery and wretchedness, and came from heaven to help us. Those tyrants and jailers, then, are all expelled now, and in their place has come Jesus Christ, Lord of life, righteousness, every blessing, and salvation, and has delivered us poor lost men from the jaws of hell, has won us, made us free, and brought us again into the favor and grace of the Father, and has taken us as His own property under His shelter and protection, that He may govern us by His righteousness, wisdom, power, life, and blessedness.

Let this then, be the sum of this article that the little word Lord signifies simply as much as Redeemer, i.e., He who has brought us from Satan to God, from death to life, from sin to righteousness, and who preserves us in the same. But all the points which follow in order in this article serve no other end than to explain and express this redemption, how and whereby it was accomplished, that is, how much it cost Him, and what He spent and risked that He might win us and bring us under His dominion, namely, that He became man, conceived and born without [any stain of] sin, of the Holy Ghost and of the Virgin Mary, that He might overcome sin; moreover, that He suffered, died and was buried, that He might make satisfaction for me and pay what I owe, not with silver nor gold, but with His own precious blood. And all this, in order to become my Lord; for He did none of these for Himself, nor had He any need of it. And after that He rose again from the dead, swallowed up and devoured death, and finally ascended into heaven and assumed the government at the Father's right hand, so that the devil and all powers must be subject to Him and lie at His feet, until finally, at the last day, He will completely part and separate us from the wicked world, the devil, death, sin, etc.

But to explain all these single points separately belongs not to brief sermons for children, but rather to the ampler sermons that extend throughout the entire year, especially at those times which are appointed for the purpose of treating at length of each article -- of the birth, sufferings, resurrection, ascension of Christ, etc.

Ay, the entire Gospel which we preach is based on this, that we properly understand this article as that upon which our salvation and all our happiness rest, and which is so rich and comprehensive that we never can learn it fully.

Article III.

I believe in the Holy Ghost; the holy Christian Church, the communion of saints; the forgiveness of sins; the resurrection of the body; and the life everlasting. Amen.

This article (as I have said) I cannot relate better than to Sanctification, that through the same the Holy Ghost, with His office, is declared and depicted, namely, that He makes holy. Therefore we must take our stand upon the word Holy Ghost, because it is so precise and comprehensive that we cannot find another. For there are, besides, many kinds of spirits mentioned in the Holy Scriptures, as, the spirit of man, heavenly spirits, and evil spirits. But the Spirit of God alone is called Holy Ghost, that is, He who has sanctified and still sanctifies us. For as the Father is called Creator, the Son Redeemer, so the Holy Ghost, from His work, must be called Sanctifier, or One that makes holy. But how is such sanctifying done? Answer: Just as the Son obtains dominion, whereby He wins us, through His birth, death, resurrection, etc., so also the Holy Ghost effects our sanctification by the following parts, namely, by the communion of saints or the Christian Church, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting; that is, He first leads us into His holy congregation, and places us in the bosom of the Church, whereby He preaches to us and brings us to Christ.

For neither you nor I could ever know anything of Christ, or believe on Him, and obtain Him for our Lord, unless it were offered to us and granted to our hearts by the Holy Ghost through the preaching of the Gospel. The work is done and accomplished; for Christ has acquired and gained the treasure for us by His suffering, death, resurrection, etc. But if the work remained concealed so that no one knew of it, then it would be in vain and lost. That this treasure, therefore, might not lie buried, but be appropriated and enjoyed, God has caused the Word to go forth and be proclaimed, in which He gives the Holy Ghost to bring this treasure home and appropriate it to us. Therefore sanctifying is nothing else than bringing us to Christ to receive this good, to which we could not attain of ourselves.

Learn, then, to understand this article most clearly. If you are asked: What do you mean by the words: I believe in the Holy Ghost? you can answer: I believe that the Holy Ghost makes me holy, as His name implies. But whereby does He accomplish this, or what are His method and means to this end? Answer: By the Christian Church, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. For, in the first place, He has a peculiar congregation in the world, which is the mother that begets and bears every Christian through the Word of God, which He reveals and preaches, [and through which] He illumines and enkindles hearts, that they understand, accept it, cling to it, and persevere in it.

For where He does not cause it to be preached and made alive in the heart, so that it is understood, it is lost, as was the case under the Papacy, where faith was entirely put under the bench, and no one recognized Christ as his Lord or the Holy Ghost as his Sanctifier, that is, no one believed that Christ is our Lord in the sense that He has acquired this treasure for us, without our works and merit, and made us acceptable to the Father. What, then, was lacking? This, that the Holy Ghost was not there to reveal it and cause it to be preached; but men and evil spirits were there, who taught us to obtain grace and be saved by our works. Therefore it is not a Christian Church either; for where Christ is not preached, there is no Holy Ghost who creates, calls, and gathers the Christian Church, without which no one can come to Christ the Lord. Let this suffice concerning the sum of this article. But because the parts which are here enumerated are not quite clear to the simple, we shall run over them also.

The Creed denominates the holy Christian Church, communionem sanctorum, a communion of saints; for both expressions, taken together, are identical. But formerly the one [the second] expression was not there, and it has been poorly and unintelligibly translated into German eine Gemeinschaft der Heiligen, a communion of saints. If it is to be rendered plainly, it must be expressed quite differently in the German idiom; for the word ecclesia properly means in German eine Versammlung, an assembly. But we are accustomed to the word church, by which the simple do not understand an assembled multitude, but the consecrated house or building, although the house ought not to be called a church, except only for the reason that the multitude assembles there. For we who assemble there make and choose for ourselves a particular place, and give a name to the house according to the assembly.

Thus the word Kirche (church) means really nothing else than a common assembly and is not German by idiom, but Greek (as is also the word ecclesia); for in their own language they call it kyria, as in Latin it is called curia. Therefore in genuine German, in our mother-tongue, it ought to be called a Christian congregation or assembly (eine christliche Gemeinde oder Sammlung), or, best of all and most clearly, holy Christendom (eine heilige Christenheit).

So also the word communio, which is added, ought not to be rendered communion (Gemeinschaft), but congregation (Gemeinde). And it is nothing else than an interpretation or explanation by which some one meant to explain what the Christian Church is. This our people, who understood neither Latin nor German, have rendered Gemeinschaft der Heiligen (communion of saints), although no German language speaks thus, nor understands it thus. But to speak correct German, it ought to be eine Gemeinde der Heiligen (a congregation of saints), that is, a congregation made up purely of saints, or, to speak yet more plainly, eine heilige Gemeinde, a holy congregation. I say this in order that the words Gemeinschaft der Heiligen (communion of saints) may be understood, because the expression has become so established by custom that it cannot well be eradicated, and it is treated almost as heresy if one should attempt to change a word.

But this is the meaning and substance of this addition: I believe that there is upon earth a little holy group and congregation of pure saints, under one head, even Christ, called together by the Holy Ghost in one faith, one mind, and understanding, with manifold gifts, yet agreeing in love, without sects or schisms. I am also a part and member of the same a sharer and joint owner of all the goods it possesses, brought to it and incorporated into it by the Holy Ghost by having heard and continuing to hear the Word of God, which is the beginning of entering it. For formerly, before we had attained to this, we were altogether of the devil, knowing nothing of God and of Christ. Thus, until the last day, the Holy Ghost abides with the holy congregation or Christendom, by means of which He fetches us to Christ and which He employs to teach and preach to us the Word, whereby He works and promotes sanctification, causing it [this community] daily to grow and become strong in the faith and its fruits which He produces.

We further believe that in this Christian Church we have forgiveness of sin, which is wrought through the holy Sacraments and Absolution, moreover, through all manner of consolatory promises of the entire Gospel. Therefore, whatever is to be preached concerning the Sacraments belongs here, and, in short, the whole Gospel and all the offices of Christianity, which also must be preached and taught without ceasing. For although the grace of God is secured through Christ, and sanctification is wrought by the Holy Ghost through the Word of God in the unity of the Christian Church, yet on account of our flesh which we bear about with us we are never without sin.

Everything, therefore, in the Christian Church is ordered to the end that we shall daily obtain there nothing but the forgiveness of sin through the Word and signs, to comfort and encourage our consciences as long as we live here. Thus, although we have sins, the [grace of the] Holy Ghost does not allow them to injure us, because we are in the Christian Church, where there is nothing but [continuous, uninterrupted] forgiveness of sin, both in that God forgives us, and in that we forgive, bear with, and help each other.

But outside of this Christian Church, where the Gospel is not, there is no forgiveness, as also there can be no holiness [sanctification]. Therefore all who seek and wish to merit holiness [sanctification], not through the Gospel and forgiveness of sin, but by their works, have expelled and severed themselves [from this Church].

Meanwhile, however, while sanctification has begun and is growing daily, we expect that our flesh will be destroyed and buried with all its uncleanness, and will come forth gloriously, and arise to entire and perfect holiness in a new eternal life. For now we are only half pure and holy, so that the Holy Ghost has ever [some reason why] to continue His work in us through the Word, and daily to dispense forgiveness, until we attain to that life where there will be no more forgiveness, but only perfectly pure and holy people, full of godliness and righteousness, removed and free from sin, death, and all evil, in a new, immortal, and glorified body.

Behold, all this is to be the office and work of the Holy Ghost, that He begin and daily increase holiness upon earth by means of these two things, the Christian Church and the forgiveness of sin. But in our dissolution He will accomplish it altogether in an instant, and will forever preserve us therein by the last two parts.

But the term Auferstehung des Fleisches (resurrection of the flesh) here employed is not according to good German idiom. For when we Germans hear the word Fleisch (flesh), we think no farther than of the shambles. But in good German idiom we would say Auferstehung des Leibes, or Leichnams (resurrection of the body). However, it is not a matter of much moment, if we only understand the words aright.

This, now, is the article which must ever be and remain in operation. For creation we have received; redemption, too, is finished. But the Holy Ghost carries on His work without ceasing to the last day. And for that purpose He has appointed a congregation upon earth by which He speaks and does everything. For He has not yet brought together all His Christian Church nor dispensed forgiveness. Therefore we believe in Him who through the Word daily brings us into the fellowship of this Christian Church, and through the same Word and the forgiveness of sins bestows, increases, and strengthens faith in order that when He has accomplished it all, and we abide therein, and die to the world and to all evil, He may finally make us perfectly and forever holy; which now we expect in faith through the Word.

Behold, here you have the entire divine essence, will, and work depicted most exquisitely in quite short and yet rich words wherein consists all our wisdom, which surpasses and exceeds the wisdom, mind, and reason of all men. For although the whole world with all diligence has endeavored to ascertain what God is, what He has in mind and does, yet has she never been able to attain to [the knowledge and understanding of] any of these things. But here we have everything in richest measure; for here in all three articles He has Himself revealed and opened the deepest abyss of his paternal heart and of His pure unutterable love. For He has created us for this very object, that He might redeem and sanctify us; and in addition to giving and imparting to us everything in heaven and upon earth, He has given to us even His Son and the Holy Ghost, by whom to bring us to Himself. For (as explained above) we could never attain to the knowledge of the grace and favor of the Father except through the Lord Christ, who is a mirror of the paternal heart, outside of whom we see nothing but an angry and terrible Judge. But of Christ we could know nothing either, unless it had been revealed by the Holy Ghost.

These articles of the Creed, therefore, divide and separate us Christians from all other people upon earth. For all outside of Christianity, whether heathen, Turks, Jews, or false Christians and hypocrites, although they believe in, and worship, only one true God, yet know not what His mind towards them is, and cannot expect any love or blessing from Him; therefore they abide in eternal wrath and damnation. For they have not the Lord Christ, and, besides, are not illumined and favored by any gifts of the Holy Ghost.

From this you perceive that the Creed is a doctrine quite different from the Ten Commandments; for the latter teaches indeed what we ought to do, but the former tells what God does for us and gives to us. Moreover, apart from this, the Ten Commandments are written in the hearts of all men; the Creed, however, no human wisdom can comprehend, but it must be taught by the Holy Ghost alone. The latter doctrine [of the Law], therefore makes no Christian, for the wrath and displeasure of God abide upon us still, because we cannot keep what God demands of us; but this [namely, the doctrine of faith] brings pure grace, and makes us godly and acceptable to God. For by this knowledge we obtain love and delight in all the commandments of God, because here we see that God gives Himself entire to us, with all that He has and is able to do, to aid and direct us in keeping the Ten Commandments -- the Father, all creatures; the Son, His entire work; and the Holy Ghost, all His gifts.

Let this suffice concerning the Creed to lay a foundation for the simple, that they may not be burdened, so that, if they understand the substance of it, they themselves may afterwards strive to acquire more, and to refer to these parts whatever they learn in the Scriptures, and may ever grow and increase in richer understanding. For as long as we live here, we shall daily have enough to do to preach and to learn this.

Part Third. OF PRAYER.

The Lord's Prayer.

We have now heard what we must do and believe, in which things the best and happiest life consists. Now follows the third part, how we ought to pray. For since we are so situated that no man can perfectly keep the Ten Commandments, even though he have begun to believe, and since the devil with all his power together with the world and our own flesh, resists our endeavors, nothing is so necessary as that we should continually resort to the ear of God, call upon Him, and pray to Him, that He would give, preserve, and increase in us faith and the fulfillment of the Ten Commandments, and that He would remove everything that is in our way and opposes us therein. But that we might know what and how to pray, our Lord Christ has Himself taught us both the mode and the words, as we shall see.

But before we explain the Lord's Prayer part by part, it is most necessary first to exhort and incite people to prayer, as Christ and the apostles also have done. And the first matter is to know that it is our duty to pray because of God's commandment. For thus we heard in the Second Commandment: Thou shalt not take the name of the lord, thy God, in vain, that we are there required to praise that holy name, and call upon it in every need, or to pray. For to call upon the name of God is nothing else than to pray. Prayer is therefore as strictly and earnestly commanded as all other commandments: to have no other God, not to kill, not to steal, etc. Let no one think that it is all the same whether he pray or not, as vulgar people do, who grope in such delusion and ask Why should I pray? Who knows whether God heeds or will hear my prayer? If I do not pray, some one else will. And thus they fall into the habit of never praying, and frame a pretext, as though we taught that there is no duty or need of prayer, because we reject false and hypocritical prayers.

But this is true indeed that such prayers as have been offered hitherto when men were babbling and bawling in the churches were no prayers. For such external matters, when they are properly observed, may be a good exercise for young children, scholars, and simple persons, and may be called singing or reading, but not really praying. But praying, as the Second Commandment teaches, is to call upon God in every need. This He requires of us, and has not left it to our choice. But it is our duty and obligation to pray if we would be Christians, as much as it is our duty and obligation to obey our parents and the government; for by calling upon it and praying the name of God is honored and profitably employed. This you must note above all things, that thereby you may silence and repel such thoughts as would keep and deter us from prayer. For just as it would be idle for a son to say to his father, "Of what advantage is my obedience? I will go and do what I can; it is all the same"; but there stands the commandment, Thou shalt and must do it, so also here it is not left to my will to do it or leave it undone, but prayer shall and must be offered at the risk of God's wrath and displeasure.

This is therefore to be understood and noted before everything else, in order that thereby we may silence and repel the thoughts which would keep and deter us from praying, as though it were not of much consequence if we do not pray, or as though it were commanded those who are holier and in better favor with God than we; as, indeed, the human heart is by nature so despondent that it always flees from God and imagines that He does not wish or desire our prayer, because we are sinners and have merited nothing but wrath. Against such thoughts (I say) we should regard this commandment and turn to God, that we may not by such disobedience excite His anger still more. For by this commandment He gives us plainly to understand that He will not cast us from Him nor chase us away, although we are sinners, but rather draw us to Himself, so that we might humble ourselves before Him, bewail this misery and plight of ours, and pray for grace and help. Therefore we read in the Scriptures that He is angry also with those who were smitten for their sin, because they did not return to Him and by their prayers assuage His wrath and seek His grace.

Now, from the fact that it is so solemnly commanded to pray, you are to conclude and think, that no one should by any means despise his prayer, but rather set great store by it, and always seek an illustration from the other commandments. A child should by no means despise his obedience to father and mother, but should always think: This work is a work of obedience, and what I do I do with no other intention than that I may walk in the obedience and commandment of God, on which I can settle and stand firm, and esteem it a great thing, not on account of my worthiness, but on account of the commandment. So here also, what and for what we pray we should regard as demanded by God and done in obedience to Him, and should reflect thus: On my account it would amount to nothing; but it shall avail, for the reason that God has commanded it. Therefore everybody, no matter what he has to say in prayer, should always come before God in obedience to this commandment.

We pray, therefore, and exhort every one most diligently to take this to heart and by no means to despise our prayer. For hitherto it has been taught thus in the devil's name that no one regarded these things, and men supposed it to be sufficient to have done the work, whether God would hear it or not. But that is staking prayer on a risk, and murmuring it at a venture, and therefore it is a lost prayer. For we allow such thoughts as these to lead us astray and deter us: I am not holy or worthy enough; if I were as godly and holy as St. Peter or St. Paul, then I would pray. But put such thoughts far away, for just the same commandment which applied to St. Paul applies also to me; and the Second Commandment is given as much on my account as on his account, so that he can boast of no better or holier commandment.

Therefore you should say: My prayer is as precious, holy, and pleasing to God as that of St. Paul or of the most holy saints. This is the reason: For I will gladly grant that he is holier in his person, but not on account of the commandment; since God does not regard prayer on account of the person, but on account of His word and obedience thereto. For on the commandment on which all the saints rest their prayer I, too, rest mine. Moreover I pray for the same thing for which they all pray and ever have prayed; besides, I have just as great a need of it as those great saints, yea, even a greater one than they.

Let this be the first and most important point, that all our prayers must be based and rest upon obedience to God, irrespective of our person, whether we be sinners or saints, worthy or unworthy. And we must know that God will not have it treated as a jest, but be angry, and punish all who do not pray, as surely as He punishes all other disobedience; next, that He will not suffer our prayers to be in vain or lost. For if He did not intend to answer your prayer, He would not bid you pray and add such a severe commandment to it.

In the second place, we should be the more urged and incited to pray because God has also added a promise, and declared that it shall surely be done to us as we pray, as He says Ps. 50, 15: Call upon Me in the day of trouble: I will deliver thee. And Christ in the Gospel of St. Matthew, 7, 7: Ask, and it shall be given you. For every one that asketh receiveth. Such promises ought certainly to encourage and kindle our hearts to pray with pleasure and delight, since He testifies with His [own] word that our prayer is heartily pleasing to Him, moreover, that it shall assuredly be heard and granted, in order that we may not despise it or think lightly of it, and pray at a venture.

This you can hold up to Him and say: Here I come, dear Father, and pray, not of my own purpose nor upon my own worthiness, but at Thy commandment and promise, which cannot fail or deceive me. Whoever, therefore, does not believe this promise must know again that he excites God to anger as a person who most highly dishonors Him and reproaches Him with falsehood.

Besides this, we should be incited and drawn to prayer because in addition to this commandment and promise God anticipates us, and Himself arranges the words and form of prayer for us, and places them upon our lips as to how and what we should pray, that we may see how heartily He pities us in our distress, and may never doubt that such prayer is pleasing to Him and shall certainly be answered; which [the Lord's Prayer] is a great advantage indeed over all other prayers that we might compose ourselves. For in them the conscience would ever be in doubt and say: I have prayed, but who knows how it pleases Him, or whether I have hit upon the right proportions and form? Hence there is no nobler prayer to be found upon earth than the Lord's Prayer which we daily pray because it has this excellent testimony, that God loves to hear it, which we ought not to surrender for all the riches of the world.

And it has been prescribed also for this reason that we should see and consider the distress which ought to urge and compel us to pray without ceasing. For whoever would pray must have something to present, state, and name which he desires; if not, it cannot be called a prayer.

Therefore we have rightly rejected the prayers of monks and priests, who howl and growl day and night like fiends; but none of them think of praying for a hair's breadth of anything. And if we would assemble all the churches, together with all ecclesiastics, they would be obliged to confess that they have never from the heart prayed for even a drop of wine. For none of them has ever purposed to pray from obedience to God and faith in His promise, nor has any one regarded any distress, but (when they had done their best) they thought no further than this, to do a good work, whereby they might repay God, as being unwilling to take anything from Him, but wishing only to give Him something.

But where there is to be a true prayer there must be earnestness. Men must feel their distress, and such distress as presses them and compels them to call and cry out then prayer will be made spontaneously, as it ought to be, and men will require no teaching how to prepare for it and to attain to the proper devotion. But the distress which ought to concern us most, both as regards ourselves and every one, you will find abundantly set forth in the Lord's Prayer. Therefore it is to serve also to remind us of the same, that we contemplate it and lay it to heart, lest we become remiss in prayer. For we all have enough that we lack, but the great want is that we do not feel nor see it. Therefore God also requires that you lament and plead such necessities and wants, not because He does not know them, but that you may kindle your heart to stronger and greater desires, and make wide and open your cloak to receive much.

Therefore, every one of us should accustom himself from his youth daily to pray for all his wants, whenever he is sensible of anything affecting his interests or that of other people among whom he may live, as for preachers, the government, neighbors, domestics, and always (as we have said) to hold up to God His commandment and promise, knowing that He will not have them disregarded. This I say because I would like to see these things brought home again to the people that they might learn to pray truly, and not go about coldly and indifferently, whereby they become daily more unfit for prayer; which is just what the devil desires, and for what he works with all his powers. For he is well aware what damage and harm it does him when prayer is in proper practice. For this we must know, that all our shelter and protection rest in prayer alone. For we are far too feeble to cope with the devil and all his power and adherents that set themselves against us, and they might easily crush us under their feet. Therefore we must consider and take up those weapons with which Christians must be armed in order to stand against the devil. For what do you think has hitherto accomplished such great things, has checked or quelled the counsels, purposes, murder, and riot of our enemies, whereby the devil thought to crush us, together with the Gospel, except that the prayer of a few godly men intervened like a wall of iron on our side? They should else have witnessed a far different tragedy, namely, how the devil would have destroyed all Germany in its own blood. But now they may confidently deride it and make a mock of it, however, we shall nevertheless be a match both for themselves and the devil by prayer alone, if we only persevere diligently and not become slack. For whenever a godly Christian prays: Dear Father let Thy will be done, God speaks from on high and says: Yes, dear child, it shall be so, in spite of the devil and all the world.

Let this be said as an exhortation, that men may learn, first of all, to esteem prayer as something great and precious, and to make a proper distinction between babbling and praying for something. For we by no means reject prayer, but the bare, useless howling and murmuring we reject, as Christ Himself also rejects and prohibits long palavers. Now we shall most briefly and clearly treat of the Lord's Prayer. Here there is comprehended in seven successive articles, or petitions, every need which never ceases to relate to us, and each so great that it ought to constrain us to keep praying it all our lives.

The First Petition.

Hallowed be Thy name.

This is, indeed, somewhat obscure, and not expressed in good German, for in our mother-tongue we would say: Heavenly Father, help that by all means Thy name may be holy. But what is it to pray that His name may be holy? Is it not holy already? Answer: Yes, it is always holy in its nature, but in our use it is not holy. For God's name was given us when we became Christians and were baptized, so that we are called children of God and have the Sacraments by which He so incorporates us in Himself that everything which is God's must serve for our use.

Here now the great need exists for which we ought to be most concerned, that this name have its proper honor, be esteemed holy and sublime as the greatest treasure and sanctuary that we have; and that as godly children we pray that the name of God, which is already holy in heaven, may also be and remain holy with us upon earth and in all the world.

But how does it become holy among us? Answer, as plainly as it can be said: When both our doctrine and life are godly and Christian. For since in this prayer we call God our Father, it is our duty always to deport and demean ourselves as godly children, that He may not receive shame, but honor and praise from us.

Now the name of God is profaned by us either in words or in works. (For whatever we do upon the earth must be either words or works, speech or act.) In the first place, then, it is profaned when men preach, teach, and speak in the name of God what is false and misleading, so that His name must serve to adorn and to find a market for falsehood. That is, indeed, the greatest profanation and dishonor of the divine name. Furthermore, also when men, by swearing, cursing, conjuring, etc., grossly abuse the holy name as a cloak for their shame. In the second place also by an openly wicked life and works, when those who are called Christians and the people of God are adulterers, drunkards, misers, envious, and slanderers. Here again must the name of God come to shame and be profaned because of us. For just as it is a shame and disgrace to a natural father to have a bad perverse child that opposes him in words and deeds, so that on its account he suffers contempt and reproach, so also it brings dishonor upon God if we who are called by His name and have all manner of goods from Him teach, speak, and live in any other manner except as godly and heavenly children, so that people say of us that we must be not God's, but the devil's children.

Thus you see that in this petition we pray just for that which God demands in the Second Commandment; namely, that His name be not taken in vain to swear, curse, lie, deceive, etc., but be usefully employed to the praise and honor of God. For whoever employs the name of God for any sort of wrong profanes and desecrates this holy name, as aforetime a church was considered desecrated when a murder or any other crime had been committed in it, or when a pyx or relic was desecrated, as being holy in themselves, yet become unholy in use. Thus this point is easy and clear if only the language is understood, that to hallow is the same as in our idiom to praise, magnify, and honor both in word and deed.

Here, now, learn how great need there is of such prayer. For because we see how full the world is of sects and false teachers, who all wear the holy name as a cover and sham for their doctrines of devils, we ought by all means to pray without ceasing, and to cry and call upon God against all such as preach and believe falsely and whatever opposes and persecutes our Gospel and pure doctrine, and would suppress it, as bishops, tyrants, enthusiasts, etc. Likewise also for ourselves who have the Word of God, but are not thankful for it, nor live as we ought according to the same. If now you pray for this with your heart, you can be sure that it pleases God; for He will not hear anything more dear to Him than that His honor and praise is exalted above everything else, and His Word is taught in its purity and is esteemed precious and dear.

The Second Petition.

Thy kingdom come.

As we prayed in the First Petition concerning the honor and name of God that He would prevent the world from adorning its lies and wickedness with it, but cause it to be esteemed sublime and holy both in doctrine and life, so that He may be praised and magnified in us, so here we pray that His kingdom also may come. But just as the name of God is in itself holy, and we pray nevertheless that it be holy among us, so also His kingdom comes of itself, without our prayer, yet we pray nevertheless that it may come to us, that is, prevail among us and with us, so that we may be a part of those among whom His name is hallowed and His kingdom prospers.

But what is the kingdom of God? Answer: Nothing else than what we learned in the Creed, that God sent His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, into the world to redeem and deliver us from the power of the devil, and to bring us to Himself, and to govern us as a King of righteousness, life and salvation against sin death, and an evil conscience, for which end He has also bestowed His Holy Ghost, who is to bring these things home to us by His holy Word, and to illumine and strengthen us in the faith by His power.

Therefore we pray here in the first place that this may become effective with us, and that His name be so praised through the holy Word of God and a Christian life that both we who have accepted it may abide and daily grow therein, and that it may gain approbation and adherence among other people and proceed with power throughout the world, that many may find entrance into the Kingdom of Grace, be made partakers of redemption, being led thereto by the Holy Ghost, in order that thus we may all together remain forever in the one kingdom now begun.

For the coming of God's Kingdom to us occurs in two ways; first, here in time through the Word and faith; and secondly, in eternity forever through revelation. Now we pray for both these things, that it may come to those who are not yet in it, and, by daily increase, to us who have received the same, and hereafter in eternal life. All this is nothing else than saying: Dear Father, we pray, give us first Thy Word, that the Gospel be preached properly throughout the world; and secondly, that it be received in faith, and work and live in us, so that through the Word and the power of the Holy Ghost Thy kingdom may prevail among us, and the kingdom of the devil be put down, that he may have no right or power over us, until at last it shall be utterly destroyed, and sin, death, and hell shall be exterminated, that we may live forever in perfect righteousness and blessedness.

From this you perceive that we pray here not for a crust of bread or a temporal, perishable good, but for an eternal inestimable treasure and everything that God Himself possesses; which is far too great for any human heart to think of desiring if He had not Himself commanded us to pray for the same. But because He is God, He also claims the honor of giving much more and more abundantly than any one can comprehend, -- like an eternal, unfailing fountain, which, the more it pours forth and overflows, the more it continues to give, -- and He desires nothing more earnestly of us than that we ask much and great things of Him, and again is angry if we do not ask and pray confidently.

For just as when the richest and most mighty emperor would bid a poor beggar ask whatever he might desire, and were ready to give great imperial presents, and the fool would beg only for a dish of gruel, he would be rightly considered a rogue and a scoundrel who treated the command of his imperial majesty as a jest and sport, and was not worthy of coming into his presence: so also it is a great reproach and dishonor to God if we, to whom He offers and pledges so many unspeakable treasures, despise the same, or have not the confidence to receive them, but scarcely venture to pray for a piece of bread.

All this is the fault of the shameful unbelief which does not look to God for as much good as will satisfy the stomach, much less expects without doubt such eternal treasures of God. Therefore we must strengthen ourselves against it, and let this be our first prayer; then, indeed, we shall have all else in abundance, as Christ teaches [Matt. 6, 33]: Seek ye first the kingdom of God and His righteousness and all these things shall be added unto you. For how could He allow us to suffer want and to be straitened in temporal things when He promises that which is eternal and imperishable?

The Third Petition.

Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.

Thus far we have prayed that God's name be honored by us, and that His kingdom prevail among us; in which two points is comprehended all that pertains to the honor of God and to our salvation, that we receive as our own God and all His riches. But now a need just as great arises, namely, that we firmly keep them, and do not suffer ourselves to be torn therefrom. For as in a good government it is not only necessary that there be those who build and govern well, but also those who make defense, afford protection and maintain it firmly, so here likewise, although we have prayed for the greatest need, for the Gospel, faith, and the Holy Ghost, that He may govern us and redeem us from the power of the devil, we must also pray that His will be done. For there will be happenings quite strange if we are to abide therein, as we shall have to suffer many thrusts and blows on that account from everything that ventures to oppose and prevent the fulfillment of the two petitions that precede.

For no one believes how the devil opposes and resists them, and cannot suffer that any one teach or believe aright. And it hurts him beyond measure to suffer his lies and abominations, that have been honored under the most specious pretexts of the divine name, to be exposed, and to be disgraced himself, and, besides, be driven out of the heart, and suffer such a breach to be made in his kingdom. Therefore he chafes and rages as a fierce enemy with all his power and might, and marshals all his subjects, and, in addition enlists the world and our own flesh as his allies. For our flesh is in itself indolent and inclined to evil, even though we have accepted and believe the Word of God. The world, however, is perverse and wicked; this he incites against us, fans and stirs the fire, that he may hinder and drive us back, cause us to fall, and again bring us under his power. Such is all his will, mind, and thought, for which he strives day and night, and never rests a moment, employing all arts, wiles, ways, and means whichever he can invent.

If we would be Christians, therefore, we must surely expect and reckon upon having the devil with all his angels and the world as our enemies, who will bring every possible misfortune and grief upon us. For where the Word of God is preached, accepted, or believed, and produces fruit, there the holy cross cannot be wanting. And let no one think that he shall have peace; but he must risk what whatever he has upon earth -- possessions, honor. house and estate, wife and children, body and life. Now, this hurts our flesh and the old Adam; for the test is to be steadfast and to suffer with patience in whatever way we are assailed, and to let go whatever is taken from us.

Hence there is just as great need, as in all the others, that we pray without ceasing: "Dear Father, Thy will be done, not the will of the devil and of our enemies, nor of anything that would persecute and suppress Thy holy Word or hinder Thy kingdom; and grant that we may bear with patience and overcome whatever is to be endured on that account, lest our poor flesh yield or fall away from weakness or sluggishness."

Behold, thus we have in these three petitions, in the simplest manner, the need which relates to God Himself, yet all for our sakes. For whatever we pray concerns only us, namely, as we have said, that what must be done anyway without us, may also be done in us. For as His name must be hallowed and His kingdom come without our prayer, so also His will must be done and succeed although the devil with all his adherents raise a great tumult, are angry and rage against it, and undertake to exterminate the Gospel utterly. But for our own sakes we must pray that even against their fury His will be done without hindrance also among us, that they may not be able to accomplish anything and we remain firm against all violence and persecution, and submit to such will of God.

Such prayer, then, is to be our protection and defense now, is to repel and put down all that the devil, Pope, bishops, tyrants, and heretics can do against our Gospel. Let them all rage and attempt their utmost, and deliberate and resolve how they may suppress and exterminate us, that their will and counsel may prevail: over and against this one or two Christians with this petition alone shall be our wall against which they shall run and dash themselves to pieces. This consolation and confidence we have, that the will and purpose of the devil and of all our enemies shall and must fail and come to naught, however proud, secure, and powerful they know themselves to be. For if their will were not broken and hindered, the kingdom of God could not abide on earth nor His name be hallowed.

The Fourth Petition.

Give us this day our daily bread.

Here, now, we consider the poor breadbasket, the necessaries of our body and of the temporal life. It is a brief and simple word, but it has a very wide scope. For when you mention and pray for daily bread, you pray for everything that is necessary in order to have and enjoy daily bread and, on the other hand, against everything which interferes with it. Therefore you must open wide and extend your thoughts not only to the oven or the flour-bin but to the distant field and the entire land, which bears and brings to us daily bread and every sort of sustenance. For if God did not cause it to grow, and bless and preserve it in the field, we could never take bread from the oven or have any to set upon the table.

To comprise it briefly, this petition includes everything that belongs to our entire life in the world, because on that account alone do we need daily bread. Now for our life it is not only necessary that our body have food and covering and other necessaries, but also that we spend our days in peace and quiet among the people with whom we live and have intercourse in daily business and conversation and all sorts of doings, in short, whatever pertains both to the domestic and to the neighborly or civil relation and government. For where these two things are hindered [intercepted and disturbed] that they do not prosper as they ought, the necessaries of life also are impeded, so that ultimately life cannot be maintained. And there is, indeed, the greatest need to pray for temporal authority and government, as that by which most of all God preserves to us our daily bread and all the comforts of this life. For though we have received of God all good things in abundance we are not able to retain any of them or use them in security and happiness, if He did not give us a permanent and peaceful government. For where there are dissension, strife, and war, there the daily bread is already taken away, or at least checked.

Therefore it would be very proper to place in the coat-of-arms of every pious prince a loaf of bread instead of a lion, or a wreath of rue, or to stamp it upon the coin, to remind both them and their subjects that by their office we have protection and peace, and that without them we could not eat and retain our daily bread. Therefore they are also worthy of all honor, that we give to them for their office what we ought and can, as to those through whom we enjoy in peace and quietness what we have, because otherwise we would not keep a farthing; and that, in addition, we also pray for them that through them God may bestow on us the more blessing and good.

Let this be a very brief explanation and sketch, showing how far this petition extends through all conditions on earth. Of this any one might indeed make a long prayer, and with many words enumerate all the things that are included therein, as that we pray God to give us food and drink, clothing, house, and home, and health of body; also that He cause the grain and fruits of the field to grow and mature well; furthermore, that He help us at home towards good housekeeping, that He give and preserve to us a godly wife, children, and servants, that He cause our work, trade, or whatever we are engaged in to prosper and succeed, favor us with faithful neighbors and good friends, etc. Likewise, that He give to emperors, kings, and all estates, and especially to the rulers of our country and to all counselors, magistrates, and officers, wisdom, strength, and success that they may govern well and vanquish the Turks and all enemies; to subjects and the common people, obedience, peace, and harmony in their life with one another, and on the other hand, that He would preserve us from all sorts of calamity to body and livelihood, as lightning, hail, fire, flood, poison, pestilence, cattle-plague, war and bloodshed, famine, destructive beasts, wicked men, etc. All this it is well to impress upon the simple, namely, that these things come from God, and must be prayed for by us.

But this petition is especially directed also against our chief enemy, the devil. For all his thought and desire is to deprive us of all that we have from God, or to hinder it; and he is not satisfied to obstruct and destroy spiritual government in leading souls astray by his lies and bringing them under his power, but he also prevents and hinders the stability of all government and honorable, peaceable relations on earth. There he causes so much contention, murder, sedition, and war also lightning and hail to destroy grain and cattle, to poison the air, etc. In short, he is sorry that any one has a morsel of bread from God and eats it in peace; and if it were in his power, and our prayer (next to God) did not prevent him, we would not keep a straw in the field, a farthing in the house, yea, not even our life for an hour, especially those who have the Word of God and would like to be Christians.

Behold, thus God wishes to indicate to us how He cares for us in all our need, and faithfully provides also for our temporal support. and although He abundantly grants and preserves these things even to the wicked and knaves, yet He wishes that we pray for them, in order that we may recognize that we receive them from His hand, and may feel His paternal goodness toward us therein. For when He withdraws His hand, nothing can prosper nor be maintained in the end, as, indeed, we daily see and experience. How much trouble there is now in the world only on account of bad coin, yea, on account of daily oppression and raising of prices in common trade, bargaining and labor on the part of those who wantonly oppress the poor and deprive them of their daily bread! This we must suffer indeed; but let them take care that they do not lose the common intercession, and beware lest this petition in the Lord's Prayer be against them.

The Fifth Petition.

And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us.

This part now relates to our poor miserable life, which, although we have and believe the Word of God, and do and submit to His will, and are supported by His gifts and blessings is nevertheless not without sin. For we still stumble daily and transgress because we live in the world among men who do us much harm and give us cause for impatience, anger, revenge, etc. Besides, we have Satan at our back, who sets upon us on every side, and fights (as we have heard) against all the foregoing petitions, so that it is not possible always to stand firm in such a persistent conflict.

Therefore there is here again great need to call upon God and to pray: Dear Father, forgive us our trespasses. Not as though He did not forgive sin without and even before our prayer (for He has given us the Gospel, in which is pure forgiveness before we prayed or ever thought about it). But this is to the intent that we may recognize and accept such forgiveness. For since the flesh in which we daily live is of such a nature that it neither trusts nor believes God, and is ever active in evil lusts and devices, so that we sin daily in word and deed, by commission and omission by which the conscience is thrown into unrest, so that it is afraid of the wrath and displeasure of God, and thus loses the comfort and confidence derived from the Gospel; therefore it is ceaselessly necessary that we run hither and obtain consolation to comfort the conscience again.

But this should serve God's purpose of breaking our pride and keeping us humble. For in case any one should boast of his godliness and despise others, God has reserved this prerogative to Himself, that the person is to consider himself and place this prayer before his eyes, and he will find that he is no better than others, and that in the presence of God all must lower their plumes, and be glad that they can attain forgiveness. And let no one think that as long as we live here he can reach such a position that he will not need such forgiveness. In short, if God does not forgive without ceasing, we are lost.

It is therefore the intent of this petition that God would not regard our sins and hold up to us what we daily deserve, but would deal graciously with us, and forgive, as He has promised, and thus grant us a joyful and confident conscience to stand before Him in prayer. For where the heart is not in right relation towards God, nor can take such confidence, it will nevermore venture to pray. But such a confident and joyful heart can spring from nothing else than the [certain] knowledge of the forgiveness of sin.

But there is here attached a necessary, yet consolatory addition: As we forgive. He has promised that we shall be sure that everything is forgiven and pardoned, yet in the manner that we also forgive our neighbor. For just as we daily sin much against God and yet He forgives everything through grace, so we, too, must ever forgive our neighbor who does us injury, violence, and wrong, shows malice toward us, etc. If, therefore you do not forgive, then do not think that God forgives you; but if you forgive, you have this consolation and assurance, that you are forgiven in heaven, not on account of your forgiving, -- for God forgives freely and without condition, out of pure grace, because He has so promised, as the Gospel teaches, -- but in order that He may set this up for our confirmation and assurance for a sign alongside of the promise which accords with this prayer, Luke 6, 37: Forgive, and ye shall be forgiven. Therefore Christ also repeats it soon after the Lord's Prayer, and says, Matt. 6,14: For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you, etc.

This sign is therefore attached to this petition, that, when we pray, we remember the promise and reflect thus: Dear Father, for this reason I come and pray Thee to forgive me, not that I can make satisfaction, or can merit anything by my works, but because Thou hast promised and attached the seal thereto that I should be as sure as though I had absolution pronounced by Thyself. For as much as Baptism and the Lord's Supper appointed as external signs, effect, so much also this sign can effect to confirm our consciences and cause them to rejoice. And it is especially given for this purpose, that we might use and practice it every hour, as a thing that we have with us at all times.

The Sixth Petition.

And lead us not into temptation.

We have now heard enough what toil and labor is required to retain all that for which we pray, and to persevere therein, which, however, is not achieved without infirmities and stumbling. Besides, although we have received forgiveness and a good conscience and are entirely acquitted, yet is our life of such a nature that one stands to-day and to-morrow falls. Therefore, even though we be godly now and stand before God with a good conscience, we must pray again that He would not suffer us to relapse and yield to trials and temptations.

Temptation, however, or (as our Saxons in olden times used to call it) Bekoerunge, is of three kinds, namely, of the flesh, of the world and of the devil. For in the flesh we dwell and carry the old Adam about our neck, who exerts himself and incites us daily to inchastity, laziness, gluttony and drunkenness, avarice and deception, to defraud our neighbor and to overcharge him, and, in short, to all manner of evil lusts which cleave to us by nature, and to which we are incited by the society, example and what we hear and see of other people, which often wound and inflame even an innocent heart.

Next comes the world, which offends us in word and deed, and impels us to anger and impatience. In short, there is nothing but hatred and envy, enmity, violence and wrong, unfaithfulness, vengeance, cursing, raillery slander, pride and haughtiness, with superfluous finery, honor, fame, and power, where no one is willing to be the least, but every one desires to sit at the head and to be seen before all.

Then comes the devil, inciting and provoking in all directions, but especially agitating matters that concern the conscience and spiritual affairs, namely, to induce us to despise and disregard both the Word and works of God to tear us away from faith, hope, and love and bring us into misbelief, false security, and obduracy, or, on the other hand, to despair, denial of God, blasphemy, and innumerable other shocking things. These are indeed snares and nets, yea, real fiery darts which are shot most venomously into the heart, not by flesh and blood, but by the devil.

Great and grievous, indeed, are these dangers and temptations which every Christian must bear, even though each one were alone by himself, so that every hour that we are in this vile life where we are attacked on all sides, chased and hunted down, we are moved to cry out and to pray that God would not suffer us to become weary and faint and to relapse into sin, shame, and unbelief. For otherwise it is impossible to overcome even the least temptation.

This, then, is leading us not into temptation, to wit, when He gives us power and strength to resist, the temptation, however, not being taken away or removed. For while we live in the flesh and have the devil about us, no one can escape temptation and allurements; and it cannot be otherwise than that we must endure trials, yea, be engulfed in them; but we pray for this, that we may not fall and be drowned in them.

To feel temptation is therefore a far different thing from consenting or yielding to it. We must all feel it, although not all in the same manner, but some in a greater degree and more severely than others; as, the young suffer especially from the flesh, afterwards, they that attain to middle life and old age, from the world, but others who are occupied with spiritual matters, that is, strong Christians, from the devil. But such feeling, as long as it is against our will and we would rather be rid of it, can harm no one. For if we did not feel it, it could not be called a temptation. But to consent thereto is when we give it the reins and do not resist or pray against it.

Therefore we Christians must be armed and daily expect to be incessantly attacked, in order that no one may go on in security and heedlessly, as though the devil were far from us, but at all times expect and parry his blows. For though I am now chaste, patient, kind, and in firm faith, the devil will this very hour send such an arrow into my heart that I can scarcely stand. For he is an enemy that never desists nor becomes tired, so that when one temptation ceases, there always arise others and fresh ones.

Accordingly, there is no help or comfort except to run hither and to take hold of the Lord's Prayer, and thus speak to God from the heart: Dear Father, Thou hast bidden me pray; let me not relapse because of temptations. Then you will see that they must desist, and finally acknowledge themselves conquered. Else if you venture to help yourself by your own thoughts and counsel, you will only make the matter worse and give the devil more space. For he has a serpent's head, which if it gain an opening into which he can slip, the whole body will follow without check. But prayer can prevent him and drive him back.

The Seventh and Last Petition.

But deliver us from evil. Amen. In the Greek text this petition reads thus: Deliver or preserve us from the Evil One, or the Malicious One; and it looks as if He were speaking of the devil, as though He would comprehend everything in one so that the entire substance of all our prayer is directed against our chief enemy. For it is he who hinders among us everything that we pray for: the name or honor of God, God's kingdom and will, our daily bread, a cheerful good conscience, etc.

Therefore we finally sum it all up and say: Dear Father pray, help that we be rid of all these calamities. But there is nevertheless also included whatever evil may happen to us under the devil's kingdom -- poverty, shame, death, and, in short, all the agonizing misery and heartache of which there is such an unnumbered multitude on the earth. For since the devil is not only a liar, but also a murderer, he constantly seeks our life, and wreaks his anger whenever he can afflict our bodies with misfortune and harm. Hence it comes that he often breaks men's necks or drives them to insanity, drowns some, and incites many to commit suicide, and to many other terrible calamities. Therefore there is nothing for us to do upon earth but to pray against this arch enemy without ceasing. For unless God preserved us, we would not be safe from him even for an hour.

Hence you see again how God wishes us to pray to Him also for all the things which affect our bodily interests, so that we seek and expect help nowhere else except in Him. But this matter He has put last; for if we are to be preserved and delivered from all evil, the name of God must first be hallowed in us, His kingdom must be with us, and His will be done. After that He will finally preserve us from sin and shame, and, besides, from everything that may hurt or injure us.

Thus God has briefly placed before us all the distress which may ever come upon us, so that we might have no excuse whatever for not praying. But all depends upon this, that we learn also to say Amen, that is, that we do not doubt that our prayer is surely heard and [what we pray] shall be done. For this is nothing else than the word of undoubting faith, which does not pray at a venture, but knows that God does not lie to him, since He has promised to grant it. Therefore, where there is no such faith, there cannot be true prayer either.

It is, therefore, a pernicious delusion of those who pray in such a manner that they dare not from the heart say yea and positively conclude that God hears them, but remain in doubt and say, How should I be so bold as to boast that God hears my prayer? For I am but a poor sinner, etc.

The reason for this is, they regard not the promise of God, but their own work and worthiness, whereby they despise God and reproach Him with lying, and therefore they receive nothing. As St. James says [1, 6]: But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering; for he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea, driven with the wind and tossed. For let not that man think that he shall receive anything of the Lord. Behold, such importance God attaches to the fact that we are sure we do not pray in vain, and that we do not in any way despise our prayer.

Part Fourth.

OF BAPTISM.

We have now finished the three chief parts of the common Christian doctrine. Besides these we have yet to speak of our two Sacraments instituted by Christ, of which also every Christian ought to have at least an ordinary, brief instruction, because without them there can be no Christian; although, alas! hitherto no instruction concerning them has been given. But, in the first place, we take up Baptism, by which we are first received into the Christian Church. However, in order that it may be readily understood we will treat of it in an orderly manner, and keep only to that which it is necessary for us to know. For how it is to be maintained and defended against heretics and sects we will commend to the learned.

In the first place, we must above all things know well the words upon which Baptism is founded, and to which everything refers that is to be said on the subject, namely, where the Lord Christ speaks in the last chapter of Matthew, v. 19:

Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

Likewise in St. Mark, the last chapter, v. 16:

He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned .

In these words you must note, in the first place, that here stand God's commandment and institution, lest we doubt that Baptism is divine, not devised nor invented by men. For as truly as I can say, No man has spun the Ten Commandments, the Creed, and the Lord's Prayer out of his head, but they are revealed and given by God Himself, so also I can boast that Baptism is no human trifle, but instituted by God Himself, moreover, that it is most solemnly and strictly commanded that we must be baptized or we cannot be saved, lest any one regard it as a trifling matter, like putting on a new red coat. For it is of the greatest importance that we esteem Baptism excellent, glorious, and exalted, for which we contend and fight chiefly, because the world is now so full of sects clamoring that Baptism is an external thing, and that external things are of no benefit. But let it be ever so much an external thing here stand God's Word and command which institute, establish, and confirm Baptism. But what God institutes and commands cannot be a vain, but must be a most precious thing, though in appearance it were of less value than a straw. If hitherto people could consider it a great thing when the Pope with his letters and bulls dispensed indulgences and confirmed altars and churches, solely because of the letters and seals, we ought to esteem Baptism much more highly and more precious, because God has commanded it, and, besides, it is performed in His name. For these are the words, Go ye baptize; however, not in your name, but in the name of God.

For to be baptized in the name of God is to be baptized not by men, but by God Himself. Therefore although it is performed by human hands, it is nevertheless truly God's own work. From this fact every one may himself readily infer that it is a far higher work than any work performed by a man or a saint. For what work greater than the work of God can we do?

But here the devil is busy to delude us with false appearances, and lead us away from the work of God to our own works. For there is a much more splendid appearance when a Carthusian does many great and difficult works and we all think much more of that which we do and merit ourselves. But the Scriptures teach thus: Even though we collect in one mass the works of all the monks, however splendidly they may shine, they would not be as noble and good as if God should pick up a straw. Why? Because the person is nobler and better. Here, then, we must not estimate the person according to the works, but the works according to the person, from whom they must derive their nobility. But insane reason will not regard this, and because Baptism does not shine like the works which we do, it is to be esteemed as nothing.

From this now learn a proper understanding of the subject, and how to answer the question what Baptism is, namely thus, that it is not mere ordinary water, but water comprehended in God's Word and command, and sanctified thereby, so that it is nothing else than a divine water; not that the water in itself is nobler than other water, but that God's Word and command are added.

Therefore it is pure wickedness and blasphemy of the devil that now our new spirits, to mock at Baptism, omit from it God's Word and institution, and look upon it in no other way than as water which is taken from the well, and then blather and say: How is a handful of water to help the soul? Aye, my friend, who does not know that water is water if tearing things asunder is what we are after? But how dare you thus interfere with God's order, and tear away the most precious treasure with which God has connected and enclosed it, and which He will not have separated? For the kernel in the water is God's Word or command and the name of God which is a treasure greater and nobler than heaven and earth.

Comprehend the difference, then, that Baptism is quite another thing than all other water; not on account of the natural quality, but because something more noble is here added; for God Himself stakes His honor His power and might on it. Therefore it is not only natural water, but a divine, heavenly, holy, and blessed water, and in whatever other terms we can praise it, -- all on account of the Word, which is a heavenly, holy Word, that no one can sufficiently extol, for it has, and is able to do, all that God is and can do [since it has all the virtue and power of God comprised in it]. Hence also it derives its essence as a Sacrament, as St. Augustine also taught: Accedat verbum ad elementum et fit sacramentum. That is, when the Word is joined to the element or natural substance, it becomes a Sacrament, that is, a holy and divine matter and sign.

Therefore we always teach that the Sacraments and all external things which God ordains and institutes should not be regarded according to the coarse, external mask, as we regard the shell of a nut, but as the Word of God is included therein. For thus we also speak of the parental estate and of civil government. If we propose to regard them in as far as they have noses, eyes, skin, and hair flesh and bones, they look like Turks and heathen, and some one might start up and say: Why should I esteem them more than others? But because the commandment is added: Honor thy father and thy mother, I behold a different man, adorned and clothed with the majesty and glory of God. The commandment (I say) is the chain of gold about his neck, yea, the crown upon his head which shows to me how and why one must honor this flesh and blood.

Thus, and much more even, you must honor Baptism and esteem it glorious on account of the Word, since He Himself has honored it both by words and deeds; moreover, confirmed it with miracles from heaven. For do you think it was a jest that, when Christ was baptized, the heavens were opened and the Holy Ghost descended visibly, and everything was divine glory and majesty?

Therefore I exhort again that these two the water and the Word, by no means be separated from one another and parted. For if the Word is separated from it, the water is the same as that with which the servant cooks, and may indeed be called a bath-keeper's baptism. But when it is added, as God has ordained, it is a Sacrament, and is called Christ-baptism. Let this be the first part regarding the essence and dignity of the holy Sacrament.

In the second place, since we know now what Baptism is, and how it is to be regarded, we must also learn why and for what purpose it is instituted; that is, what it profits, gives and works. And this also we cannot discern better than from the words of Christ above quoted: He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved. Therefore state it most simply thus, that the power, work, profit, fruit, and end of Baptism is this, namely, to save. For no one is baptized in order that he may become a prince, but, as the words declare, that he be saved. But to be saved. we know. is nothing else than to be delivered from sin, death, and the devil, and to enter into the kingdom of Christ, and to live with Him forever.

Here you see again how highly and precious we should esteem Baptism, because in it we obtain such an unspeakable treasure, which also indicates sufficiently that it cannot be ordinary mere water. For mere water could not do such a thing, but the Word does it, and (as said above) the fact that the name of God is comprehended therein. But where the name of God is, there must be also life and salvation, that it may indeed be called a divine, blessed, fruitful, and gracious water; for by the Word such power is imparted to Baptism that it is a laver of regeneration, as St. Paul also calls it, Titus 3, 5.

But as our would-be wise, new spirits assert that faith alone saves, and that works and external things avail nothing, we answer: It is true, indeed, that nothing in us is of any avail but faith, as we shall hear still further. But these blind guides are unwilling to see this, namely, that faith must have something which it believes, that is, of which it takes hold, and upon which it stands and rests. Thus faith clings to the water, and believes that it is Baptism, in which there is pure salvation and life; not through the water (as we have sufficiently stated), but through the fact that it is embodied in the Word and institution of God, and the name of God inheres in it. Now, if I believe this, what else is it than believing in God as in Him who has given and planted His Word into this ordinance, and proposes to us this external thing wherein we may apprehend such a treasure?

Now, they are so mad as to separate faith and that to which faith clings and is bound though it be something external. Yea, it shall and must be something external, that it may be apprehended by the senses, and understood and thereby be brought into the heart, as indeed the entire Gospel is an external, verbal preaching. In short, what God does and works in us He proposes to work through such external ordinances. Wherever, therefore, He speaks, yea, in whichever direction or by whatever means He speaks, thither faith must look, and to that it must hold. Now here we have the words: He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved. To what else do they refer than to Baptism, that is, to the water comprehended in God's ordinance? Hence it follows that whoever rejects Baptism rejects the Word of God, faith, and Christ, who directs us thither and binds us to Baptism.

In the third place since we have learned the great benefit and power of Baptism, let us see further who is the person that receives what Baptism gives and profits. This is again most beautifully and clearly expressed in the words: He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved. That is, faith alone makes the person worthy to receive profitably the saving, divine water. For, since these blessings are here presented and promised in the words in and with the water, they cannot be received in any other way than by believing them with the heart. Without faith it profits nothing, notwithstanding it is in itself a divine superabundant treasure. Therefore this single word (He that believeth) effects this much that it excludes and repels all works which we can do, in the opinion that we obtain and merit salvation by them. For it is determined that whatever is not faith avails nothing nor receives anything.

But if they say, as they are accustomed: Still Baptism is itself a work, and you say works are of no avail for salvation; what then, becomes of faith? Answer: Yes, our works, indeed, avail nothing for salvation; Baptism, however, is not our work, but God's (for, as was stated, you must put Christ-baptism far away from a bath-keeper's baptism). God's works, however, are saving and necessary for salvation, and do not exclude, but demand, faith; for without faith they could not be apprehended. For by suffering the water to be poured upon you, you have not yet received Baptism in such a manner that it benefits you anything; but it becomes beneficial to you if you have yourself baptized with the thought that this is according to God's command and ordinance, and besides in God's name, in order that you may receive in the water the promised salvation. Now, this the fist cannot do, nor the body; but the heart must believe it.

Thus you see plainly that there is here no work done by us, but a treasure which He gives us, and which faith apprehends; just as the Lord Jesus Christ upon the cross is not a work, but a treasure comprehended in the Word, and offered to us and received by faith. Therefore they do us violence by exclaiming against us as though we preach against faith; while we alone insist upon it as being of such necessity that without it nothing can be received nor enjoyed.

Thus we have these three parts which it is necessary to know concerning this Sacrament especially that the ordinance of God is to be held in all honor, which alone would be sufficient, though it be an entirely external thing like the commandment, Honor thy father and thy mother, which refers to bodily flesh and blood. Therein we regard not the flesh and blood, but the commandment of God in which they are comprehended, and on account of which the flesh is called father and mother; so also, though we had no more than these words, Go ye and baptize, etc., it would be necessary for us to accept and do it as the ordinance of God. Now there is here not only God's commandment and injunction, but also the promise, on account of which it is still far more glorious than whatever else God has commanded and ordained, and is, in short, so full of consolation and grace that heaven and earth cannot comprehend it. But it requires skill to believe this, for the treasure is not wanting, but this is wanting that men apprehend it and hold it firmly.

Therefore every Christian has enough in Baptism to learn and to practice all his life; for he has always enough to do to believe firmly what it promises and brings: victory over death and the devil, forgiveness of sin, the grace of God, the entire Christ, and the Holy Ghost with His gifts. In short, it is so transcendent that if timid nature could realize it, it might well doubt whether it could be true. For consider, if there were somewhere a physician who understood the art of saving men from dying, or, even though they died, of restoring them speedily to life, so that they would thereafter live forever, how the world would pour in money like snow and rain, so that because of the throng of the rich no one could find access! But here in Baptism there is brought free to every one's door such a treasure and medicine as utterly destroys death and preserves all men alive.

Thus we must regard Baptism and make it profitable to ourselves, that when our sins and conscience oppress us, we strengthen ourselves and take comfort and say: Nevertheless I am baptized; but if I am baptized, it is promised me that I shall be saved and have eternal life, both in soul and body. For that is the reason why these two things are done in Baptism namely, that the body, which can apprehend nothing but the water, is sprinkled, and, in addition, the word is spoken for the soul to apprehend. Now, since both, the water and the Word, are one Baptism, therefore body and soul must be saved and live forever: the soul through the Word which it believes, but the body because it is united with the soul and also apprehends Baptism as it is able to apprehend it. We have, therefore, no greater jewel in body and soul, for by it we are made holy and are saved, which no other kind of life, no work upon earth, can attain.

Let this suffice respecting the nature, blessing, and use of Baptism, for it answers the present purpose.

[Part Fifth.]

Of The Sacrament Of The Altar

OF THE SACRAMENT OF THE ALTAR.

In the same manner as we have heard regarding Holy Baptism, we must speak also concerning the other Sacrament, namely, these three points: What is it? What are its benefits? and, Who is to receive it? And all these are established by the words by which Christ has instituted it, and which every one who desires to be a Christian and go to the Sacrament should know. For it is not our intention to admit to it and to administer it to those who know not what they seek, or why they come. The words, however, are these:

Our Lord Jesus Christ, the same night in which He was betrayed, took bread; and when He had given thanks, He brake it, and gave it to His disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is My body, which is given for you: this do in remembrance of Me.

After the same manner also He took the cup when He had supped, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; this cup is the new testament in My blood, which is shed for you for the remission of sins: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of Me.

Here also we do not wish to enter into controversy and contend with the traducers and blasphemers of this Sacrament, but to learn first (as we did regarding Baptism) what is of the greatest importance, namely that the chief point is the Word and ordinance or command of God. For it has not been invented nor introduced by any man, but without any one's counsel and deliberation it has been instituted by Christ. Therefore, just as the Ten Commandments, the Lord's Prayer, and the Creed retain their nature and worth although you never keep, pray, or believe them, so also does this venerable Sacrament remain undisturbed, so that nothing is detracted or taken from it, even though we employ and dispense it unworthily. What do you think God cares about what we do or believe, so that on that account He should suffer His ordinance to be changed? Why, in all worldly matters every thing remains as God has created and ordered it, no matter how we employ or use it. This must always be urged, for thereby the prating of nearly all the fanatical spirits can be repelled. For they regard the Sacraments, aside from the Word of God, as something that we do.

Now, what is the Sacrament of the Altar!

Answer: It is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, in and under the bread and wine which we Christians are commanded by the Word of Christ to eat and to drink. And as we have said of Baptism that it is not simple water, so here also we say the Sacrament is bread and wine, but not mere bread and wine, such as are ordinarily served at the table, but bread and wine comprehended in, and connected with, the Word of God.

It is the Word (I say) which makes and distinguishes this Sacrament, so that it is not mere bread and wine, but is, and is called, the body and blood of Christ. For it is said: Accedat verbum ad elementum, et At sacramentum. If the Word be joined to the element it becomes a Sacrament. This saying of St. Augustine is so properly and so well put that he has scarcely said anything better. The Word must make a Sacrament of the element, else it remains a mere element. Now, it is not the word or ordinance of a prince or emperor, but of the sublime Majesty, at whose feet all creatures should fall, and affirm it is as He says, and accept it with all reverence fear, and humility.

With this Word you can strengthen your conscience and say: If a hundred thousand devils, together with all fanatics, should rush forward, crying, How can bread and wine be the body and blood of Christ? etc., I know that all spirits and scholars together are not as wise as is the Divine Majesty in His little finger. Now here stands the Word of Christ: Take, eat; this is My body; Drink ye all of it; this is the new testament in My blood, etc. Here we abide, and would like to see those who will constitute themselves His masters, and make it different from what He has spoken. It is true, indeed, that if you take away the Word or regard it without the words, you have nothing but mere bread and wine. But if the words remain with them as they shall and must, then, in virtue of the same, it is truly the body and blood of Christ. For as the lips of Christ say and speak, so it is, as He can never lie or deceive.

Hence it is easy to reply to all manner of questions about which men are troubled at the present time, such as this one: Whether even a wicked priest can minister at, and dispense, the Sacrament, and whatever other questions like this there may be. For here we conclude and say: Even though a knave takes or distributes the Sacrament, he receives the true Sacrament, that is, the true body and blood of Christ, just as truly as he who [receives or] administers it in the most worthy manner. For it is not founded upon the holiness of men, but upon the Word of God. And as no saint upon earth, yea, no angel in heaven, can make bread and wine to be the body and blood of Christ, so also can no one change or alter it, even though it be misused. For the Word by which it became a Sacrament and was instituted does not become false because of the person or his unbelief. For He does not say: If you believe or are worthy, you receive My body and blood, but: Take, eat and drink; this is By body and blood. Likewise: Do this (namely, what I now do, institute, give, and bid you take) . That is as much as to say, No matter whether you are worthy or unworthy, you have here His body and blood by virtue of these words which are added to the bread and wine. Only note and remember this well; for upon these words rest all our foundation, protection, and defense against all errors and deception that have ever come or may yet come.

Thus we have briefly the first point which relates to the essence of this Sacrament. Now examine further the efficacy and benefits on account of which really the Sacrament was instituted; which is also its most necessary part, that we may know what we should seek and obtain there. Now this is plain and clear from the words just mentioned: This is My body and blood, given and shed FOR YOU, for the remission of sins. Briefly that is as much as to say: For this reason we go to the Sacrament because there we receive such a treasure by and in which we obtain forgiveness of sins. Why so? Because the words stand here and give us this; for on this account He bids me eat and drink, that it may be my own and may benefit me, as a sure pledge and token, yea, the very same treasure that is appointed for me against my sins, death, and every calamity.

On this account it is indeed called a food of souls, which nourishes and strengthens the new man. For by Baptism we are first born anew; but (as we said before) there still remains, besides, the old vicious nature of flesh and blood in man, and there are so many hindrances and temptations of the devil and of the world that we often become weary and faint, and sometimes also stumble.

Therefore it is given for a daily pasture and sustenance, that faith may refresh and strengthen itself so as not to fall back in such a battle, but become ever stronger and stronger. For the new life must be so regulated that it continually increase and progress, but it must suffer much opposition. For the devil is such a furious enemy that when he sees that we oppose him and attack the old man, and that he cannot topple us over by force, he prowls and moves about on all sides, tries all devices, and does not desist until he finally wearies us, so that we either renounce our faith or yield hands and feet and become listless or impatient. Now to this end the consolation is here given when the heart feels that the burden is becoming too heavy, that it may here obtain new power and refreshment.

But here our wise spirits contort themselves with their great art and wisdom, crying out and bawling: How can bread and wine forgive sins or strengthen faith? Although they hear and know that we do not say this of bread and wine, because in itself bread is bread, but of such bread and wine as is the body and blood of Christ, and has the words attached to it. That, we say, is verily the treasure, and nothing else, through which such forgiveness is obtained. Now the only way in which it is conveyed and appropriated to us is in the words (Given and shed for you). For herein you have both truths, that it is the body and blood of Christ, and that it is yours as a treasure and gift. Now the body of Christ can never be an unfruitful, vain thing, that effects or profits nothing. Yet however great is the treasure in itself, it must be comprehended in the Word and administered to us, else we should never be able to know or seek it.

Therefore also it is vain talk when they say that the body and blood of Christ are not given and shed for us in the Lord's Supper, hence we could not have forgiveness of sins in the Sacrament. For although the work is accomplished and the forgiveness of sins acquired on the cross, yet it cannot come to us in any other way than through the Word. For what would we otherwise know about it, that such a thing was accomplished or was to be given us if it were not presented by preaching or the oral Word? Whence do they know of it, or how can they apprehend and appropriate to themselves the forgiveness, except they lay hold of and believe the Scriptures and the Gospel? But now the entire Gospel and the article of the Creed: I believe a holy Christian Church, the forgiveness of sin, etc., are by the Word embodied in this Sacrament and presented to us. Why, then, should we allow this treasure to be torn from the Sacrament when they must confess that these are the very words which we hear everywhere in the Gospel, and they cannot say that these words in the Sacrament are of no use, as little as they dare say that the entire Gospel or Word of God, apart from the Sacrament, is of no use?

Thus we have the entire Sacrament, both as to what it is in itself and as to what it brings and profits. Now we must also see who is the person that receives this power and benefit. That is answered briefly, as we said above of Baptism and often elsewhere: Whoever believes it has what the words declare and bring. For they are not spoken or proclaimed to stone and wood, but to those who hear them, to whom He says: Take and eat, etc. And because He offers and promises forgiveness of sin, it cannot be received otherwise than by faith. This faith He Himself demands in the Word when He says: Given and shed for you. As if He said: For this reason I give it, and bid you eat and drink, that you may claim it as yours and enjoy it. Whoever now accepts these words, and believes that what they declare is true, has it. But whoever does not believe it has nothing, as he allows it to be offered to him in vain, and refuses to enjoy such a saving good. The treasure, indeed, is opened and placed at every one's door, yea upon his table, but it is necessary that you also claim it, and confidently view it as the words suggest to you.

This, now, is the entire Christian preparation for receiving this Sacrament worthily. For since this treasure is entirely presented in the words, it cannot be apprehended and appropriated in any other way than with the heart. For such a gift and eternal treasure cannot be seized with the fist. Fasting and prayer, etc., may indeed be an external preparation and discipline for children, that the body may keep and bear itself modestly and reverently towards the body and blood of Christ; yet what is given in and with it the body cannot seize and appropriate. But this is done by the faith of the heart, which discerns this treasure and desires it. This may suffice for what is necessary as a general instruction respecting this Sacrament; for what is further to be said of it belongs to another time.

Conclusion

In conclusion, since we have now the true understanding and doctrine of the Sacrament, there is indeed need of some admonition and exhortation, that men may not let so great a treasure which is daily administered and distributed among Christians pass by unheeded, that is, that those who would be Christians make ready to receive this venerable Sacrament often. For we see that men seem weary and lazy with respect to it; and there is a great multitude of such as hear the Gospel, and, because the nonsense of the Pope has been abolished, and we are freed from his laws and coercion, go one, two, three years, or even longer without the Sacrament, as though they were such strong Christians that they have no need of it; and some allow themselves to be prevented and deterred by the pretense that we have taught that no one should approach it except those who feel hunger and thirst, which urge them to it. Some pretend that it is a matter of liberty and not necessary, and that it is sufficient to believe without it; and thus for the most part they go so far that they become quite brutish, and finally despise both the Sacrament and the Word of God.

Now, it is true, as we have said, that no one should by any means be coerced or compelled, lest we institute a new murdering of souls. Nevertheless, it must be known that such people as deprive themselves of, and withdraw from, the Sacrament so long a time are not to be considered Christians. For Christ has not instituted it to be treated as a show, but has commanded His Christians to eat and drink it, and thereby remember Him.

And, indeed, those who are true Christians and esteem the Sacrament precious and holy will urge and impel themselves unto it. Yet that the simple-minded and the weak who also would like to be Christians be the more incited to consider the cause and need which ought to impel them, we will treat somewhat of this point. For as in other matters pertaining to faith, love, and patience, it is not enough to teach and instruct only, but there is need also of daily exhortation, so here also there is need of continuing to preach that men may not become weary and disgusted, since we know and feel how the devil always opposes this and every Christian exercise, and drives and deters therefrom as much as he can.

And we have, in the first place, the clear text in the very words of Christ: Do this in remembrance of Me. These are bidding and commanding words by which all who would be Christians are enjoined to partake of this Sacrament. Therefore, whoever would be a disciple of Christ, with whom He here speaks, must also consider and observe this, not from compulsion, as being forced by men, but in obedience to the Lord Jesus Christ, and to please Him. However, if you say: But the words are added, As oft as ye do it; there He compels no one, but leaves it to our free choice, answer: That is true, yet it is not written that we should never do so. Yea, just because He speaks the words, As oft as ye do it, it is nevertheless implied that we should do it often; and it is added for the reason that He wishes to have the Sacrament free, not limited to special times, like the Passover of the Jews, which they were obliged to eat only once a year, and that just upon the fourteenth day of the first full moon in the evening, and which they must not vary a day. As if He would say by these words: I institute a Passover or Supper for you which you shall enjoy not only once a year, just upon this evening, but often, when and where you will, according to every one's opportunity and necessity, bound to no place or appointed time; although the Pope afterwards perverted it, and again made a Jewish feast of it.

Thus, you perceive, it is not left free in the sense that we may despise it. For that I call despising it if one allow so long a time to elapse and with nothing to hinder him yet never feels a desire for it. If you wish such liberty, you may just as well have the liberty to be no Christian, and neither have to believe nor pray; for the one is just as much the command of Christ as the other. But if you wish to be a Christian, you must from time to time render satisfaction and obedience to this commandment. For this commandment ought ever to move you to examine yourself and to think: See, what sort of a Christian I am! If I were one, I would certainly have some little longing for that which my Lord has commanded [me] to do.

And, indeed, since we act such strangers to it, it is easily seen what sort of Christians we were under the Papacy, namely, that we went from mere compulsion and fear of human commandments, without inclination and love, and never regarded the commandment of Christ. But we neither force nor compel any one; nor need any one do it to serve or please us. But this should induce and constrain you by itself, that He desires it and that it is pleasing to Him. You must not suffer men to coerce you unto faith or any good work. We are doing no more than to say and exhort you as to what you ought to do, not for our sake, but for your own sake. He invites and allures you; if you despise it, you must answer for it yourself.

Now, this is to be the first point, especially for those who are cold and indifferent, that they may reflect upon and rouse themselves. For this is certainly true, as I have found in my own experience, and as every one will find in his own case, that if a person thus withdraw from this Sacrament, he will daily become more and more callous and cold, and will at last disregard it altogether. To avoid this, we must, indeed, examine heart and conscience, and act like a person who desires to be right with God. Now, the more this is done, the more will the heart be warmed and enkindled, that it may not become entirely cold.

But if you say: How if I feel that I am not prepared? Answer: That is also my scruple, especially from the old way under the Pope, in which a person tortured himself to be so perfectly pure that God could not find the least blemish in us. On this account we became so timid that every one was instantly thrown into consternation and said to himself: Alas! you are unworthy! For then nature and reason begin to reckon our unworthiness in comparison with the great and precious good; and then it appears like a dark lantern in contrast with the bright sun, or as filth in comparison with precious stones. Because nature and reason see this, they refuse to approach and tarry until they are prepared so long that one week trails another, and one half year the other. But if you are to regard how good and pure you are, and labor to have no compunctions, you must never approach.

We must, therefore, make a distinction here among men. For those who are wanton and dissolute must be told to stay away; for they are not prepared to receive forgiveness of sin since they do not desire it and do not wish to be godly. But the others, who are not such callous and wicked people, and desire to be godly, must not absent themselves, even though otherwise they be feeble and full of infirmities, as St. Hilary also has said: If any one have not committed sin for which he can rightly be put out of the congregation and esteemed as no Christian, he ought not stay away from the Sacrament, lest he may deprive himself of life. For no one will make such progress that he will not retain many daily infirmities in flesh and blood.

Therefore such people must learn that it is the highest art to know that our Sacrament does not depend upon our worthiness. For we are not baptized because we are worthy and holy, nor do we go to confession because we are pure and without sin, but the contrary because we are poor miserable men and just because we are unworthy; unless it be some one who desires no grace and absolution nor intends to reform.

But whoever would gladly obtain grace and consolation should impel himself, and allow no one to frighten him away, but say: I, indeed, would like to be worthy, but I come, not upon any worthiness, but upon Thy Word, because Thou hast commanded it, as one who would gladly be Thy disciple, no matter what becomes of my worthiness. But this is difficult; for we always have this obstacle and hindrance to encounter, that we look more upon ourselves than upon the Word and lips of Christ. For nature desires so to act that it can stand and rest firmly on itself, otherwise it refuses to make the approach. Let this suffice concerning the first point.

In the second place, there is besides this command also a promise, as we heard above, which ought most strongly to incite and encourage us. For here stand the kind and precious words: This is My body, given for you. This is My blood, shed for you, for the remission of sins. These words, I have said, are not preached to wood and stone, but to me and you; else He might just as well be silent and not institute a Sacrament. Therefore consider, and put yourself into this YOU, that He may not speak to you in vain.

For here He offers to us the entire treasure which He has brought for us from heaven, and to which He invites us also in other places with the greatest kindness, as when He says in St. Matthew 11, 28: Come unto Me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Now it is surely a sin and a shame that He so cordially and faithfully summons and exhorts us to our highest and greatest good, and we act so distantly with regard to it, and permit so long a time to pass [without partaking of the Sacrament] that we grow quite cold and hardened, so that we have no inclination or love for it. We must never regard the Sacrament as something injurious from which we had better flee but as a pure wholesome, comforting remedy imparting salvation and comfort, which will cure you and give you life both in soul and body. For where the soul has recovered, the body also is relieved. Why, then, is it that we act as if it were a poison, the eating of which would bring death?

To be sure, it is true that those who despise it and live in an unchristian manner receive it to their hurt and damnation; for nothing shall be good or wholesome to them, just as with a sick person who from caprice eats and drinks what is forbidden him by the physician. But those who are sensible of their weakness, desire to be rid of it and long for help, should regard and use it only as a precious antidote against the poison which they have in them. For here in the Sacrament you are to receive from the lips of Christ forgiveness of sin which contains and brings with it the grace of God and the Spirit with all His gifts, protection, shelter, and power against death and the devil and all misfortune.

Thus you have, on the part of God, both the command and the promise of the Lord Jesus Christ. Besides this, on your part, your own distress which is about your neck, and because of which this command, invitation and promise are given, ought to impel you. For He Himself says: They that be whole need not a physician, but they that be sick; that is, those who are weary and heavy-laden with their sins, with the fear of death temptations of the flesh and of the devil. If therefore, you are heavy-laden and feel your weakness, then go joyfully to this Sacrament and obtain refreshment, consolation, and strength. For if you would wait until you are rid of such burdens, that you might come to the Sacrament pure and worthy, you must forever stay away. For in that case He pronounces sentence and says: If you are pure and godly, you have no need of Me, and I, in turn, none of thee. Therefore those alone are called unworthy who neither feel their infirmities nor wish to be considered sinners.

But if you say: What, then, shall I do if I cannot feel such distress or experience hunger and thirst for the Sacrament? Answer: For those who are so minded that they do not realize their condition I know no better counsel than that they put their hand into their bosom to ascertain whether they also have flesh and blood. And if you find that to be the case, then go, for your good, to St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians, and hear what sort of a fruit your flesh is: Now the works of the flesh (he says [chap. 5, 19ff.]) are manifest, which are these: Adultery fornication uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revelings, and such like.

Therefore, if you cannot feel it, at least believe the Scriptures, they will not lie to you and they know your flesh better than you yourself. Yea, St. Paul further concludes in Rom. 7, 18: l know that in me, that is, in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing. If St. Paul may speak thus of his flesh, we do not propose to be better nor more holy. But that we do not feel it is so much the worse; for it is a sign that there is a leprous flesh which feels nothing, and yet [the leprosy] rages and keeps spreading. Yet as we have said, if you are quite dead to all sensibility, still believe the Scriptures, which pronounce sentence upon you. And, in short, the less you feel your sins and infirmities, the more reason have you to go to the Sacrament to seek help and a remedy.

In the second place, look about you and see whether you are also in the world, or if you do not know it, ask your neighbors about it. If you are in the world, do not think that there will be lack of sins and misery. For only begin to act as though you would be godly and adhere to the Gospel, and see whether no one will become your enemy, and, moreover, do you harm, wrong, and violence, and likewise give you cause for sin and vice. If you have not experienced it, then let the Scriptures tell you, which everywhere give this praise and testimony to the world.

Besides this, you will also have the devil about you, whom you will not entirely tread under foot, because our Lord Christ Himself could not entirely avoid him. Now, what is the devil? Nothing else than what the Scriptures call him, a liar and murderer. A liar, to lead the heart astray from the Word of God, and to blind it, that you cannot feel your distress or come to Christ. A murderer, who cannot bear to see you live one single hour. If you could see how many knives, darts, and arrows are every moment aimed at you, you would be glad to come to the Sacrament as often as possible. But there is no reason why we walk so securely and heedlessly, except that we neither think nor believe that we are in the flesh, and in this wicked world or in the kingdom of the devil.

Therefore, try this and practice it well, and do but examine yourself, or look about you a little, and only keep to the Scriptures. If even then you still feel nothing, you have so much the more misery to lament both to God and to your brother. Then take advice and have others pray for you, and do not desist until the stone be removed from your heart. Then, indeed, the distress will not fail to become manifest, and you will find that you have sunk twice as deep as any other poor sinner, and are much more in need of the Sacrament against the misery which unfortunately you do not see, so that, with the grace of God, you may feel it more and become the more hungry for the Sacrament, especially since the devil plies his force against you, and lies in wait for you without ceasing, to seize and destroy you, soul and body, so that you are not safe from him one hour. How soon can he have brought you suddenly into misery and distress when you least expect it!

Let this, then, be said for exhortation, not only for those of us who are old and grown, but also for the young people, who ought to be brought up in the Christian doctrine and understanding. For thereby the Ten Commandments, the Creed, and the Lord's Prayer might be the more easily inculcated to our youth, so that they would receive them with pleasure and earnestness, and thus would practice them from their youth and accustom themselves to them. For the old are now well-nigh done for, so that these and other things cannot be attained, unless we train the people who are to come after us and succeed us in our office and work, in order that they also may bring up their children successfully that the Word of God and the Christian Church may be preserved. Therefore let every father of a family know that it is his duty by the injunction and command of God, to teach these things to his children, or have them learn what they ought to know. For since they are baptized and received into the Christian Church, they should also enjoy this communion of the Sacrament, in order that they may serve us and be useful to us; for they must all indeed help us to believe, love, pray, and fight against the devil.

This text was converted to ASCII format for Project Wittenberg by Allen Mulvey and is in the public domain. You may freely distribute, copy or print this text. Please direct any comments or suggestions to: Rev. Robert E. Smith of the Walther Library at Concordia Theological Seminary.

E-mail: bob_smith@mail.ctsfw.edu Surface Mail: 6600 N. Clinton St., Ft. Wayne, IN 46825 USA Phone: (219) 452-3149 Fax: (219) 452-2126

Project Gutenberg Etext of The Large Catechism, by Martin Luther

*** x-header ***