THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION 
 
 By J. L. NEVE, D. D, 
 
mtl)eCtt)c>ofi^etogorh 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
This book is due two weeks from the last date 
 stamped below, and if not j;eturned or renewed at or 
 before that time a fine of five cents a day will be incurred. 
 
 !lJ9n*A3 
 
THE 
 
 Augsburg Confession 
 
 A BRIEF REVIEW OF ITS HISTORY 
 
 AND 
 
 AN INTERPRETATION OF ITS 
 DOCTRINAL ARTICLES 
 
 WITH 
 
 INTRODUCTORY DISCUSSIONS ON CONFESSIONAL 
 QUESTIONS, 
 
 By 
 J. L. NEVE, D.D., 
 
 Professor of Symbolics and History of Doctrines in the 
 
 Hamma Di-vinity School of Wittenberg College^ 
 
 in Springfieldj Ohio. 
 
 Philadelphia, Pa. 
 The Lutheran Publication Society 
 
Exchanfje 
 
 ^^'^3 77 
 
 Copyright, 1914, by 
 The Lutheran Publication Society 
 
 
PREFACE 
 
 A number of years ago, when the new introduction to 
 J. T. Mueller's "Symbolische Buecher," written by Pro- 
 fessor Kolde, of Erlangen, appeared, giving us a bird's- 
 eye view of the present status of research regarding the 
 Augsburg Confession, the writer went to work and se- 
 cured all the necessary source material for writing more 
 extensively a critical introduction to the Augsburg Con- 
 fession. The story which Dr. Kolde had told on thirty 
 pages the writer wanted to tell more in detail and yet in 
 such a way that the student of the Augsburg Confession 
 would find all the available information without being 
 confused. This work was finished in German at the time 
 when the ''Confessional History of the Lutheran Church" 
 by Dr. J. W. Richard was published. Soon, also, the 
 ''Confessional Principle and the Confessions of the 
 Lutheran Church" by Drs. T. E. Schmauk and T. Benze 
 appeared. These works, like the one which the writer 
 had prepared, were written in the technical form of 
 theological research. This kept him from publishing his 
 work at that time. 
 
 , But, on the basis of this work, is now presented a book 
 on the Augsburg Confession that has been prepared with 
 regard for the taste of the common reader who does 
 not care for the more detailed investigations in the 
 technical language of the theologians. The main stress 
 in this book is not upon the history of the Augsburg 
 Confession, but upon the interpretation of its text, its 
 articles. It is prefaced by a chapter with simple talks on 
 confessional questions, which is especially dedicated to 
 our laymen. It is an attempt to answer a number of 
 questions which they especially have in mind, and en- 
 deavors to interest them in the study of the confessional 
 principles contained in the Confessions. 
 
 The second part of the book, which ofifers a brief his- 
 tory of the Augsburg Confession, confines itself to telling 
 the story of the Confession in a readable way without 
 
 I 
 
2 Pri^Faci:. 
 
 aiming at any scientific form, nor giving any of the 
 proofs from the sources contained in the manuscript to 
 which reference has been made. It is hoped to pubhsh this 
 manuscript also, which has cost so very much labor, if 
 there should be sufficient interest in the study of the sub- 
 ject. 
 
 The third part, with its interpretation of the articles 
 of the Confession, forms the main part of this book. 
 There, also, the effort has been made to write in such a 
 way that a layman with some education can follow the 
 discussions. It has been difficult to carry out this inten- 
 tion. It would have been easy if it had been the aim 
 merely to preach on some of the thoughts of the Confes- 
 sion, i3Ut the purpose was to explain each article accord- 
 ing to its historical meaning in a connected way. If this 
 is the plan, then it is difficult to bring these theological 
 principles, upon which the work of the Reformation was 
 based, within the understanding of readers who have not 
 had the opportunity to study church history. The Augs- 
 burg Confession is different from the Catechism. It 
 establishes doctrinal principles and rejects the positions 
 of Unitarianism, Socinianism, Pelagianism, Semi-Pela- 
 gianism, Zwinglianism, Anabaptism, Donatism, Nova- 
 tianism. Yet the writer has never in his interpretation of 
 the articles assumed the knowledge of any of the facts 
 of church history, but has always tried to explain them. 
 Of course, theological subjects will sometimes dictate 
 their own style, especially when adequate expressions are 
 aimed at. At some places the language may not be as 
 simple as would be desirable. But in order even here to 
 help the lay reader as much as possible, the discussion 
 has been put in the form of questions and answers and 
 made more readable by presenting it in divisions and sub- 
 divisions. The aim of this book is, to repeat, to make 
 the reader familiar with all the leading thoughts of the 
 Confession in their connections. 
 
 For this reason, the professors of symbolics in Luth- 
 eran theological seminaries may find that they can use 
 the book with their classes, as it is the writer's intention 
 to do. While it aims to be a discussion of the articles 
 
PRKr'ACi^. 3 
 
 of the Augsburg Confession only, yet it reaches over into 
 the other Confessions of the Lutheran Church, so that 
 with some aid of the teacher, on the basis of this book, 
 a study of the other confessional writings of the Book 
 of Concord could be carried out. 
 
 Because of the frequent references to the other Con- 
 fessions of our Church the student of this book would find 
 it profitable to purchase a copy of the "People's Edition" 
 of the Book of Concord, or the Symbolical Books of the 
 Evangelical Lutheran Church, translated from the 
 original languages by Dr. H. E. Jacobs. Our references 
 follow the paging of this book which was published by 
 the General Council Publication Board in Philadelphia, 
 but which can be procured from any publication house 
 of the Lutheran Church in this country. 
 
 The interpretation of the Augsburg Confession, in the 
 third part of this book covers only the first twenty-one 
 articles, which give the doctrinal foundations of the 
 Lutheran Church. The last seven articles on abuses have 
 been given in text only. Yet some of the passages of 
 these last seven articles, that are of practical interest for 
 the Church to-day have been treated in connection with 
 articles of the first part. So, for instance, the passage on 
 Sunday, in Article XXVIII, is discussed in connection 
 with Article XV. 
 
 To make the study more practical, the aim has been 
 always to state which denominations of to-day are hold- 
 ing the positions rejected at the close of each article. 
 Thus some elements of comparative symbolics have been 
 injected for the practical information of the reader. 
 
 Here the writer could close his introduction. But he 
 has yet something in mind. While writing this book he 
 has been thinking of the education of our laymen for 
 work in the kingdom of God. The Laymen's Movement 
 has brought our laymen to the front. The intelligent 
 laymen of our Church, all over the land, get into touch 
 with each other at large conventions, and so their influ- 
 ence will be felt in many things pertaining to the course 
 of development of the Lutheran Church in this coun- 
 try. The better their religious education is, the safer 
 
4 PrKFacE. 
 
 their leadership will be. In the Fatherland, one of the 
 aims of Inner Missions has been to train laymen for 
 leadership in the Church. They have schools for train- 
 ing deacons (''Bniederanstalten' ) . The laymen, just as 
 well as the pastor, should visit the sick, the poor. The 
 laymen should be able to meet the objections of unbelief, 
 to conduct prayer meetings, young people's meetings, 
 Sunday schools. But to be able to do this in the spirit 
 of their Church, an education is needed. The minister 
 of the Gospel needs the education of the theological 
 seminary. So the layman, as a deacon in the Church, or 
 as a leader of any kind in the Church, needs a training 
 in a laymen's seminary. He should study church history 
 so that he can explain historically the churches and the 
 religious tendencies by which our own Church is sur- 
 rounded. This should be done under the guide of a 
 text-book prepared for this special purpose, a book that 
 should be practical in every respect. Such laymen's 
 seminary should also offer a thorough study of Luther's 
 Catechism and the Augsburg Confession. With regard 
 to Biblical studies, not only should the contents of the 
 Bible be studied, as in the men's classes of the Sunday 
 school, but also the leading principles of interpretation 
 should be taught. Instruction might, also, be given with 
 regard to practical questions of the Church. A layman's 
 seminary with such courses would enable many of the 
 members of our congregations to do valuable work in the 
 congregations to which they belong. In our country 
 the situation of the Lutheran Church is peculiar. Here 
 Lutherans do not live by themselves in states, as in 
 Germany, but are surrounded by all the other denomina- 
 tions. By intermarriage, and in many other ways, the 
 influences of the other denominations reach into our 
 congregations. They lose their identity as Lutheran 
 congregations and become strangers to the rich heritage 
 of their fathers. All simply because our members have 
 not been educated. A knowledge has been kept from 
 them which they would appreciate so much. If in any 
 country, then it is here in America that our laymen need 
 a training in the faith and in the spirit of our own Church, 
 
Prkfack. 5 
 
 in order to find the path in which a healthy development 
 of the Lutheran Church in America lies. Our laymen 
 need a discerning eye with respect to the influences that 
 are at work about us to break down or to push into the 
 background the principles of the Augsburg Confession 
 which are fundamental to the life of our Church. We 
 cannot here go into details, but read in the third part of 
 this book the interpretation of Articles II, on Original 
 Sin; IV and VI, on the relation between Justification 
 and Sanctification ; V, IX, and X on the Means of Grace. 
 
 The question will be asked : How could the Church 
 arrange for such laymen's seminaries? In localities 
 where there are many Lutheran congregations in a neigh- 
 borhood, such schools could be conducted in the form 
 of institutes, with able pastors as teachers. Where 
 this is impracticable, as in the West, where frequently 
 Lutherans live far apart, the local pastor could be the 
 teacher of such a school. With two hours the week 
 (prayer meeting included ; such schools need not be con- 
 fined to men only), a great work could be done. If such 
 a continuous instruction should go through a period of 
 one or two years, it would mean something for the char- 
 acter of a congregation. Wlien men begin to know their 
 Church and see how Scriptural and evangelical her prin- 
 ciples are, then they begin to love her. Such members 
 give color and character to a church. 
 
 The book which is here presented is intended as a 
 text-book for classes of laymen, unth the pastor teaching. 
 The work can be taken up in Luther League meetings; 
 also in such laymen's seminaries. Here and there may 
 be a paragraph that will at first reading be understood 
 better by the teacher than by the student. This is due 
 to the nature of the subject. But the teacher, with his 
 knowledge of the history of the Church and the setting 
 of the doctrines of our Church, can explain it all to his 
 students. 
 
 May the Head of the Church guide this book on its 
 mission ! 
 
 Thi^ Author. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 PART ONE (Introductory). 
 SIMPLE TALKS ON CONFESSIONAL QUESTIONS. 
 
 PAGS 
 
 I. Can we think of a cliurch without a creed? ii 
 
 II. What would be the dangers of a church without a 
 
 creed? • I3 
 
 III. When only can our Confessions offer us a safe- 
 
 guard against errors ? 14 
 
 IV. What is the relation of the Confessions to the 
 
 Scriptures ? 15 
 
 V. Is our Lutheran Church right in making the Augs- 
 burg Confession, which was written in the six- 
 teenth century, the guide for men who live in the 
 
 twentieth century ? 17 
 
 VI. How do the Confessions appear when we consider 
 the causes which brought them into existence and 
 the conditions which led to their adoption? .... 21 
 VII. Does the appreciation and the study of creeds inter- 
 fere with a truly religious life of individuals and 
 
 churches ? 24 
 
 VIII. How will the knowledge of and the adherence to 
 the principles of a creed aid a preacher and a 
 
 teacher of the Christian religion? 27 
 
 IX. Why is the Apostles' Creed not enough? 32 
 
 X. Why is Luther's Small Catechism not enough ? . . 35 
 XL What is the Form of Concord, and what should be 
 
 our attitude towards it ? 35 
 
 PART TWO. 
 
 THE STORY OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 
 
 1. Growth of the cause of the Reformation, 37 
 
 2. The situation becomes critical, 38 
 
 3. But once more the arm of the Emperor was checked. 
 
 The Augsburg Diet is called, 38 
 
 4. Two important colloquies, 39 
 
 a. The Schwabach x\rticles. 
 
 b. The Marburg Articles. 
 
 5. Melanchthon's work of writing the Confession, 40 
 
 a. The first plan. 
 
 7 
 
8 Contents. 
 
 PAG^ 
 
 b. What convinced Melanchthon that also articles of 
 
 doctrine should be submitted? 
 
 c. The first draft is sent to Luther. 
 
 d. How did the first draft compare with the Confes- 
 
 sion as it was finally delivered? 
 
 e. The confessional document which Melanchthon 
 
 had been preparing exclusively in the name of 
 the Elector of Saxony becomes, by agreement 
 of the several Estates, the common Confession 
 of all the Lutherans at Augsburg, 
 
 6. The arrival of the Emperor, 44 
 
 7. The opening of the Diet, 45 
 
 8. The situation, 45 
 
 9. The deliver}^ of the Confession 45 
 
 a. Attempts to prevent a public reading. 
 
 b. The public reading of the Augsburg Confession. 
 
 c. What was the effect of this reading 
 
 (1) upon the Emperor? 
 
 (2) upon the other Catholics? 
 
 (3) upon the Lutherans themselves? 
 
 10. Defending the Confession, 48 
 
 a. A Confession of the Romanists (Confutation). 
 
 b. The answer of the Lutherans (Apology). 
 
 11. A brief review of the history of the texts of the Augs- 
 burg Confession, 51 
 
 a. What became of the two copies delivered at 
 
 Augsburg? 
 
 (i) What became of the German text? 
 
 (2) What became of the Latin text? 
 
 b. What text, then, is it which we use in our Eng- 
 
 lish Lutheran churches? 
 
 c. Is there a way for us to find out how the first 
 
 publication of Melanchthon (of 1530) compares 
 with those official copies delivered at the Diet? 
 
 d. What do we find when we make the comparison? 
 
 e. The "altered" edition of 1540. 
 
 12. A few remarks on the history of the significance of 
 
 the Augsburg Confession, 53' 
 
 a. What was the significance of the Confession dur- 
 
 ing the time from the Diet at Augsburg (1530) 
 up to the Religious Peace Treaty of Augsburg 
 
 (1555)? 
 
 b. What was the significance of the Confession from 
 
 155=; up to the end of the Thirty Years' War, 
 1648? 
 
 c. What has been the significance of the Confession 
 
 from the end of the Thirty Years' War (1648) 
 on up to our day? 
 
Contents. 9 
 
 PART THREE. 
 
 AN INTERPRETATION OF THE ARTICLES OF THE 
 AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 
 
 PAC^ 
 
 Preface to the Emperor Charles V., 59 
 
 I. Chief Articlks of Faith. 
 
 I. Of God, 61 
 
 II. Of Original Sin 66 
 
 III. Of the Son of God, 74 
 
 IV. Of Justification, 79 
 
 V. Of the Ministry of the Church, 84 
 
 VI. Of New Obedience, 87 
 
 VII. Of the Church, 90 
 
 VIII. What the Church is, 95 
 
 IX. Of Baptism, 96 
 
 X. Of the Lord's Supper, 100 
 
 XI. Of Confession, 106 
 
 XII. Of Repentance 108 
 
 XIII. Of the Use of the Sacraments, 112 
 
 XIV. Of Ecclesiastical Orders, 114 
 
 XV. Of Ecclesiastical Rites, 116 
 
 XVI. Of Civil Matters 120 
 
 XVII. Of the Return of Christ to Jr igm-ent, 122 
 
 XVIII. Of Free Will, 125 
 
 XIX. Of the Cause of Sin 133 
 
 XX. Of Faith and Good Works, 136 
 
 XXI. Of the Worship of Saints, _ 140 
 
 Conclusion to the Articles of Faith, 142 
 
 II. Articles in which are Enumerated the Abuses Cor- 
 rected. 
 
 XXII. Of Both Kinds, 143 
 
 XXIII. Of the Marriage of Priests, 144 
 
 XXIV. Of the Mass, 145 
 
 XXV. Of Confession, 148 
 
 XXVI. Of the Distinction of Meats and of Traditions, 148 
 
 XXVIL Of Monastic Vows, 151 
 
 XXVIII. Of Ecclesiastical Power, 155 
 
 Epilogue, 160 
 
THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION 
 
 PART I 
 
 (INTRODUCTORY) 
 
 Simple Talks on Confessional 
 Questions 
 
 I. Can we think of a Church without a Creed? 
 
 This is impossible. The so-called ''Christian" Church 
 (Campbellites) uses the motto: "No creed but Christ." 
 But when the people of this Church think that they have 
 no creed, they deceive themselves. They have pro- 
 nounced convictions on quite a number of Christian doc- 
 trines. For instance, they reject infant baptism, and 
 they insist upon immersion as an essential thing. In 
 this they distinguish themselves from many other de- 
 nominations. Now in taking such a doctrinal position, 
 do they not, after all, give expression to a creed? Do 
 they not confess something in which they believe as a 
 denomination ? 
 
 Some, feeling the inconsistency of admitting that they 
 belong to a special denomination, and yet insisting that 
 they have no creed, have thought out another way of 
 escaping the charge that they are believers in a creed. 
 Let us explain this by relating a conversation which we 
 once had with a young man on a train. We were sharing 
 one seat and were both returning to Springfield late on 
 a Sunday night ; he from a religious meeting which he 
 had attended in another city, we from preaching in a 
 congregation that was vacant. Upon asking him whether 
 he knew something of a certain congregation in the town 
 where he had been visiting, he replied negatively and 
 said that he was not interested in congregations and 
 denominations, and he added : ''Before I was converted I 
 was a Methodist, but since the Lord has found me I 
 
 II 
 
12 The Augsburg Coni-^ession. 
 
 belong to no church." He had told us that he had been 
 attending a religious meeting, and we now asked him 
 why he had gone to a distant town for such a purpose. 
 His answer was: ''There I have met with brethren and 
 sisters in Christ." We asked whether there were others 
 in other cities with whom they harmonized and whom 
 they acknowledged as "brethren and sisters in Christ"? 
 He said that there were some in Chicago and some in 
 Kansas City. "What is the name of your organization, 
 or under what name in church statistics would you recog- 
 nize those brethren and sisters in that town and in 
 Chicago and Kansas City?" "We have no organization 
 and no name, we simply call ourselves Christians." Then 
 he proceeded with an overflowing heart to tell of why 
 they had separated themselves from the world and from 
 the denominations, with their discussion of creeds, and 
 which were the truths for which they stood. We listened 
 with much interest to the things which he enumerated 
 as the principles constituting their platform. According 
 to his speech these people held some really evangelical 
 doctrines. He said that they rejected work-righteousness 
 in all its forms and were basing their hope of salvation 
 solely upon the grace of God in Jesus Christ. This part 
 we liked especially and expressed our approval. Finally 
 he took from his pocket a tract, and handing it said : 
 "Here you will find what we believe." We said to him : 
 "And this is your creed which makes you a church, a 
 denomination, even though you labor to avoid a denomi- 
 national name. The distinction between you and the 
 other denominations is a merely theoretical one. You 
 seem to have a creed that is truly evangelical at least in 
 the great fundamental article of sin and grace." 
 
 Yes, we cannot think of a church, by which we under- 
 stand a communion of believers (see Article VH of 
 Augsburg Confession) without a creed, without confes- 
 sions. A congregation and a denomination which has 
 nothing to say, nothing to confess of how it interprets 
 the Scriptures on the doctrines of God and man and the 
 scheme of redemption and the way of salvation, is no 
 church. 
 
The Augsburg Confession. 13 
 
 II. What would be the Dangers of a Church with- 
 out a Creed? 
 
 After having just tried to make the point that we can- 
 not think of a church without some kind of a creed, it 
 might seem illogical now to ask the question what the 
 dangers of a church without a creed would be? But 
 while it is true that a church necessarily will have some- 
 thing for which it stands, yet there are to-day so many 
 churches with an attitude of great indifference to a creed, 
 or a confessional standard, as meaning a real obligation 
 for teaching. There is in the atmosphere to-day among 
 the churches a dislike for "confessionalism." Individuals 
 and churches must be "broad." This means with most 
 people that there must be no positive convictions along 
 doctrinal lines. The things in which churches differ are 
 m^atters of indifference. Never should we quote Scrip- 
 ture in support of our denominational positions. If the 
 confessions of our Church should teach a certain doctrine 
 on the basis of the Scriptures, and another denomination 
 rejects it and opposes to it a doctrine which is the reverse 
 of it, then both should be considered as right, or perhaps 
 better, as doubtful, because back of the confessions 
 stands truth as an unknown quantity. This would be 
 about a fair interpretation of what people now mean by 
 **broad." Churches so broad are, after all, practically 
 churches without a creed. Now let us ask the question : 
 What is the danger of a church without a creed? 
 
 Such a church is a playground for all kinds of teachers. 
 The members of such churches do not know where they 
 stand and what preaching they can expect in their pul- 
 pits. One simply cannot tell into which of the great 
 variety of isms and errors a church without a creed may 
 fall. The errors in the direction of false subjectivism or 
 unsound enthusiasm are so many. Word and Sacraments 
 as means of grace are despised, and all is expected of an 
 immediate influence of the Holy Spirit. So much undue 
 emphasis is laid upon man's free will in spiritual matters 
 and upon his doings as a condition of salvation that the 
 doctrine of divine grace is lost. If Lutherans become 
 indifferent to their confessions then these forms of error 
 
14 The: Augsburg Confession. 
 
 are likely to come in from all sides. A danger especially 
 threatening a church without a creed, or, let us say, a 
 church that has no appreciation of the doctrinal principles 
 of its creed, is liberalism or rationalism^ a teaching 
 that rejects everything that cannot be perceived by man's 
 reason. No amount of piety that may permeate a con- 
 gregation at a given time would prove a sufficient safe- 
 guard for the future against rationalistic influences. 
 Here church history has given us an object-lesson. The 
 pietistic university of Halle was the first to open its 
 doors to rationalism when that movement swept Germany 
 in the eighteenth century. The father of rationalism, 
 Semler, professor in Halle, who spent a long life in the 
 work of undermining the Christian faith, was at the 
 same time a pietist, and, for instance, never neglected 
 family worship. There is a point where pietism and 
 rationalism can meet on a common ground. This com- 
 mon ground is indifference to the confessions of the 
 Church, indifference to doctrine. Men with real interest 
 in the creed of their church are never rationalists. 
 
 III. But when only can our Confessions offer us a 
 Safeguard against Errors? 
 
 We must get acquainted with the Confessions. We 
 should study their principles. This is especially true of 
 the ministry. The preachers of the Word need these 
 confessional principles as an aid and a guide for rightly 
 dividing the Word of truth. But our laymen also need 
 to be familiar at least with the leading principles of the 
 faith which their church confesses. Some of our laymen 
 are expected to fill positions in the church council where 
 they not infrequently have to decide matters involving 
 doctrinal questions. Many of our laymen have to serve 
 as teachers and speakers in Sunday school and young 
 people's meetings. For such work they need to be guided 
 by doctrinal principles that have been tried out by the 
 experience of the Church. Of course, laymen cannot 
 be expected to master Melanchthon's Apology, Luther's 
 Smalcald Articles, the Form of Concord. But they 
 should be thoroughly at home in the Small Catechism. 
 
The Augsburg Confession. 15 
 
 Laymen who want to be intelligent Lutherans should 
 never cease studying Luther's Catechism. Let me here 
 give a suggestion how that can be done in a most success- 
 ful way. You know that each Synod has prepared its 
 own Catechism. And many gifted teachers of the 
 Church have also published an interpretation of Luther's 
 Catechism. In all these Catechisms the words from 
 Luther are the same, but in the exposition of Luther's 
 words there is great variety in form and thought. Now 
 the laymen of our Church, aiming at an education in the 
 doctrinal teaching of their Church, should try to get, 
 through their publication house, a collection of all these 
 Catechisms. A comparative study of them of which the 
 one and the other may be chosen for family worship 
 would wonderfully aid our laymen in building up and 
 enriching their knowledge of the principles so funda- 
 mental to a successful teaching in Sunday school and the 
 societies of the Church. But here let us take a step 
 further and say : Not only the Catechism, but also the 
 Augsburg Confession should be studied by our laymen. 
 We carry the Augsburg Confession in our Hymn Books, 
 thus indicating that it should be used by laymen as well 
 as ministers. Our laymen should be familiar with the 
 doctrinal principles, at least of the fir^st twenty-one 
 articles, so that they can make use of them in teaching 
 and apply them as cases may arise in the practical life 
 of the congregation. A laity so grounded in Scripture 
 truth would be a real bulwark against the errors threaten- 
 ing the life of the Church. Here we have spoken as if 
 to be grounded in the Confessions is equal to being 
 grounded in the Scriptures. This suggests another 
 question : 
 
 IV. What is the Relation of the Confessions to the 
 Scriptures ? 
 
 We would, of course, not be justified in making con- 
 fessions equal to the Scriptures. The Scriptures are the 
 absolute source of truth, the absolute rule of faith. 
 The Confessions are mere witnesses of what the Church 
 or what the individual as a member of the Church, 
 
i6 The: Augsburg Concession. 
 
 believes to be the meaning of the Scriptures in things 
 fundamental. Our Confessions aim at reducing the lead- 
 ing truths of Scripture to practical principles. Whether 
 a certain Confession, say, for instance, the Augsburg 
 Confession, has succeeded in expressing what the Scrip- 
 tures actually teach, is for us to examine and to say. 
 If, after such examination of the Augsburg Confession, 
 we should feel satisfied that it is in harmony with Scrip- 
 ture truth, then we are Lutherans of conviction. If in 
 time we should arrive at a different conviction and 
 believe that the principles of this Confession are in 
 conflict with the Scriptures — a conviction to which we 
 would have a perfect right — then we would, of course, 
 cease to be Lutherans. May be that in such case our 
 doubt would pertain to just one point, and only in this 
 one point we would feel that we are in harmony with 
 some other church. Then we would be un-Lutheran in 
 this one point. But in such case there is usually some 
 self-deception. Lutheranism, like Calvinism and Cathol- 
 icism, is a system. One point of doctrine is an insepara- 
 ble part of the whole doctrinal structure. It takes some 
 study to see that. So it may be that a man who finds 
 himself in conflict with the Lutheran Church in one 
 doctrine is out of joint with Lutheranism altogether. 
 It may also be that he simply misunderstands. If he 
 would be led to see what the Scriptures here teach and 
 what the meaning of the Confession in this point is, 
 then there might be no difliculty. 
 
 We have said that as Lutherans we should examine 
 the Augsburg Confession and reach a conclusion as to 
 its agreement with the Scriptures. It is our good right, 
 as sons and daughters of the Reformation, to do this. 
 We should not say that we are Lutherans simply because 
 our fathers were Lutherans. Our real reason should be 
 this, that we believe the Confessions of the Lutheran 
 Church to be Scriptural. Laymen as well as ministers 
 can form a judgment on this question. There is the doc- 
 trine of justification by faith as contained in Article IV 
 of the Augsburg Confession. He who is at home in the 
 Epistles of St. Paul, especially in his letters to the 
 
The Augsburg Confession. 17 
 
 Galatians and the Romans, can soon form an opinion 
 as to whether the doctrine of this article is Scriptural 
 or not. There is in Article VI of the Confession the 
 doctrine of the New Obedience, or of sanctification. A 
 layman can find, from studying Paul and others of the 
 sacred writers, whether this peculiarly Lutheran setting, 
 namely, justification on account of the merits of Christ, 
 through faith, as the source, and good works or sanctifi- 
 cation as the stream from the source, is Scriptural or 
 not. So you can take one article after the other, and, in 
 many cases, aided by your Catechism, you can carry out 
 an examination of the Augsburg Confession which will 
 lead you to very definite results. We predict that when 
 you in your investigation keep close to the Scrip- 
 tures and in your interpretation are willing to be 
 guided by the Gospel in the Scriptures (the analogy 
 of faith), then you w^U find yourselves in complete 
 harmony with the Augsburg Confession. And the 
 longer you study the more you will become convinced 
 that even the doctrines more remote from the centre are 
 doctrines of the Scriptures and that in our great Augs- 
 burg Confession they have been formulated in entire 
 agreement with the central doctrine of justification by 
 faith. But now let us take up another question. 
 
 V. Is our Lutheran Church right in making the 
 Augsburg Confession, v/hich was written in the Six- 
 teenth Century, the Guide for Men who live in the 
 Twentieth Century? 
 
 Opponents to creeds when they make this point seem 
 to be sure of almost general applause. But do not be 
 deceived. Stop and think a little before you join. Each 
 one of our creeds marks a certain experience which the 
 Church of Christ has had under the guidance of the Holy 
 Spirit. We shall discuss this thought more connectedly 
 in the following paragraph (under question VI). Here 
 we have reference only to the Augsburg Confession. 
 We are Lutherans. Let us consider for a moment the 
 conditions that called into existence the Lutheran Church 
 and its great Confession. We cannot help but see God's 
 
i8 The Augsburg Confession. 
 
 hand in the shaping of the circumstances. Centuries of 
 the most providential preparation had been going before. 
 There was a longing for the Gospel. The voices of 
 Savonarola, Wickliffe and Huss had been heard as 
 prophets. Then, at the darkest hour, one may say, 
 Luther came, a man such as the age needed. He had 
 experienced the Reformation in his own heart. The old 
 Pauline doctrine of justification by faith was discovered. 
 He was a religious genius in preaching and writing, and 
 endowed with creative powers in every direction. While 
 Melanchthon wrote the Augsburg Confession, it is the 
 theology, the religion of Luther, a religion born out of 
 the struggles of his conscience for the forgiveness of 
 sins ! Now, dear reader, appealing to what you and 
 everyone would understand of history, can you imagine 
 that such a religious discovery, divinely prepared for 
 centuries, should have nothing but a passing significance ? 
 Think of the time when the Augsburg Confession was 
 written, 1530. It was prepared as the common Confes- 
 sion of almost all the Protestants of Germany. It was 
 an age that was literally pregnant with the great evan- 
 gelical idea. Creed making was the most natural thing. 
 Our age, with its superior learning, can create nothing 
 like the Augsburg Confession or Luther's Small Cate- 
 chism. The leading thoughts of our age are of such a 
 conflicting nature as to their relation to each other that 
 there is absolutely no unifying idea in sight. Luther 
 was the mouthpiece of a great controlling idea ; it was 
 his answer to the question : What shall I do to be saved ? 
 It was a creed-producing age. Luther wrote to relieve 
 the ignorance of the ministers in teaching their cate- 
 chumens, and the result was his Large Catechism. Then 
 he wrote to place in their hands a book that might be 
 used as a guide for catechetical instruction, and the 
 result was his Small Catechism. Wherever Luther and 
 Melanchthon met among themselves or with others, 
 articles of faith were formulated, and these articles were 
 of such a nature that they are published even in our day. 
 There are the Torgau Articles, the Marburg Articles, 
 the Schwabach Articles. The creative powers of the 
 
TiiJt Augsburg Confession. 19 
 
 Church of Christ were raised to the highest potentiahty. 
 That was the case especially during those memorable 
 days in May and June, in Augsburg (1530), when the 
 new Church was called upon to state before the Emperor 
 and all the Estates of Germany and the representatives 
 of the Pope what it believed. Again the question : Can 
 you believe that this Augsburg Confession, which came 
 into existence under such circumstances, the Confession 
 with which the Lutheran Church as a Church was born, 
 should now be obsolete and give place to something new ? 
 No, and again no! You cannot reject the doctrinal prin- 
 ciples of this Confession without giving up the Lutheran 
 Church itself. 
 
 When we thus speak, then we have something of an 
 experience back of us. The Augsburg Confession has 
 been tested for a period of almost four hundred years. 
 All kinds of modifications have been suggested, some in 
 one article, some in another. But we have not yet found 
 the courage to make any changes. Some suggestions 
 came from the camp of the Reformed churches. But 
 to-day we are more sure than ever that any concession 
 in this direction would have been a mistake. Most of 
 the suggestions to modify the principles of the Augus- 
 tana, of which we hear to-day, come from the Socinian 
 camp, from the men of modern theology. They think 
 that the conception of the Trinity as contained in Article 
 I of our Confession, which is the same as that of the 
 Nicene Creed, needs modification. In Article II they do 
 not like the doctrine of man's total depravity, nor the 
 doctrine of Article XVIII that man cannot be saved by 
 powers of his own. With reference to Article III (the 
 Son of God) we are admonished at least to strike out the 
 thought that Christ should "reconcile the Father unto 
 us," and be a sacrifice ; and in the same way in Article 
 IV (Justification) to do away with the idea of Christ's 
 death being a "satisfaction for our sins," as also with 
 the idea of an imputed righteousness. If we consider 
 the source of the present-day objections against the 
 Augsburg Confession as a creed for men of the twenti- 
 
20 Thi: Augsburg Coni^ession. 
 
 eth century, then there will be no inclination for us to 
 make concessions — not as long as we are Lutherans. 
 
 With this we do not want to say that the Augsburg 
 Confession is a complete presentation of Christian doc- 
 trines for all times. We do not even want to say that 
 this Confession is in all instances the best possible formu- 
 lation of the doctrines presented. What we insist 
 upon is that its doctrines are Scriptural, and for this 
 reason cannot be overthrown. We may, by elucidation 
 and by the use of comprehensive definitions, succeed in 
 making the truth clearer and more fitting to meet the 
 peculiar errors of our age. We may also be able to add 
 something of importance, something that the Church of 
 Christ has learned since the formulation of the Confes- 
 sion. Much valuable truth of this kind is found in the 
 Formula of Concord. And many resolutions adopted by 
 Synods and conventions in crises of the Church's history 
 are also of value. The time may come when in view of 
 the assaults of modern theology upon the Bible the 
 Church will be called upon, and will be ready to 
 formulate a new Confession covering the points that are 
 especially in controversy between the adherents of the 
 old and the new faith. But such twentieth or twenty- 
 fifth century creed would not reject the Augsburg Con- 
 fession, but it would build upon its foundations. When 
 our fathers in Augsburg formulated their Confession 
 they did not first tear down the Apostles' Creed and the 
 Nicene Creed, but they built upon these foundations. 
 (Read what Articles III and I of the Augsburg Confes- 
 sion have to say on that subject.) Our Confession was 
 not a "modification" of the ancient creeds, but rather a 
 development and an amplification of them. There is 
 reason to fear that the men who are always laboring to 
 hold the way open for a reconstruction, or a modification 
 of the doctrines of the Augsburg Confession will soon 
 feel that the Nicene Creed has to go also. The aim is 
 in the last analysis at the divinity of Christ. It goes 
 against the doctrine that Jesus is ''of the same essence 
 and power," "co-eternal" with the Father (Article I). 
 All this talk that the Augsburg Confession does not fit 
 
The Augsburg Con]'e:ssion, 21 
 
 any longer for the man of the twentieth century, is 
 Socinian or rationahstic in tendency. Here we can 
 make no concessions. If we have to strike out of our 
 creed the full divinity of Christ and the substitutional 
 character of His atoning death upon Calvary; if we 
 cannot believe any more that man in his natural condi- 
 tion has suffered a depravity as described in Article H 
 of the Confession, then all our preaching will be a con- 
 stant detraction from the merits of Christ. The ground 
 from beneath the article of justification by faith is 
 gone. Then we may quit preaching, because we would 
 have no message any more to a world lost in sin. 
 
 VI. How do the Confessions appear when we con- 
 sider the Causes which brought them into Existence 
 and the Conditions which led to their Adoption? 
 
 Many people look upon creeds as the product of minds 
 that had a fondness for speculation. They forget the 
 historical necessity back of the creeds. The fact is that 
 each one of them marks an important epoch in the 
 Church's experience of religious truth. 
 
 When our Lord w^as about to leave His disciples they 
 were in sorrow, because they did not know who should 
 teach and lead them. But He gave them the promise 
 of the Holy Spirit who should guide them into all truth. 
 (John 16:13.) Each one of our Confessions marks a 
 fulfilment of this promise. 
 
 There is the Apostles' Creed. This Creed, in the form 
 we have it in our Catechism and use it in our churches, 
 was not written by the Apostles before leaving Jerusalem, 
 each of them contributing a sentence, as a legend of 
 the Roman Catholic church has it. No, this creed repre- 
 sents a gradual growth. It grew out of the need of the 
 Church to have a confessional formula around which 
 the instruction of the catechumens might cluster. At 
 the same time it was needed as a bulwark against the 
 influences of heretical teachers, (Ebionites, Gnostics). 
 It must have been very brief at first. Our New Testa- 
 ment scholars hold that we have references to it in the 
 following passages in the epistles of Paul and John: 
 
22 The Augsburg Confession. 
 
 Gal. 1:9; Romans 10:9 and 10; i Cor. 15:1; i Tim. 
 3: 16; I John 4:2 and 3. This creed represented the 
 ''Gospel" in a nutshell. In the course of time one sen- 
 tence after the other was added. It became the ''Bap- 
 tismal Formula" by which Christians would know each 
 other. The more elaborate form in which we now have 
 it in our churches dates from the seventh century. 
 
 A confession which is a little more theological in char- 
 acter is the Nicene Creed. A study of the history of this 
 creed especially can show us that our confessions have 
 come into existence not as the result of fruitless specula- 
 tion, but in response to a deep need in the Church. The 
 time had come in the history of the Church when the 
 divinity of our Lord and Saviour was seriously at stake. 
 Arius, a man with a great following, taught that Christ 
 was not co-eternal with the Father, but that He had been 
 created in time. While Arius regarded Christ as superior 
 to all of us, yet He was after all only a creature of God. 
 Can a created being, even if He is superior to His fellow- 
 creatures, save us from guilt and the curse of sin? Here 
 the controversy began. Athanasius, whom church history 
 has honored with the name "father of orthodoxy," 
 fought for the phrases which at the first great synod at 
 Nicea (325) were incorporated in the creed: "Begotten 
 of His Father, before all Worlds, God of God, Light of 
 Light, Very God of very God, begotten, not made, being 
 of one Substance with the Father." A great struggle 
 between Nicene Christianity and Arianism, lasting 
 through six decades, followed. It tried the life of the 
 Church, until finally, under the Emperor Theodosius, the 
 Great, at the second ecumenical council, held in Con- 
 stantinople in 381, the Nicene creed gained the victory. 
 This was in the Roman empire. But meanwhile Arian- 
 ism had spread among the new Germanic peoples : the 
 Goths, the Vandals, the Burgunds, the Sueves, the Longo- 
 bards. For a long time it seemed as if these with their 
 great future before them would after all decide the 
 overthrow of Nicene Christianity. But God in His 
 providence interfered. The conversion of the Franks 
 (after 496) and their adoption of the Nicene Creed 
 
Thi; Augsburg Coni^ivSSion. 23 
 
 turned the tide, and soon these peoples also have the 
 Athanasian or Nicene form of Christianity. Our pur- 
 pose is to show that there was something at stake in 
 connection with the adoption of the Nicene Creed. It 
 was about the divinity of Christ. What would Chris- 
 tianity have been to-day, if Arianism had succeeded in 
 maintaining itself? 
 
 Up to this time the chief interest of the Church had 
 been centered in the doctrines of the Trinity and the 
 person of Christ. Our Lutheran Confessions have ac- 
 cepted the decisions of the old Catholic Church in these 
 questions, as can be seen from Articles I and III of the 
 Augsburg Confession. Of these two great fundamental 
 doctrines, ''the chief articles concerning the Divine 
 Majesty," as Luther wrote in the First Part of the Smal- 
 cald Articles, ''there is no contention or dispute, since we 
 on both sides confess them." But now another question 
 came into the foreground ; it was the great practical 
 question: What shall I do to be saved? The problems 
 discussed were these : What influence has the fall of 
 Adam had upon man's spiritual nature? Does sin consist 
 merely in the sinful acts, or does it also include his 
 natural inclination to sinning? What spiritual powers 
 are left in man? Can he himself effect his regeneration 
 and conversion in any degree, or does he here wholly 
 depend upon the Holy Spirit? How are "good works" 
 to be valued, as meritorious and preparing the way for 
 justification, or what is the relation between justification 
 and sanctification ? The answer to these and related 
 questions, that was given during the mediaeval age, it is 
 what we to-day understand by Romanism. There was 
 an exceedingly superficial conception of sin. Only the 
 outbreaks of sinful nature were regarded as real sins. 
 The condition of man's heart, the evil desire, was re- 
 garded as something indifferent. Man's spiritual powers, 
 while they may have been weakened in consequence of 
 the fall, are not affected to such an extent that he, with 
 the powers of his own free will and the Holy Spirit 
 merely assisting him, could not bring about the change 
 of his heart. Good works were regarded as meritoriously 
 
24 Thi: Augsburg Coni^ession. 
 
 preparing the way for justification, a process that was 
 ever to go on, and to be aided by the Sacraments as a 
 means of power in the hands of an hierarchically or- 
 ganized Church. This Romanism as we have here char- 
 acterized it was the source of all the evils and abuses 
 under which the Church was suffering when the age of 
 the Reformation was approaching. Against this system 
 of work-righteousness the Scriptural doctrine of grace 
 had to be opposed. This was done through Luther and 
 others who followed him. The best exposition of this 
 new evangelical faith we have in the Augsburg Confes- 
 sion. God had led His Church to a new religious 
 experience by which there should be given to multitudes 
 the vision of a way to a real assurance of the forgive- 
 ness of sins. 
 
 What now is the result of our investigation again at 
 the close of this paragraph ? This : No one familiar 
 with the history of our Confessions will want to look at 
 these documents as something artificially gotten up, as 
 the products of minds fond of speculation; but he will 
 see in them the hand of the Head of the Church, who 
 steered the ship of the Church through all errors, so 
 that the Church could arrive, step by step, at a clear 
 understanding of what the Scriptures intended to teach 
 as eternal truth. 
 
 VII. Does the Appreciation and the Study of 
 Creeds Interfere with a truly Religious Life of In- 
 dividuals and Churches? 
 
 This is a question which has been answered in the 
 affirmative by many who meant well in promoting the 
 cause of spirituality in the Church of Christ. 
 
 Of course, we have observed that there is such a thing 
 as knowing of Christ and not having Him in the heart. 
 We have met men who knew the doctrines of their Church 
 and were zealous in defending them, but there seemed 
 to be about them no symptoms of real religious life. And 
 we know of periods in the Church's history when there 
 was an over-emphasis upon the intellectual in religion 
 
The; Augsburg Coni?e;ssion. 25 
 
 coupled with a lack of true godliness in the life of the 
 professors of religion. 
 
 We do not want to close our eyes to dangers of any 
 kind. As there have always been men and women in 
 the Church who permitted themselves to live too much in 
 the sphere of the emotional, so there have also been 
 those who made the other mistake of being satisfied with 
 what appealed to the intellect, delighting in doctrinal 
 definitions and overlooking the claims of religion upon 
 the heart. 
 
 But would we be justified on account of this now to 
 depreciate the creeds? That would be very foolish. It 
 will always remain an indisputable fact, as we have seen, 
 that the confessions have grown, with an inner neces- 
 sity, out of the life of the Church of Christ. If they 
 are not used right, then the fault lies with the individual 
 who permits himself to become interested in the Confes- 
 sions and to become defenders of them before there has 
 been a religious experience in the heart. The creed 
 should be an expression of the religious life of the 
 Christian. As we read in Paul to the Romans (10: 10) : 
 'With the heart man believeth unto righteousness, and 
 with the mouth confession is made unto salvation." And 
 in I Peter 3: 15, "Be ready always to give answer to 
 every man that asketh you a reason concerning the hope 
 that is in you." 
 
 When we use the Apostles' Creed in our worship on 
 Sundays, and the Nicene Creed at the great festivals 
 of the Church Year, then we feel that the Confession of 
 our creed has a rightful place in our religious life. And 
 not only the great and the simple creeds of the ancient 
 Church, but also the special Confessions of our Lutheran 
 Church should be used by us as expressions of our faith. 
 Because, as we have seen, they cover a special experi- 
 ence of the Church, a more advanced experience as 
 compared with the ancient creeds. Our Small Catechism 
 especially is full of that deeply spiritual element which 
 fits it as an expression of the inner religious life. Let 
 me illustrate this : A girl of about ten years of age was 
 to undergo a serious operation, and the surgeon before 
 
26 Thij Augsburg Confession. 
 
 beginning his work asked whether she had something to 
 say. She folded her hands and repeating Luther's ex- 
 planation of the second article of the Apostles' Creed, 
 which she had learned by heart, said: ''I believe that 
 Jesus Christ, true God, begotten of the Father from 
 eternity, and also true man, born of the Virgin Mary, 
 is my Lord; who has redeemed me, a lost and con- 
 demned creature, secured and delivered me from all 
 sins, from death, and from the power of the devil, not 
 with silver and gold, but with His holy and precious 
 blood, and with His innocent sufferings and death ; in 
 order that I might be His, live under Him in His king- 
 dom, and serve Him in everlasting righteousness, inno- 
 cence and blessedness : even as He is risen from the 
 dead, and Hves and reigns in all eternity. This is most 
 certainly true." And after she had finished she said: 
 ''This I believe." Yes, dear friends, after such a quota- 
 tion we feel that it will not do for us always almost 
 instinctively to associate the creeds with men of dead 
 orthodoxy or a petrified Christianity. By doing this we 
 deceive ourselves and neglect the use of a rich fountain 
 of blessing. Pastor Loehe, one of the fathers of Inner 
 Missions in Germany, said that at night he could lie for 
 hours on his bed, and, with the joy of salvation in his 
 heart, repeat one part of Luther's Catechism after the 
 other. 
 
 The Augsburg Confession is necessarily more theo- 
 logical than Luther's Catechism. And yet these simple 
 statements of Scripture truths, as our Augsburg Confes- 
 sion has them, are well adapted as confession of what 
 ''man believeth unto righteousness." Take, for instance, 
 the following words of Article V : "That we may obtain 
 this faith, the office of teaching the Gospel and adminis- 
 tering the Sacraments was instituted. For through the 
 Word and Sacraments as through instruments, the Holy 
 Ghost is given, who worketh faith where and when it 
 pleaseth God in them that hear the Gospel, to wit, that 
 God, not for our own merits, but for Christ's sake, justi- 
 fied those who believe that they are received into favor 
 for Christ's sake." The fact is that our creeds deal with 
 
The Augsburg Coni^ession. 27 
 
 the fundamentals of our religion. It is the principles of 
 our Confessions that give frame and system to what we 
 believe of Scripture truth. Without these principles our 
 religion is nothing but vacillating sentiment, nothing but 
 a conglomeration of thoughts without leading ideas. 
 
 Let us again ask the question with which we started: 
 Is the appreciation and the study of creeds irreconcilable 
 with true spirituality? Study the life of the Church 
 fathers. What a devotion to the Master there was in men 
 like Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyprian, Athanasius, Basilius, 
 Augustine ! A very great part of the energies of these 
 men was taken up with struggles against the doctrinal 
 errors of their age. They watched with zealousness over 
 the faith delivered unto the saints. And yet about the 
 devotional expressions and productions of these men 
 there is a wonderful charm. Read the "Confessions" 
 of Augustine, and you will see how spiritually-minded a 
 man can be who with all the mighty powers of his think- 
 ing labored to develop the doctrines of the Church. And 
 of the Reformation age take men like Luther and 
 Melanchthon who gave to us the Confessions which dis- 
 tinguish the Church to which we belong. Personal piety 
 and interest in doctrines are with Luther and Melanch- 
 thon and Lazarus Spengeler, and so many others, not 
 two separate strains, running parallel and never touch- 
 ing, but they are together in a union like body and soul. 
 Piety with these men can have no existence without pure 
 doctrine. So it ought to be. So it was even yet in men 
 like Martin Chemnitz, Johann Gerhard, in Starck and 
 Arndt, in Paul Gerhardt and in the great Lutheran 
 hymn writers of the first period. The separation of these 
 two factors in modern Christians is a deplorable 
 symptom. 
 
 VIII. How will the knowledge of and the adher- 
 ence to the Principles of a Creed aid a Preacher and a 
 Teacher of the Christian Religion? 
 
 In the first place, it will help htm to be clear in his 
 presentations. And what he says will be retainable. 
 Here is a shortcoming on the part of many preachers and 
 
28 The Augsburg Con?e:ssion. 
 
 teachers who have little or no interest in the principles 
 of their creed. A preaching and a teaching that does 
 not rest upon doctrinal principles is, as a rule, lacking 
 in clearness, and, for this reason, tires the hearers. No 
 wonder, because there is no frame to the thoughts, no 
 system in the presentation. In the Confessions of our 
 Church we have, in clear outlines, the plan of salvation, 
 the need of salvation, its conditions, its consequences for 
 the individual and for the congregation of believers. 
 One requirement of a good teacher is that his viewpoints 
 are well taken. Our Confessions will furnish a preacher 
 and a teacher with viewpoints that are in harmony with 
 the leading thoughts of the Holy Scriptures. This will 
 materially aid him to be clear and lucid in his presen- 
 tations. 
 
 Secondly, it will make him a reliable teacher. His 
 teaching comes not in the form of subjective notions, but 
 in the form of doctrines tested by the experience of the 
 Church of Christ. His teaching, then, will be in harmony 
 with the Word of God. So it should be. In i Peter 
 4:11, we read: ''If any man speak, let him speak as the 
 oracles of God." In teaching in the Church no one of 
 us, be he pastor or layman, has the right to teach human 
 wisdom, but he must teach the Word of God, the ''oracles 
 of God." Have you ever thought of this, that in teaching 
 in the Church you are not only to teach on the basis of 
 God's Word, but in such a way that your own teaching, 
 your interpretation of the Scriptures is like "the oracles 
 of God"? That is what this passage, quoted from St. 
 Peter, means. Yes, preaching and teaching in the 
 Church of Christ is a most serious thing. James (3:1) 
 therefore, admonishes: "Be not many of you teachers, 
 my brethren, knowing that we shall receive heavier judg- 
 ment." But, my friends, instead of advising you to 
 abstain from teaching, let me show you how you can 
 become reliable teachers of the divine Word. Study the 
 Confessions of your Church, especially Luther's Small 
 Catechism and the Augsburg Confession. As we have 
 already said, here you are furnished with the true view- 
 points ; here you find the keys for understanding the 
 
The: Augsburg Coni^ession. 29 
 
 Scriptures; here you have, as we would say in a theo- 
 logical term, the analogy of faith, or, as Paul, in the 
 translation of King James' version, says, in his letter to 
 the Romans (12:6), the ''proportion of faith." For 
 teaching God's Word we need in our minds, to begin 
 with, a setting of divine truths, where the fundamentals 
 of our Christian religion are placed in the right relations 
 to each other. This we have in our Confessions. If we 
 follow them as a guide, the Bible will be to us something 
 altogether different from what it would be, if we start 
 out independently, ignorant of what our Church has 
 summed up as fundamental truths. Now we will find the 
 scheme of redemption running through the whole Bible. 
 Without such a guide the Bible, in its largest part, will 
 appear to us as a mass of disconnected moral require- 
 ments. We must so study the Bible that we can find 
 the Saviour even in the Old Testament. 
 
 Thirdly, if you do your teaching of the divine Word 
 under the guide of the Confessions then you can have a 
 good conscience. You are in harmony with the doctrinal 
 experiences of the Church of Christ. You do not ignore 
 what the Church has learned in the school of the Holy 
 Spirit. He who ignores the Confessions as a guide in 
 teaching in the Church may some day find that he has 
 been teaching notions instead of eternal truth. At the 
 foundation of his teaching there is not the Biblical way 
 of salvation as it stands out so clearly in the Confessions 
 of our Church. ''To the law and to the testimony ! if 
 they speak not according to this Word, surely there is 
 no morning for them." (Isaiah 8:20.) As an illus- 
 tration of this the people of the Fatherland have recently 
 had a remarkable experience. You may have heard of 
 the fellowship movement (Gemeinschaftsbewegung) in 
 Germany. It aim_s at gathering into societies the spirit- 
 ually alive Christians all over the land for the purposes 
 of Christian fellowship among each other and evangeliza- 
 tion of the world. This movement began about thirty- 
 five years ago and has had a marvelous development. At 
 their annual conventions at Gnadau, Blankenburg and 
 Eisenach these people assemble by the thousands. With 
 
30 The: Augsburg Con:^ession. 
 
 their many houses of worship, with their host of evan- 
 gelists and workers, with their press they have exercised 
 a remarkable influence. But from the beginning the 
 movement was out of harmony with so many essentials 
 of Lutheran doctrine. It was greatly influenced by the 
 Oxford movement in England, especially by Pearsall 
 Smith, of Philadelphia, who visited Germany in 1875 
 preaching his new gospel to many thousands in the lead- 
 ing cities of the Fatherland. The emphasis was upon 
 perfect holiness which, he said, every one simply giving 
 himself to Jesus can attain now. The motto was : ''J^sus 
 saves me now." As doctrinal ground the thought was 
 emphasized that in the death of Christ our sin has been 
 annihilated. This is our salvation through the Christ 
 in us. The doctrine of the forgiveness of sins through 
 justification by faith in the atoning power of the blood 
 of Christ (the Christ for us) was pushed aside. But 
 the man who brought this doctrine into a system for the 
 people of the fellowship movement in Germany was 
 Pastor Th. Jellinghaus. Through Bible schools which 
 he conducted and through many publications which have 
 had a wide circulation he has labored for a life time to 
 formulate and to systematize, to elucidate and to give 
 foundations to this doctrine. He was the acknowledged 
 doctrinal leader, the "dogmatician" of the fellowship 
 movement. We knew him personally. We heard him 
 teach at the Eisenach conference and at Meiningen and 
 sat with him at table (1902). He was a man of piety 
 and of a beautiful character. But now comes what we 
 wanted to say of the good conscience in teaching in 
 the Church. A few years ago 1905-06) Pastor Jelling- 
 haus while working on a Bible Commentary which was 
 to give the Scripture ground for his teaching became 
 convinced that his new system of doctrines was in con- 
 flict with the Scriptures. More and more the conviction 
 grew upon him that his conception of sin had been too 
 superficial ; that he had not taken the holiness, the jus- 
 tice and the wrath of God seriously enough ; that his 
 rejection of the vicarious atonement of Christ, of the 
 substitutional character of His death, was in conflict 
 
The Augsburg Confession. 31 
 
 with the Scriptural significance of Christ's death as the 
 means of our salvation; that his conceptions of re- 
 pentance and faith contained many erroneous elements. 
 Finally, that his doctrine of holiness as an immediate 
 experience was in conflict with the actual experiences of 
 Christians and had no foundation in the Scriptures. The 
 thought that he had for a lifetime been teaching doctrines 
 in conflict with the Scriptures, and the other thought 
 that he had had such a great following and that many 
 had been misled through him, so tortured his conscience 
 that he broke down in his nerves and for a time had to 
 be confined to an asylum. But he recovered again and 
 was dismissed. While living with his son-in-law, a 
 pastor, who with many others testifies to the normal 
 condition of his mind, he published a "Declaration on my 
 Doctrinal Errors" (Erklaerung ueber meine Lehrirrun- 
 gen, Verlag von Prack & Co., in Lichtenrade, 60 Pfen- 
 ninge), in which he confesses before the world the 
 mistakes of his life, with the prayer and the hope that the 
 harm which he has done to the Church may again be 
 rectified as much as possible. He again returns to the 
 doctrinal positions of the Lutheran Church. This cer- 
 tainly has been a remarkable experience. It can teach 
 all of us a serious lesson. When we undertake to teach 
 in the Church of Christ we take upon ourselves a great 
 responsibility. God will one day take us to account. 
 The question will then not be : How did you succeed in 
 entertaining your audiences and your classes ? but : How 
 did your teaching conform to the Scriptures as the rule 
 of faith? Let us quote in this connection what Paul 
 says, I Cor. 3:11-15: "For other foundation can no 
 man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now 
 if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, pre- 
 cious stones, wood, hay, stubble ; every man's work shall 
 be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because 
 it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try any 
 man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work abide 
 which he has built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. 
 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss ; 
 yet so as by fire." God grant that our work may be of the 
 
32 The Augsburg Confe^ssion. 
 
 permanent kind. Let us not despise the good guide 
 which we have in the Confessions of our Church. There 
 we are on Scriptural ground, and with a Scriptural mes- 
 sage only we can have a good conscience. 
 
 IX. Why is the Apostles' Creed not enough? 
 
 It is not always easy for laymen to arrive at an appre- 
 ciation of the doctrinal principles of the Augsburg Con- 
 fession. Many of these principles look to them as being 
 of no fundamental significance. They observe that there 
 are good Christians among those who do not obligate 
 themselves to this Confession. At the same time they 
 w^ould not want to go as far as to be opposed to any 
 kind of a creed. But they think it would be enough if 
 such a creed would cover just *'the fundamentals." The 
 Apostles' Creed appeals to them as such a statement on 
 the fundamentals, and they think that should be enough. 
 
 Let me ask you again to read what we discussed under 
 VL A study of Church history, of the causes which 
 produced the later Confessions, will lead us to look at 
 this question in an altogether different light. If you 
 are tempted to depreciate the creeds of our Church, then 
 read John i6: 13. Our creeds are monuments of how 
 Christ has kept the promise that His Holy Spirit shall 
 lead us in all truth. With each new creed the Church of 
 Christ has had a new experience of truth. As we have 
 seen, the Apostles' and the Nicene Creed repre- 
 sent experiences which the Church has had with refer- 
 ence to the doctrines of Trinity and Christology only. 
 At the time of the Reformation, the Church had grown 
 so much that it was now ready to give expression to 
 doctrines of an altogether different kind, the doctrine 
 of sin and grace, of how salvation is appropriated, of 
 the Scriptural relation between forgiveness of sins and 
 holiness of life, of the Sacraments and the conception 
 of the Church. Let us ask again : Why is the Apostles' 
 Creed not enough? If we consider this question in the 
 light of the experiences which the Church has had under 
 the enlightening influence of the Holy Spirit and which 
 have been expressed in the Augsburg Confession, then 
 
Th^ Augsburg Con:^ession. 33 
 
 we know what we have to answer. The Apostles' Creed 
 is not enough. It does not by far cover all the funda- 
 mentals. It covers only a part of the doctrinal experi- 
 ences of the Church. If we now, after all these valuable 
 experiences, should want to go back to the Apostles' Creed 
 and should demand that on this basis the various denomi- 
 nations unite, would not that be equal to compelling the 
 full grown man to return again to the state of develop- 
 ment of the child? Here was the mistake of Syncretism. 
 Let us not ignore what we have been taught in the period 
 of the Reformation. The principles of Romanism, of 
 Anabaptism, of Pelagianism, of Zwinglianism, in oppo- 
 sition to which the doctrines of the Augsburg Confession 
 have been formulated, are standing out to-day as types of 
 religion essentially different from the faith of our 
 Church. This observation can confirm us in the convic- 
 tion that our Augsburg Confession has given expression 
 to principles that had a right to be recorded as experi- 
 ences of the Church of the pure Word. 
 
 X. Why is Luther's Small Catechism not Enough? 
 
 This is another question that might be asked by lay- 
 men. Here we could not reply as in the case of the Apos- 
 tles' Creed. We could not say that Luther's Small Cate- 
 chism does not treat of the questions dealing with the 
 way of salvation. Luther's treatment of the Ten Com- 
 mandments, his exposition of the second and third 
 articles of the Apostles' Creed belong to the most beauti- 
 ful gems in the confessional literature of the Church. 
 And what the Catechism writes on the Sacraments is 
 even more explicit than what the Augsburg Confession 
 has on that subject. 
 
 And yet there must be a reason why so many Lutheran 
 bodies have published the Augsburg Confession in their 
 hymn books, thus indicating their conviction that this 
 Confession also should be placed into the hands of our 
 laymen. Let us here refer to something that Prof. 
 Kahnis of the Leipzig University wrote in his book 
 "Luthertum und Christentum." Of Luther's Small Cate- 
 chism he says (p. 136) : "In evangelical truth and conse- 
 
34 The: Augsburg Coni^ession. 
 
 cration as well as in popular simplicity, clearness and 
 power, it surpasses anything that has ever been written 
 in this respect. None of our Confessions have been so 
 written in the spirit of God as must be said of the Small 
 Catechism. And next to the Scriptures no other book 
 has so impressed the hearts of men." But then Kahnis 
 goes on to say: "But as symbolical writings both Cate- 
 chisms cannot claim the authority of the Augsburg 
 Confession." He gives two reasons: (i) Because they 
 were not direct testimonies of the Church. (2) Accord- 
 ing to their purpose, they did not give complete expres- 
 sion to the doctrinal character of Lutheranism. 
 
 Here, then, are two points of difference between 
 Luther's Small Catechism and the Augsburg Confession. 
 In the Catechism we have one of the most excellent 
 private writings of Luther. But the Augsburg Confes- 
 sion was prepared as a public document of the Lutheran 
 Church. It was as such signed by the political representa- 
 tives of the young Church. And in this Confession, more 
 particularly in the first twenty-one articles, pains have 
 been taken ''to give complete expression to the doctrinal 
 character of Lutheranism." 
 
 The Catechism does not aim at completeness. As in- 
 stances let us mention a few things. While the Cate- 
 chism in the Ten Commandments leads us to see our 
 sins, it does not give such a carefully guarded definition 
 of original sin as the source of individual sins as we 
 have in Article II of the Augsburg Confession. While 
 the teaching of the Catechism on the forgiveness of sins 
 rests upon the central doctrine of justification, yet there 
 is nowhere in the Catechism such clear and definite 
 statement of this great doctrine as we have it in Article 
 IV of the Confession. Neither do we find in the Cate- 
 chism such statements of the relation between justification 
 and sanctification as they are given in Articles VI and 
 XX of the Augsburg Confession. The Catechism, in the 
 explanation of the third article of the Apostles' Creed, 
 teaches beautifully of the saving work of the Holy Spirit 
 in the Church, but it cannot, according to its plan, deal 
 with such principles in the doctrines of the Church as we 
 
Ths Augsburg Concession. 35 
 
 find them expressed in Articles VII, VIII, XIII, XIV 
 and XV. The Augsburg Confession is an altogether 
 different kind of a Confession as compared with the 
 Catechism. Some of its statements and principles may 
 appeal less to the heart, but each one of these principles 
 is an essential pillar under the structure of the Church. 
 We cannot here go into details, but must refer to the 
 explanation of the articles in the third part of this book. 
 
 Augsburg Confession and Catechism mutually supple- 
 ment each other. Both are adapted for laymen because 
 they are brief and simple. All Lutherans should be 
 thoroughly at home in the Small Catechism. They 
 should so know it that they could always repeat it for 
 their comfort. But Lutherans who want to be intelligent 
 in church matters, who care to understand their Church 
 as distinguished from other churches, who desire to be 
 familiar with the principles constituting the life of their 
 Church, Lutherans who are called upon to lead and to 
 teach should be thoroughly familiar with the Augsburg 
 Confession as well as with Luther's Catechism. 
 
 XI. What is the Form of Concord and what should 
 be our Attitude towards it? 
 
 This document, the last of the confessional writings of 
 the Lutheran Church, was written for the purpose of 
 establishing peace at a time when, after the death of 
 Luther and Melanchthon, our dear Church was torn up 
 by doctrinal controversies. These controversies were 
 not unnecessary quarrels, for there were real difficulties 
 that had to be settled. And it took decades of serious 
 investigation, meditation and discussion before an agree- 
 ment could be effected. The Form of Concord consists 
 of two parts. Both deal with exactly the same questions, 
 only that the first part (Epitome) treats of these matters 
 in brief definitions, while the second part (solid, plain 
 and clear repetition and declaration) gives a longer 
 exposition. 
 
 The Form of Concord is necessarily more theological 
 in the treatment of its subjects than the Catechism and 
 even the Augsburg Confession. For this reason it can- 
 not claim the attention of the laymen in the same degree 
 
36 Thi^ Augsburg Coni^ession. 
 
 as it will arrest the interest of those that have studied 
 theology as a science. Yet as an illustration of some of 
 the doctrinal principles of the Augsburg Confession and 
 for the purpose of learning in what directions a legitimate 
 development of Lutheranism is to be sought it is very 
 helpful to read the corresponding and other additional 
 parts especially in the first part of the Form of Concord, 
 Our book, in its third part, therefore, will have frequent 
 references to the Form of Concord as well as to the other 
 confessional writings of our Church. The Form of 
 Concord is throughout a legitimate development of the 
 principles of the Augsburg Confession and its definitions 
 and expositions are of the greatest value for him who 
 wants to familiarize himself thoroughly with the doc- 
 trinal system of the Lutheran Church. "^ 
 
 *A student of this book should be in possession of the people's edition 
 of the Book of Concord, or the Symbolical Books of the Evangelical 
 Lutheran Church, translated from the original languages, and edited by 
 Dr. Jacobs. 
 
PART II 
 
 The Story of the Augsburg 
 Confession 
 
 I. Growth of the Reformation Movement. In order to 
 arrive at a starting point of this "Brief History," we shall, 
 invite the kind reader to follow us back to a critical mo- 
 ment in the history of the Reformation. On April 26th, 
 1 52 1, Luther had left Worms where he in such a heroic 
 way refused to retract what he had been teaching. One 
 month later, Charles V proclaimed the ban of the empire 
 against him and all his friends. This meant that the cause 
 of the Reformation was to be suppressed and its promot- 
 ers and supporters to be put to death. But this so-called 
 "Edict of \Vorms" could not be carried out in the domin- 
 ions of Germany where the princes were favorable to 
 Lutheranism. The Emperor's hands became tied as he 
 soon found himself on terms of war not only with the 
 King of France but also with the Pope. The cause of 
 the Gospel grew daily. Several nobles heretofore indiffer- 
 ent now became supporters of the Reformation move- 
 ment. These, together with the Elector of Saxony, 
 constituted quite a formidable influence. It meant a 
 great step forward in the development of the Reforma- 
 tion. Up to this time there had been only individual 
 followers of Luther, but from now on a reorganization 
 of the churches of the dominions on the basis of the 
 teachings of Luther takes place, and the princes as parts 
 of the Estates of the Empire, make themselves responsi- 
 ble for the movement. The changed situation could be 
 observed at the Diet of Spires in 1526, where the Luth- 
 eran princes had inscribed over their code of arms the 
 words : "Verbum Dei manet in aeternum," i. e., "The 
 word of God remaineth forever." The edict of Worms 
 was a dead letter. During the years up to 1529 the 
 foundations for the Lutheran Church were laid, Luther, 
 Melanchthon and Bugenhagen conducted visitations and 
 
 37 
 
38 The Augsburg Concession. 
 
 everywhere the theologians of the Lutheran Estates were 
 busy with the work of reorganizing the Church on the 
 basis of EvangeHcal principles. It was in 1529 when 
 Luther composed his two Catechisms. 
 
 2. The situation becomes critical. In June, 1528, at 
 Barcelona the Emperor had concluded a peace with the 
 Pope and he promised to use his whole power in sup- 
 pressing heresy. By the Treaty of Cambray, the follow- 
 ing year, the war with Francis I of France was also 
 brought to a conclusion. In this treaty Charles and 
 Francis both promised each other to suppress the Refor- 
 mation movement. Under such conditions another diet 
 was summoned to meet in Spires in 1529. The brother 
 of the Emperor, Ferdinand of Austria, was to preside. 
 Here the Catholics were in the majority, and, in harmony 
 with instructions from the Emperor, resolutions were 
 adopted which meant the death-knell of the Reformation. 
 Against these the Lutherans entered a solemn protest, 
 drawn up in a carefully prepared document and signed 
 by the protesting princes. This act gave to the Lutherans 
 the name Protestants. When Ferdinand refused to re- 
 ceive the document it was sent to the Emperor who was 
 at that time in Italy and about to be crowned by the 
 Pope. But neither was the Emperor inclined to listen. 
 Having gained free hands he is now bent upon either 
 bringing the Lutherans back again to the Church or to 
 crush the cause of the Reformation. The agreement 
 between the Emperor and the Pope was that Germany 
 should be cleaned of the Lutheran heresy. First, at- 
 tempts should be made to win the Protestant princes by 
 promises. If this should not avail threats were to be 
 used. The next step should be the use of force. Ferd- 
 inand was to co-operate with an Austrian army. The 
 Pope promised to induce other princes to assist. After 
 the political power of Protestantism had been crushed, 
 the inquisition was to be introduced to complete the work. 
 Such were the plans. The Romanists were rejoicing that 
 the Emperor as protector of the Catholic faith would 
 soon be on the ground. 
 
 3. But once more the arm of the Bmperor was checked. 
 
Th^ Augsburg CoNifESSioN. 39 
 
 God in His providence interfered with the plans against 
 Protestantism. The Turks, under Sultan Soliman, with 
 an army of 300,000 started their new march upon 
 Vienna, determined to conquer the whole Occident. Soli- 
 man carried an Emperor's crown with him which should 
 be placed upon his head after the overthrow of the 
 empire of Charles V. In vain did his brother Ferdinand 
 try to make peace with Soliman in order that the plans 
 against Protestantism might be carried out. It could not 
 be done. This changed the policy of the Emperor. He 
 needed the good will and support of the Protestant 
 Estates to battle successfully with the Turks. This con- 
 sideration induced Charles to summon in kind terms for 
 the spring of 1530 a diet at Augsburg. Here they would 
 all deliberate in mutual kindness on the religious cause 
 and at the same time try to agree on a mobilization plan 
 against the Turks. In the invitation of the Emperor, the 
 Protestants were even recognized as one party of the 
 empire, with which the Romanists would negotiate. 
 
 4. Two important colloquies. The Protestants, during 
 these most critical years, felt their political weakness 
 because they were doctrinally divided. As early as 1524, 
 it had become evident that Zwingli and Luther could not 
 agree on the doctrine of the Lord's Supper. The Protes- 
 tant cities in Southern Germany leaned to the views of 
 Zwingli, and Philip of Hessia, the most energetic of the 
 Protestant princes, was sympathizing with him. So it 
 came that in view of the threatening attitude of the 
 Roman Catholic forces, attempts were made to reach an 
 understanding in order that the Protestants might be 
 able to present a united front to any onslaught on their 
 cause. Two conferences were held, both of which are 
 memorable because here articles of faith were drawn up 
 which afterwards were used as sources for creating the 
 Augsburg Confession. 
 
 a. The Schwahach Articles must have been written 
 by the Wittenberg theologians, Melanchthon and Luther, 
 about July or August of 1529.* The object in view was 
 
 *For details see my artf-^le in Lutheran Quarterly, April, 1909, The 
 text is in Jacobs' Book of C ncord, Vol. II. 
 
40 The Augsburg Confession. 
 
 to effect an agreement, especially concerning the Lord's 
 Supper, between Brandenburg and Saxony on one hand 
 and the South German cities, who had been leaning to 
 Zwingli, on the other hand. So these articles were a 
 kind of a political document aiming at an alliance of all 
 the German Protestant forces against the Emperor and 
 the Catholic princes. For this reason they were first 
 kept secret and were not published until the Augsburg 
 diet was in session. They did not, however, accomplish 
 the desired union. The South German cities insisted on 
 a modification of the statements regarding the Real 
 Presence in the Lord's Supper. To this the princes of 
 Brandenburg and Saxony would not agree. In that day, 
 the conscience on matters of truth was the only deciding 
 factor. Even the laymen would not for one moment 
 think of bridging over doctrinal differences by union- 
 istic formulas for relieving a difficult situation. Rather 
 would these princes go down in defeat before the Em- 
 peror and suffer the loss of all they had, even their life, 
 than to make doctrinal concessions against their con- 
 science. But w^hile these Schwabach Articles did not 
 effect the desired union yet they have served a good 
 purpose : on this basis the doctrinal articles of the Augs- 
 burg Confession (the first twenty-one) were written. 
 
 b. The Marburg Articles (text in vol. II of Dr. 
 Jacobs' Book of Concord) were drawn up by Luther at 
 the close of a colloquy held in Marburg between Luther 
 and Zwingli on the 26. and 3d of October, 1529. Philip 
 of Hessia had invited both parties to meet in his palace. 
 Here both agreed on all doctrines with exception of 
 the one on the Lord's Supper, and the Marburg Articles 
 are a codification of agreement and disagreement between 
 the two reformers. They could not agree on the Lord's 
 Supper. These articles also may have aided Melanchthon 
 in shaping the first twenty-one articles of the Augsburg 
 Confession. 
 
 5. Melanchthon's work of writing the Confession. 
 Melanchthon, the co-laborer of Luther, was an accom- 
 plished master in formulating articles of doctrine. The 
 Elector of Saxony, under whose government he, together 
 
Tilt Augsburg Confession. 41 
 
 with Luther, was teaching in the Wittenberg University, 
 commissioned him with the important work of formulat- 
 ing articles on ''doctrines and abuses," to be submitted 
 to the Emperor at the diet as a defence of the religious 
 condition in the Saxon dominion. 
 
 a. The first plan. The opinion was held that the 
 main thing would be to explain to the Emperor why the 
 Lutherans had done away with a number of things, 
 which the Catholics insisted upon as matters of impor- 
 tance for the maintenance of the Church: such as the 
 administration of the communion by giving the bread 
 only, the unmarried life of the clergy, the mass, auricular 
 confession, the observation of ceremonies, monastic 
 vows. So Melanchthon began his work by writing the 
 articles which we now have in the second part of our 
 Confession. On these questions, articles must have been 
 agreed upon at Torgau (the so-called Torgau Articles), 
 before leaving for Augsburg. A work which especially 
 occupied Melanchthon was a somewhat lengthy introduc- 
 tion or preface to those articles on the abuses. He 
 finished it in Augsburg and wrote about it to Luther 
 who had been left at Coburg, a fortress near to Augs- 
 burg. (Luther could not appear at Augsburg because 
 the ban of the Empire was upon him.) This introduc- 
 tion, which according to later plans was set aside in favor 
 of an introduction to be written by Chancellor Dr. 
 Brueck, has recently been found in the Nuremberg 
 archive, and it is a skillfully written defense of the reli- 
 gious conditions in Saxony. It must be remembered that 
 at this time Melanchthon was writing the Confession as 
 a document which was to be an "Apology" for the Elector 
 of Saxony only. The Augsburg Confession was at first 
 not intended to be the Confession of all the Lutherans 
 at Augsburg. 
 
 b. What convinced Melanchthon that also articles on 
 doctrines should be submitted to the Bmperor? Dr. Eck, 
 the great enemy of the Lutherans, published a pamphlet 
 containing 404 articles against those that disturb the 
 peace of the Church. Here the Lutherans were put in 
 the same class with Zwingli, Carlstadt and the Ana- 
 
42 The^ Augsburg Con?e:ssion. 
 
 baptists. A copy of this pamphlet was sent to the 
 Emperor. By remarks, with red ink on the margin, the 
 Lutherans were accused of teaching the most radical 
 heresies. Of this Melanchthon heard in Augsburg and 
 it convinced him that the document, to be submitted to 
 the Emperor, should not only be an "apology," but a 
 confession as well. So Melanchthon began to write on 
 what we now have in the first twenty-one articles. For 
 this he could make use of the Schwabach Articles. 
 
 c. The first draft is sent to Luther. While waiting 
 for the Emperor to arrive at Augsburg, Melanchthon 
 had so far finished the Confession that on May nth the 
 Elector could send a special messenger to Luther at 
 Coburg with the document. Luther should look over it 
 and feel free to write suggestions on the margin. May 
 15th his answer came back: '1 have read over Magister 
 Philip's Apology. It pleases me very well, and I know 
 of nothing therein to be improved or changed ; nor would 
 it become me, for I cannot move so gently. Christ, our 
 Lord grant that it may bring much and great fruit as we 
 hope and pray." Luther could not have expressed him- 
 self so mildly as had done Melanchthon and as it was 
 necessary at this occasion. The Emperor did not arrive 
 until 15th of June. During all this time Melanchthon 
 continued to improve the Confession, making changes 
 daily. Yet that first draft of May nth was the only one 
 sent to Luther before the delivery of the Confession. 
 There was so complete harmony between Luther and 
 Melanchthon at that time that there was no need of con- 
 stantly keeping Luther informed of every change made. 
 Furthermore the suspense in which the Lutherans lived 
 during those days of awaiting the arrival of the Emperor 
 was of such a nature that a historian has no difficulty in 
 understanding why Luther did not receive a draft every 
 few days. 
 
 d. How did this first draft compare with the Confes- 
 sion as it zuas finally delivered? This would naturally 
 be an interesting question. What did Luther see of the 
 articles in the document as read before the Emperor? 
 We do not know for sure, because that first draft of May 
 
Tnt Augsburg Coni^ession. 43 
 
 nth has not been preserved. A draft, however, of a 
 later time, which shows us in what condition the Confes- 
 sion was about the first of June has recently been dis- 
 covered in the Nuremberg Archives and was published 
 by Professor Kolde as "Die aelteste uns bekannte Redak- 
 tion der Augsburgischen Konfession." It is astonishing 
 to see how different the Confession in that state of its 
 development was from the final form in which it was 
 delivered. Our Article IV was there the fifth article. Ar- 
 ticles VII and VIII were one article. Our article on the 
 Lord's Supper (X) was the ninth article. Articles XX, 
 XXI and XXVII were not yet written. Furthermore, 
 in Article II there was no rejection of the Pelagians. In 
 the article on Justification (now Article IV) there was 
 not yet the sentence : ''This faith God imputes for right- 
 eousness in his sight. — Rom. 3 and 4." In Articles VII and 
 VIII (now Article VII) the phrase ''in which the Gospel 
 is rightly taught" did not yet have the word "rightly." 
 Article VIII (later IX) on Baptism simply empha- 
 sized infant Baptism and offered no doctrine of Baptism. 
 In Article XVI (our seventeenth) on Christ's return to 
 judgment the thought was expressed that the dead will 
 be raised "with the very body in which they died." This 
 was changed in the final reading. (See our interpreta- 
 tion of Article XVII.) These points can give us an idea 
 of how imperfect the Confession must have been when 
 Luther saw the first draft of May nth. 
 
 e. The confessional document which Melanchthon 
 had been preparing exclusively in the name of the Elec- 
 tor of Saxony becomes by agreement of the several 
 Estates the common Confession of all the Lutherans at 
 Augsburg. How did that come about? The Emperor 
 was approaching and was soon expected to be in Augs- 
 burg. Persistent rumors that the Papists together with 
 the Roman Catholic princes had succeeded in making the 
 Emperor very suspicious of the Lutherans and unfriendly 
 to them convinced the Lutheran Estates that they should 
 stand together and hand in a common Confession. There 
 was at first a little difficulty with Philip of Hessia. He 
 was opposed to the sentence in Article X on the Lord's 
 
44 The Augsburg Confession. 
 
 Supper: "and we disapprove of those who teach other- 
 wise." He desired that Zwingli and the South German 
 cities should be taken in too. But Melanchthon, with the 
 others, was immovable. So Philip yielded. Melanch- 
 thon's introduction which had been prepared exclusively 
 with reference to conditions in Saxony was now removed 
 and the Saxon chancellor, Dr. Brueck, was instructed to 
 write an introduction in the name of all the Lutheran 
 Estates. On the 23d of June, after a final discussion of 
 the situation, the Confession was signed by the princes 
 who were willing to identify themselves with the cause 
 of Lutheranism. 
 
 6. The arrival of the Bmperor took place under very 
 spectacular circumstances. The Elector of Saxony car- 
 ried the sword of the Empire before him. To both sides 
 on horse back could be seen in gorgeous attire the ambas- 
 sadors, Campeggius and Pimpinelli. Next to the 
 Emperor in the parade followed the bigoted enemies of 
 the Reformation, King Ferdinand of Austria, Elector 
 Joachim I of Brandenburg and the Dukes of Saxony and 
 Bavaria. Right on the first day of meeting with the 
 Emperor an occasion offered itself to the Lutherans to 
 give testimony of their faith. After the ceremonies of 
 welcome were over the papal ambassador lifted up his 
 hands to pronounce the benediction of the Pope. But 
 while all fell upon their knees the Lutheran princes re- 
 mained standing. It took courage so to act, but the 
 cause of the Gospel was to them a matter of conscience, 
 and they regarded it as their duty to confess the truth 
 under all circumstances. On the following day the Cor- 
 pus Christi procession was to take place and the Luth- 
 erans were expected to participate. But they refused. 
 A controversy arose over the preaching on Sundays. The 
 Emperor insisted that the Lutheran ministers should not 
 preach during the diet. Margrave George of Branden- 
 burg replied that for conscience sake he could not forbid 
 his ministers to preach the Gospel. He would be willing 
 to lay down his head before the Emperor, but could not 
 yield to this demand. The Emperor answered in broken 
 German: "Not head off, dear prince." Charles V was 
 
Tut Augsburg Coni^ession. 45 
 
 not without good traits. When his brother Ferdinand 
 urged him to force the Protestants to yield, he replied: 
 'It becomes princes to be magnanimous." 
 
 7. The opening of the Diet. On the 20th of June all 
 proceeded in a splendid procession to the cathedral where 
 the Diet was opened with very impressive services. The 
 embassador of the Pope in addressing the Emperor, ad- 
 monished him to do away with the schism in the Church. 
 After the service all marched in procession to the conven- 
 tion hall. The first question was about the program for 
 the Diet. The plan of the Romanists was first to arrive 
 at an agreement as to the defence of the empire against 
 the Turks, and then, after the Lutheran Estates had 
 pledged themselves, to take up the religious question. 
 But the Lutherans insisted that the religious question 
 should be the first on the program. And they prevailed. 
 
 8. The situation. During the days of the Augsburg 
 Diet a comedy was presented on the stage, which was 
 characteristic of the situation: A scholar (Reuchlin) 
 appears with a bunch of straight and crooked sticks, 
 throws them down and goes. A theologian (Erasmus) 
 comes, and trying in vain to make the crooked sticks 
 straight, runs off. A third man in the garb of a monk 
 (Luther) appears, and after he had set fire to the sticks, 
 goes. Another in the robe of the Emperor (Charles) 
 comes and draws his sword against the flames, but with 
 this he intensifies the fire and goes off with indignation. 
 At last the head of the church appears, and, consulting 
 with himself for a moment what should be done to ex- 
 tinguish the fire, beholds two vessels, one with oil, another 
 with water. He takes the one with oil, pours it into the 
 fire and runs off in consternation. 
 
 9. The delivery of the Confession. 
 
 a. Attempts to prevent a public reading. The Em- 
 peror and all the Romanists knew that a public reading 
 of a Confession of the Lutherans would strengthen their 
 cause. The Papal embassadors who, in co-operation with 
 enemies of the Reformation like Dr. Eck, had been busy 
 in spreading so many lies against their adversaries, feared 
 that such a public reading might explode most of their 
 
46 The Augsburg CoNifEssioN. 
 
 tales. But the Lutherans were determined to be heard in 
 public. On Friday afternoon at a certain moment all 
 Lutheran princes arose, and Chancellor, Dr. Brueck, as 
 their spokesman, said that they were now ready for a 
 public reading of their Confession. The Em_peror 
 answered that it was now too late and that they should 
 simply hand over to him the document. Dr. Brueck 
 replied promptly that they could not agree to a disposing 
 of this important matter in such a way. They had been 
 too much slandered as to what doctrines they hold and 
 therefore they owed it to the truth to show publicly of 
 what spirit they were. They would therefore plead with 
 the Emperor to permit a public reading. The Emperor 
 insisted upon his demand. But the Lutherans did not 
 give up. Dr. Brueck said : The Emperor had listened so 
 often in cases of much less importance and they could 
 not believe that he would now refuse in a matter that had 
 so much to do with the welfare of the souls of his sub- 
 jects. This appeal was too much for Charles V, he 
 yielded and appointed the afternoon of the following day 
 for the reading. As place for the meeting he designed 
 the chapel of his lodging place instead of the convention 
 hall. This perhaps was with the purpose of limiting the 
 hearers, as the chapel did not hold more than about 200 
 persons. Again the Emperor demanded that the docu- 
 ment containing their Confession should be handed him 
 now. But Dr. Brueck declared that they could not give 
 up the document at this time, they had been hurried in 
 the composition of it and they would yet like to write a 
 clean copy. While this was true, their fear was that 
 even yet the intrigues of the Papal embassadors might 
 succeed in frustrating the public reading. Again the 
 Emperor yielded. 
 
 b. The public reading of the Augsburg Confession. 
 In the afternoon at 3 o'clock, the 25th of June — it was on 
 a Saturday — the palace of the bishop was filled to its 
 utmost capacity, and many were standing outside before 
 the windows. All were eager to hear the Confession of 
 the Lutherans. Another trick, however, was tried by 
 the Romanists to minimize the effect of this public read- 
 
The Augsburg Coni^ession. 47 
 
 ing. While Dr. Brueck stood there with the Latin and 
 Dr. Beyer (another chancellor of the Saxony) with the 
 German copy in hand the Emperor demanded that the 
 Latin copy be heard. Many who were present could not 
 have understood the Latin. At this moment the Elector 
 of Saxony arose and with a firm voice insisted that since 
 they were on German soil the German copy should be 
 read. Again the Emperor yielded. Now Dr. Beyer, a 
 man with a penetrating voice, read loud and slowly word 
 for word the articles of the Confession. He was heard 
 even by the crowds standing outside. When Dr. Beyer 
 had finished, he returned his copy to Dr. Brueck, who 
 again handed both the Latin and the German document 
 to the secretary of the Emperor. But Charles taking 
 both copies into his hands put the Latin into his pocket 
 and gave the German to the archbishop of Alayence to 
 be deposited in the archives of the empire."^ 
 
 c. What was the effect of this reading? What effect 
 did it have upon the Bmperorf There are different re- 
 ports. Brentz writes that when the Confession was read 
 the Emperor slept. But when we remember that the 
 reading took two hours, the napping for a moment on the 
 part of a layman should not be interpreted as meaning 
 a lack of interest. Court preacher Coelestine of Bran- 
 denburg remarks that the Emperor slept for a moment 
 only. Dr. Schaff says: A moment's napping here does 
 not mean a lack of interest in this Confession, for when 
 a few weeks later the reply of the Catholics (the 
 ''Confutation") was read, Charles V was again soundly 
 asleep. Jonas reports that the Emperor had watched 
 with a good deal of interest. — What effect did the reading 
 have upon other Catholics? Duke William of Bavaria 
 said in a friendly remark to the Elector of Saxony: ''I 
 have been misinformed concerning this doctrine." To 
 Dr. Eck, his own professor at Ingolstadt, he addressed 
 this question: "Can you refute this doctrine?" Eck 
 answered: "With the Fathers I can, but not with the 
 Scriptures." "Then," the reply was, "I see that the Luth- 
 
 *The history of these two copies of our Confession will be briefly 
 related at another place. 
 
48 The; Augsburg CoNifESSiON. 
 
 erans are in the Scriptures, and we outside." The 
 CathoHc bishop Stadion of Augsburg said after the read- 
 ing of the Confession: "It is the truth, the pure truth, 
 we cannot deny it." A beautiful remark is reported of 
 the Confessor of the Emperor. He said to Melanchthon : 
 ''You have a theology which can be understood only by 
 one who prays much." The Cardinal Campeggius is 
 reported to have said: ''Personally I could admit this 
 doctrine, but officially we must oppose it." — What was 
 the effect upon the Lutherans themselves? They felt 
 greatly encouraged. They felt that they had given an 
 account of themselves as a church and that they had a 
 right to exist. The Confession now became their flag 
 which they were determined to follow. A number of 
 cities subscribed to the Confession here at Augsburg. 
 Several princes who joined later had received the decid- 
 ing impression at this occasion. Spalatin, one of Luther's 
 co-laborers, wrote: "This was a day that witnessed one 
 of the greatest acts that has even taken place on this 
 globe. A Confession has been delivered in Latin and 
 German, so Scriptural in character, as the world has not 
 heard the like in a thousand years." Luther rejoiced that 
 he had been permitted to see this day when the words 
 of the Psalmist (Ps. 119:46) had been fulfilled: "I 
 will speak of thy testimonies also before Kings, and will 
 not be ashamed." These words of the Psalmist have 
 been used as a motto over all the editions of the Augs- 
 burg Confession. 
 
 10. Defending the Confession. 
 
 a. A Confession of the Romanists. On the follow- 
 ing day the Emperor convened the Catholic Estates and 
 divines in order to counsel with them what should be 
 done. Dr. Eck's advice was: The Emperor should not 
 argue any longer with the Lutherans but simply use his 
 sword. One prince said: "They have delivered a docu- 
 ment with black ink, the Emperor should now draw a 
 line through it with red ink." Another replied to this : 
 "But look out, the 'presilje' (red ink then was prepared 
 from roots imported from Brazil) may squirt into your 
 eyes." He referred to the political power of the Protes- 
 
The Augsburg Confession. 49 
 
 tants. The Emperor himself felt that he was not yet 
 ready for an open break with the Lutherans. He needed 
 them in the campaign against the Turks. "Not yet" 
 (nondum) — this was all through life the motto of 
 Charles V. Wait with striking until quite ready, but 
 then strike hard. So it was resolved to prepare a refuta- 
 tion of the Lutheran Confession and to submit it to the 
 Diet. A committee of theologians was appointed to do 
 the work. Dr. Eck was among them, with other fanatic 
 enemies of the Reformation. These men considered this 
 an excellent opportunity to denounce Luther's writings 
 in the name of the Emperor. One chapter of the work 
 was given the superscription: ''The fruit of Luther's 
 teaching as it can be seen in Anabaptism." They labored 
 hard to prepare a work that should be a general accusa- 
 tion of Protestantism. It comprised 351 pages. It has 
 recently been found in the Vatican. But when this work 
 was presented to the Emperor and the Estates on the 
 15th of July it was rejected as too long, too superficial, 
 and too insulting. The committee was told to do the 
 work with more modesty, also with more thoroughness. 
 And then it should be written in the name of the Emperor 
 as his own Confession. No wonder that the members 
 of the committee felt humiliated. They complained of 
 the trouble they had with the Lutherans. Luther wrote 
 from Coburg: "Poor carpenters make many chips and 
 spoil much lumber." The second attempt was again 
 a failure. In the third endeavor they succeeded. Their 
 work was accepted. But two secretaries of the Emperor 
 had to help them. On the 3d of August, thirty-eight 
 days after the delivery of the Lutheran Confession, it 
 was publicly read. The reading was no success. The 
 secretary who read it got badly mixed up in the pages 
 and read things that did not belong together. Worse 
 than this was the poor theology of the document and the 
 ridiculous way of proving points of Roman doctrine 
 from Scripture. Here is an illustration. To prove that 
 the laymen are entitled to bread only in the Communion 
 and should not want wine, i Sam. 2 : 36 was quoted : 
 "And it shall come to pass that every one that is left 
 
50 The Augsburg Con^i^ssion. 
 
 in thine house shall come and crouch to him for a piece 
 of silver and a morsel of bread, and shall say : Put me, 
 I pray thee, into one of the priest's offices, that I may eat 
 a piece of bread." The Lutherans were accused of hav- 
 ing laughed loudly during the reading. With the 
 presentation of passages like these, they were certainly 
 excusable. The Roman Catholics have always been 
 ashamed of this so-called ''Confutation." It was a long 
 time before it was published. Translated into English 
 it is found in vol. II of Dr. Jacobs' Book of Concord 
 (not the ''People's Edition"). 
 
 b. The answer of the Lutherans. The Lutherans, of 
 course, wanted to reply and defend their Confession. 
 But they were denied a copy of the "Confutation." Then 
 they were told that a copy should be given them if they 
 would promise not to reply. This they could not prom- 
 ise. They were expected simply to accept the Confuta- 
 tion as this was the Emperor's Confession, who could 
 and would not tolerate a religious division in the Empire. 
 But the Lutherans felt themselves bound in their con- 
 science to abide with their own Confession of which 
 they were convinced that it expressed the truth of the 
 Scriptures. So they felt that it was their sacred duty 
 to defend their Confession. Now something arose which 
 aided Melanchthon wonderfully in meeting all the points 
 of Roman objection against the Confession which they 
 had delivered. For a time of three months he was, on 
 the side of the Lutherans, part of a large committee, 
 appointed by the Emperor to consider the possibility of 
 an agreement. Here Melanchthon met with all the 
 thoughts expressed in the "Confutation." The attempt 
 to reach an agreement failed, as had been predicted by 
 Luther at Coburg, who knew too well the spirit of the 
 Roman Catholic Church. But these three months' de- 
 liberations with the Catholics so enriched the though'ts 
 of Melanchthon that with the additional aid of some 
 notes taken down during the reading of the "Confuta 
 tion" he was now ready to write his Apology of the 
 Augsburg Confession, a document that has always been 
 highly valued as a confessional writing of the Lutheran 
 
The Augsburg Con^e:ssion. 51 
 
 Church. The Apology was also offered to the Emperor 
 at the Diet by Dr. Brueck. But it was not accepted. 
 
 II. A brief review of the history of the texts of the 
 Augsburg Confession. 
 
 a. What became of those tivo copies delivered at 
 Augsburg? We heard that Charles V took both to him- 
 self and then handed the German to the Archbishop 
 of Mayence to be preserved in the archives of the Empire 
 while he put the Latin copy into his own pocket. 
 
 What became of the German copy? It was deposited 
 in the archives of Mayence. But when the council of 
 Trent was to be held, in 1545, this copy was taken to 
 Italy and never returned. It may yet exist in some 
 archive of Italy. Professor Haase of Jena has searched 
 the Vatican library for it, but in vain. For two hundred 
 years it had been believed that the text in the German 
 Book of Concord (the text used by the Germans to-day) 
 was identical with the German copy delivered at Augs- 
 burg. When the Book of Concord, the book containing 
 all the confessional writings of the Lutheran Church, was 
 to be published, the Elector of Brandenburg sent his 
 court preacher Coelestin to Mayence on the mission of 
 bringing home a verified copy of the German original. 
 But he was deceived by the secretaries of the archive 
 and partly committed an act of deception himself. As 
 the German original had not been returned since it was 
 sent to Trent, another copy of inferior value, dating 
 from a time when the Confession was yet in the process 
 of creation, had been put in its place. This copy, of 
 course, did not have the signature of the princes. 
 Coelestin added these himself. So the Book of Con- 
 cord received its German text. Two hundred years later 
 George Gottlieb Weber discovered the deception and 
 published it in a work of two volumes ("Kritische 
 Geschichte der Augsburg Konfession"). 
 
 What became of the Latin text? Charles V deposited 
 it in the archives of Brussels, the capital of the Nether- 
 lands over which he was ruler (King) in a special sense. 
 But when his son, the fanatic Philip II of Spain, had 
 ascended the throne and at the time when the Duke Alva 
 
52 The Augsburg Coni^ession. 
 
 in the name of the King conducted his dreadful persecu- 
 tions against the Protestants in the Netherlands, Philip 
 wrote to him that on his return he should bring with him 
 the Confession to Spain *'in order that they (the Protes- 
 tants) might not hold it as a Koran/' and that he should 
 "'be careful that the original be given him, and not a copy, 
 and that no other, not even a trace of it, be left, so that 
 so pernicious a book may be forever destroyed." From 
 a receipt given, we know that when Alva returned to 
 Spain (1573) he took the Confession with him which 
 has no doubt been destroyed. 
 
 b. Now the question will be asked : What text, then, 
 is it zvhich we use in our English Lutheran churches? 
 The EngHsh Lutherans are a good deal better off with 
 their English text than the Germans are with their Ger- 
 man text. The Germans have always to correct their 
 German text after the Latin which we have in the Book 
 of Concord, Our English text is a translation of this 
 Latin text. How did the Lutheran Church get this Latin 
 text? When the Lutherans came home from Augsburg 
 Melanchthon published the Confession in both languages. 
 You ask how could that be reliably done since the 
 originals were not in his possession? But do not forget 
 that he had all the material in hand, from which the 
 clean copies for delivery had been made shortly before 
 the public reading. 
 
 c. Is there a way for us to find out hozv the first 
 publication of Melanchthon (the so-called Bditio prin- 
 ceps of 1530) compares zvith those official copies delivered 
 at the Diet? Although these copies are lost, as we have 
 seen, yet we are even here not altogether helpless. When 
 the Confession was in process of preparation, and espe- 
 cially when it was about completed, there were copies 
 taken from it by the different parties interested. There 
 are yet thirty-nine of these in existence. Some of them, 
 it is true, were taken when the Confession was yet very 
 incomplete. To this class belongs the German text in 
 the German Book of Concord. But some of these copies 
 were taken after the completion of the document, at the 
 time when the Lutherans were ready to deliver it. These 
 
The Augsburg Concession. 53 
 
 copies have even the signatures affixed, a class of manu- 
 scripts regarded as especially reliable. From the Latin 
 text in its completed form we have six copies and one 
 French translation. The late Prof. P. Tschackert of 
 Goettingen has done us a service in publishing a book in 
 which he, by careful comparison of all those manuscripts, 
 has created a text, German and Latin, side by side, from 
 which the original and lost copies cannot have differed 
 very materially.* 
 
 d. What do we find when we make the comparison f 
 We shall here not go into details, as we can refer to our 
 pamphlet on the ''Altered and the Unaltered Augustana" 
 published by the German Literary Board, Burlington, la. 
 Only this may be stated : Melanchthon in his first edition 
 for publication sought to improve the text at a number 
 of points. In that day they did not feel that an official 
 document should not be altered. 
 
 e. Among the editions of the Augsburg Confession, 
 which followed in quick succession, there is one that is 
 especially known as the "altered" Confession (the 
 Variata) . It is the edition of 1540. While in the preced- 
 ing editions the changes merely aimed at making the 
 thoughts clearer, in this edition there are changes of 
 doctrinal significance especially pertaining to the Lord's 
 Supper (Article X) and Free Will (XVIII). These 
 alterations became the cause of much controversy in the 
 Lutheran Church, especially since there were those who 
 under the shield of these changes labored to alter the 
 character of Lutheranism. So it became a custom in the 
 Lutheran Church to make a distinction between an al- 
 tered and an unaltered Augsburg Confession. Subscrip- 
 tion to the unaltered Confession was regarded as a better 
 safeguard for pure Lutheran teaching. This question has 
 been thoroughly treated in the pamphlet mentioned. 
 
 12. A few remarks on the history of the significance 
 of the Augsburg Confession. 
 a. What was the significance of the Confession during 
 
 _ *With the aid of this book (Die unversenderte Au.srsburgische Konfes- 
 sion, deutsch und lateinisch, nach den besten Handschriften aus dem 
 Besitze^ der Unterzeichner. Leipzig 1910) it is now easy to make the 
 comparison. 
 
54 The Augsburg Confession. 
 
 the time from the Diet at Augsburg, 1530, up to the Reli- 
 gious Peace Treaty at Augsburg, 1555? It must be re- 
 membered that at the time when the Confession was 
 written there was no talk of creating a creed to which 
 the pastors and churches should obligate themselves. 
 The Confession was simply intended as a document by 
 which the Lutherans wanted to give account of their 
 »loctrinal position before the Emperor and the Estates 
 of Germany. It was therefore the princes who signed 
 the Confession, not the theologians. Yet the feeling 
 that the essential principles of the Lutheran Reformation 
 had here been brought to an expression created within 
 all followers of Luther a very high esteem for this 
 document. All Lutherans, of their own free will, wanted 
 to be adherents of the Augsburg Confession and they 
 were known by their opponents as such. Charles V from 
 now on up to the Religious Peace Treaty at Augsburg 
 was bent upon two things: (i) to crush the political 
 power of the Protestants and (2) by colloquies and con- 
 ferences to unite the Lutherans with the Roman Catho- 
 lics. At these conferences the question was always 
 asked: What do the Lutherans teach according to the 
 Confession delivered at Augsburg, and what may they 
 be induced to concede? At the Augsburg Religious 
 Peace Treaty the Lutherans were recognized as adherents 
 of the Augsburg Confession and an agreement was signed 
 according to which, among all Protestants, the adherents 
 of the Augsburg Confession only should enjoy toleration. 
 The Anabaptists, Zwinglians and Calvinists were not 
 included. The Calvinists tried to secure toleration by 
 saying that they also could subscribe to the Confession 
 in the form in which it had been published from 1540 on 
 (the altered edition with its changes in Article X, where 
 the phrases ''truly present" and ''they disapprove of those 
 who teach otherwise" were omitted. See the interpreta- 
 tion of Article X in the third part of this book). 
 
 b. What was the significance of the Confession from 
 ^555, ^P io the end of the Thirty Years' War, 1648? It 
 continued to be regarded as a political document with the 
 thought on the part of the Romanists — up to the time 
 
The Augsburg Conipession. 55 
 
 of the outbreak of the war— that as soon as it could be 
 proved that the Lutherans had departed from the Confes- 
 sion as it was delivered at Augsburg, the Augsburg Reli- 
 gious Peace Treaty was null and void. During^ this 
 period the consciousness of the Lutherans of the differ- 
 ence between the altered and the unaltered edition grew. 
 Confessional subscription to the ''unaltered" Augsburg 
 Confession and other confessional writings, as the case 
 was (first the Corpora doctrinse, then the Book of Con- 
 cord), on the part of the pastors, was demanded. 
 
 c. What has been the significance of the Confession 
 from the end of the Thirty Years' War (1648) on up to 
 our day? It is from now on merely a confessional docu- 
 ment with no political significance vv^hatever. Here, 1648, 
 at the peace treaty of Osnabrueck, which concluded the 
 Thirty Years' War, for the first time since the days of 
 the Emperor Theodosius the Great (385), the principle 
 of the freedom of conscience in religious matters was 
 recognized. (Of course, there was the fatal restriction 
 contained in the paragraph which gave to the individual 
 princes the right to create uniformity of faith within 
 their own borders by forcing those who refused conver- 
 sion to emigrate. Cuius regio, eius religio. This brought 
 the Salzburgers to our country.) From now on the dis- 
 cussion regarding the Augsburg Confession has been con- 
 fined to its theology, and a rich literature has sprung up. 
 All Lutheran churches in all countries, if they do not de- 
 mand subscription to all the confessional writings of the 
 Lutheran Church, demand at least subscription to the 
 Augsburg Confession. 
 
PART III 
 
 An Interpretation of the Articles 
 of the Augsburg Confession 
 
The Augsburg Confession* 
 
 DELIVERED TO THE EMPEROR CHARLES V., AT THE 
 DIET OF AUGSBURG, A. D. 1530. 
 
 [This Translation is made from the Latin Editio Princeps of 1530-31, the 
 authority of which, equally with that of the German Editio Princeps, sur- 
 passes all other known Editions. It has been carefully prepared by a 
 Joint Committee of The General Council, The General Synod, The United 
 Synod of the South, and the Joint Synod of Ohio, as a Common Standard 
 of The Augsburg Confession in English. The words in brackets are 
 inserted from the German Editio Princeps.} 
 
 PREFACE 
 
 Most Invincible Bniperor, Cccsar Augustus, most Clement Lord: 
 Inasmuch as Your Imperial Majesty has summoned a Diet 
 of the Empire here at Augsburg to deHberate concerning 
 measures against the Turk, that most atrocious, hereditary and 
 ancient enemy of the Christian name and religion, in what way 
 effectually to withstand his furor and assaults by strong and 
 lasting military provision; and then also concerning dissen- 
 sions in the matter of our holy religion and Christian Faith, 
 that in this matter of religion the opinions and judgments of 
 parties might be heard in each other's presence, and considered 
 and weighed among ourselves in charity, leniency and mutual 
 kindness, to the end that the things in the Scriptures which on 
 either side have been differently interpreted or misunderstood, 
 being corrected and laid aside, these matters may be settled 
 and brought back to one perfect truth and Christian concord, 
 that for the future one pure and true religion may be embraced 
 and maintained by us, that as we all serve and do battle under 
 one Christ, so we may be able also to live in unity and con- 
 cord in the one Christian Church. And inasmuch as we, the 
 undersigned Electors and Princes, with others joined with us, 
 have been called to the aforesaid Diet, the same as the other 
 Electors, Princes and Estates, in obedient compliance with the 
 Imperial mandate we have come to Augsburg, and, what we 
 do not mean to say as boasting, we were among the first to be 
 here. 
 
 Since then Your Imperial Majesty caused to be proposed to 
 the Electors, Princes and other Estates of the Empire, also 
 
 *The text of the Confession is that of the People's Edition of the Book 
 of Concord, translated from the Latin and edited by Dr. H. E. Jacobs and 
 published by the General Council Publication Board, Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 59 
 
6o The Augsburg Coni^ession. 
 
 here at Augsburg at the very beginning of this Diet, among 
 other things, that, by virtue of the Imperial Edict, the several 
 Estates of the Empire should present their opinions and judg- 
 ments in the German and Latin languages, after due delibera- 
 tion, answer was given to Your Imperial Majesty, on the 
 ensuing Wednesday, that on the next Friday the Articles of our 
 Confession for our part would be presented. 
 
 Wherefore, in obedience to Your Imperial Majesty's wishes, 
 we offer, in this matter of religion, the Confession of our 
 preachers and of ourselves, showing what manner of doctrine 
 from the Holy Scriptures and the pure Word of God has been 
 up to this time set forth in our lands, dukedoms, dominions and 
 cities, and taught in our churches. And if the other Electors, 
 Princes and Estates of the Empire will present similar writings, 
 to wit, in Latin and German, according to the said Imperial 
 proposition, giving their opinions in this matter of religion, here 
 before Your Imperial Majesty, our most clement Lord, we, 
 with the Princes and friends aforesaid, are prepared to confer 
 amicably concerning all possible ways and means, as far as may 
 be honorably done, that we may come together, and, the matter 
 between us on both sides being peacefully discussed without 
 offensive strife, the dissension, by God's help, may be done away 
 and brought back to one true accordant religion ; for as we all 
 serve and do battle under one Christ, we ought to confess the 
 one Christ, and so, after the tenor of Your Imperial Majesty's 
 Edict, everything be conducted according to the truth of God, 
 which, with most fervent prayers, we entreat of God. 
 
 But, with regard to the other Electors, Princes and Estates, 
 if they hold that this treatment of the matter of religion after 
 the manner w^hich Your Imperial Majesty as so wisely brought 
 forward, namely, with such mutual presentation of writings and 
 calm conferring together among ourselves, should not proceed, 
 or be unfruitful in results; we, at least, leave behind the clear 
 testimony that we decline or refuse nothing whatever, allowed 
 of God and a good conscience, which may tend to bring about 
 Christian concord; as also Your Imperial Majesty and the 
 other Electors and Estates of the Empire, and all who are 
 rnoved by sincere love and zeal for religion, and who will 
 give an impartial hearing to this matter, will graciously perceive 
 and more and more understand from this our Confession. 
 
 Your Imperial Majesty also, not only once but often, gra- 
 ciously signified to the Electors, Princes and Estates of the 
 Empire, and at the Diet of Spires held A. D. 1526, according 
 to the form of Your Imperial instruction and commission 
 given and prescribed, caused it to be stated and publicly pro- 
 claimed, that Your Majesty, in dealing with this matter of 
 religion, for certain reasons which were alleged in Your 
 Majesty's name, was not willing to decide and could not 
 determine anything, but that Your Majesty would diligently 
 use Your Majesty's office with the Roman Pontiff for the con- 
 
The Augsburg Coni^kssion. 6i 
 
 veiling of a General Council, as the same was publicly set forth 
 at greater length over a year ago at the last Diet which met 
 at Spires. There Your Imperial Majesty, through his High- 
 ness Ferdinand, King of Bohemia and Hungary, our friend 
 and clement Lord, as well as through the Orator and Imperial 
 Commissioners, caused this, among other things, to be pro- 
 claimed: that Your Imperial Majesty had known of and pon- 
 dered the resolution of Your Majesty's Representative in the 
 Empire, and of the President and Imperial Counsellors, and 
 the Legates from other Estates convened at Ratisbon, concern- 
 ing the calling of a Council, and that this also was adjudged 
 by Your Imperial Majesty to be of advantage; and because 
 the matters to be adjusted between Your Imperial Majesty 
 and the Roman Pontiff were nearing agreement and Christian 
 reconciliation. Your Imperial Majesty did not doubt that the 
 Roman Pontiff could be induced to hold a General Council; 
 therefore Your Imperial Majesty himself signified that he 
 would endeavor to secure the Chief Pontiff's consent together 
 with Your Imperial Majesty to convene such General Council, 
 and that letters to that effect would be publicly issued with all 
 possible expedition. 
 
 In the event, therefore, that the dift'erences between us and 
 the other parties in the matter of religion cannot be amicably 
 and in charity settled here before Your Imperial Majesty, we 
 offer this in all obedience, abundantly prepared to join issue 
 and to defend the cause in such a general, free, Christian Coun- 
 cil, for the convening of which there has always been accordant 
 action and agreement of votes in all the Imperial Diets held 
 during Your Majesty's reign, on the part of the Electors, 
 Princes and other Estates of the Empire. To this General 
 Council, and at the same time to Your Imperial Majesty, we 
 have made appeal in this greatest and gravest of matters even 
 before this in due manner and form of law. To this appeal, 
 both to Your Imperial Majesty and to a Council, we still adhere, 
 neither do we intend, nor would it be possible for us, to relin- 
 quish it by this or any other document, unless the matter 
 between us and the other side, according to the tenor of the 
 latest Imperial citation, can be amicably and charitably settled 
 and brought to Christian concord, of which this also is our 
 solemn and public testimony. 
 
 ARTICLE ONE. 
 Oi^ God. 
 
 Our churches, with common consent, do teach, that the decree 
 of the Council of Nicpea concerning the Unity of the Divine 
 Essence and concerning the Three Persons, is true and to be 
 believed without any doubting; that is to say, there is one Divine 
 Essence which is called and which is God : eternal, without 
 
62 The Augsburg Coni-kssion. 
 
 body, without parts, of infinite power, wisdom and goodness, the 
 Maker and Preserver of all things, visible and invisible; and 
 yet there are three Persons, of the same essence and power, 
 who also are co-eternal, the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. 
 And the term "person" they use as the Fathers haveused it,_ to 
 signify, not a part or quality in another, but that which subsists 
 of itself. 
 
 They condemn all heresies which have sprung up against this 
 article, as the Manicheans who assumed two principles (gods), 
 one Good, and the other Evil; also the Valentinians, Arians, 
 Eunomians, Mohammedans, and such. They condemn also the 
 Samosatenes, old and new, who contending that there is but 
 one Person, sophistically and impiously argue that the Word 
 and the Holy Ghost are not distinct Persons, but that "Word" 
 signifies a spoken word, and "Spirit" (Ghost) signifies motion 
 created in things. 
 
 1. Why is the reference here to "the decree of the 
 Council of Nicea," and not to the Apostles' Creed? 
 
 The Nicene Creed was always regarded in a special 
 sense as the foundation of orthodoxy (so at the Councils 
 of Constance 1414-18 and at Trent 1545-63), because it 
 had the expressed sanction of the orthodox fathers at the 
 first oecumenical council at Nicea (325) and was again 
 formally adopted at the second oecumenical Council at 
 Constantinople (385). The Apostles' Creed was a 
 gradual growth, a development of the Baptismal For- 
 mula, and had never been formally adopted by the 
 Church. The aim of Melanchthon here is to meet the 
 accusation of Dr. Eck that the Lutherans were not in 
 harmony with the Catholic Church on the doctrine of 
 God. 
 
 2. How does our Confession state the doctrine of the 
 Trinity? 
 
 (i) There is only one God, one divine Essence. 
 
 (2) But there are three ''persons'' in this one divine 
 Essence. 
 
 (3) As this word ''person" can easily be misunder- 
 stood and cannot claim to be an adequate expression of 
 what the ''persons" in the Trinity means, this word 
 ''person'' is defined: a. negatively: "not a part or 
 quality in another" (against the Samosatenes, see below) ; 
 
The: Augsburg Coni^i^ssion. 63 
 
 b. positively : "but that which subsists of itself." The 
 practical meaning is that to each of the three persons can 
 be applied the personal pronouns : "I," "Thou," "He." 
 To each one can be attributed a distinct work. The best 
 illustration as to what is meant by persons in the Trinity 
 we have in Luther's explanation of the Articles of the 
 Apostles' Creed. Of God the Father he says that He 
 "has created me and all that exists ; that He has given 
 and still preserves to me my body and soul . . . ; that 
 He daily provides me abundantly . . . protects me, 
 . . . and preserves me." Of Christ he says that He 
 was "begotten of the Father from eternity ... is my 
 Lord ; who has redeemed me ... in order that I might 
 be His . . ." Of the Holy Ghost He confesses that He 
 "has called me through the Gospel, enlightened me by 
 His gifts, and sanctified and preserved me in the true 
 faith ; . . . daily forgives abundantly all my sins, and 
 will raise up me and all the dead at the last day." 
 
 (4) The three persons are equally God (against 
 Arianism, see below). 
 
 (5) This one God is ''eternal, zvithout body, zuithoiit 
 parts, of infinite pozver, zvisdom and goodness, the Maker 
 and Preserver of all tilings, visible and invisible." The 
 point is that while the Triune God is to be thought of in 
 "persons" yet he is above all human limitations. 
 
 3. Which are the heresies rejected? 
 
 The Errorists here mentioned can be divided into three 
 classes : 
 
 (i) Those who deny the one essence. 
 
 a. The ''Manicheans who assumed two principles 
 (Gods), one good, and the other evil." 
 
 b. The Valentinians (a kind of Gnostics) who taught 
 a multiplicity of deities coming forth from a divine 
 source in pairs. 
 
 (2) Those who teach one God, but deny that this one 
 God exists in three persons. 
 
 a. The Mohammedans who emphasized the oneness 
 of God, rejecting the persons, but thus lost the reality 
 of God. The Mohammedans are an exception among all 
 
64 The: Augsburg Confi:ssion. 
 
 others here mentioned. They stand alone as having no 
 relation to Christianity. Why were they mentioned? It 
 must have been because Dr. Eck in his pamphlet put the 
 Lutherans on the level with the Turks ("worse than the 
 Turks"). 
 
 b. The Samosatenes, the followers of the heretic 
 bishop Paul of Samosata, making the Word, or the Son, 
 a mere power with which the man Jesus was endowed, 
 and also making the Holy Spirit an impersonal power. 
 The Samosatenes are here qualified by the remark: "old 
 and new." By the "w^w'^are meant certain men at the time 
 of the Reformation who rejected the Trinity (such as 
 Denk, Hetzer, who again were followed by Joris, L. and 
 F. Socinus). Melanchthon had such as Denk and Hetzer 
 in mind. They considered God as an abstract unity, de- 
 nied the divinity of Christ and regarded the Spirit as 
 an impersonal power. Hetzer particularly taught, as our 
 Confession here says, "that the Word and Holy Ghost 
 are not distinct persons, but that 'Word signifies a spoken 
 word, and that Spirit signifies the motion created in 
 things.' " All these heresies, and others, we find in 
 Unitarianism of to-day. But Unitarianism is not confined 
 to the few bearing the name Unitarians. The Univer- 
 salists, the Cincinnati "Protestants," the Swedenborgians, 
 the Russellites, and the Christian Scientists reject the 
 doctrine of the Trinity including in this the denial of the 
 essential divinity of Christ. The same position is taken 
 by many liberalists in whatever denomination they may 
 be found. The "Christians" (Campbellites) also have an 
 aversion against the mystery of the Trinity. All these 
 we would to-day understand as coming in under the term 
 of our Confession : the "new" Samosatenes. 
 
 (3) Those who admit three persons but who subor- 
 dinate Son and Spirit to the Father. 
 
 a. The Arians. From the beginning there were those 
 in the Church who thought that the Father was the real 
 God and that the Son was a being subordinate to the 
 Father, and God in a secondary sense only. At first this 
 view was not regarded as heretical. But when the bishop 
 Arius came and developed it to a consistent doctrine and 
 
The Augsburg Confession. 65 
 
 taught that Christ had been created by the Father and 
 that He had not been in existence from all eternity and 
 was not of the same essence as the Father, then the 
 Church saw the danger of this subordination-idea and 
 condemned the doctrine at the first synod ever held, the 
 oecumenical synod at Nicea, 325. The consideration was 
 this : There is no guarantee of our redemption, if Christ 
 was not, as the Nicene Creed says, the ''only begotten 
 Son of God" (against the "created" of Arius), and be- 
 gotten ''before all words, God of God, Light of Light, 
 very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one 
 substance with the Father." Melanchthon, in our Con- 
 fession, describes the persons of the Trinity as "of the 
 same essence and power, who are also co-eternal." 
 
 b. The Bunomians are the extreme wing of the Arians 
 who went so far as to say that there was no likeness 
 between the Father and the Son. The relation of the 
 Eunomians to the Arians is that of the superlative to the 
 comparative in grammar. 
 
 4. Can the doctrine of the Trinity claim the signifi- 
 cance of a fundamental doctrine? 
 
 a. There are those who say that it cannot. They say 
 the term "Trinity" is not found in the Scriptures. This 
 is true. But no one who takes his Bible seriously can 
 deny that the substance is there. We learn that God is 
 one and that He manifested Himself in three persons. 
 (Remember what we said above on the word "persons.") 
 
 b. Then they point to the speculative character of the 
 doctrine of the Trinity as, for instance, exhibited in the 
 Athanasian Creed. And yet while we admit that the 
 passages of this Creed, in their endeavor to bring to our 
 understanding as near as possible the great mystery of 
 the Trinity, sound speculative, could we do without them 
 in our believing and praying, in our teaching? In the 
 exercise of our practical piety, that is if we want to be 
 in harmony with the language of the Holy Scriptures, 
 we cannot make use of the one divine Essence without 
 assuming a manifestation in persons with a special rela- 
 tion to each other and to the world. A God as the 
 
(£ The Augsburg Confession. 
 
 Mohammedans and the Indians of America believe in is 
 of no comfort to the sinner. In Christ only we have a 
 reflection of the heart of the Father. But of Christ we 
 would know nothing except through the Holy Spirit. 
 
 c. Finally they say that a doctrine so diificult to un- 
 derstand cannot possibly he intended to be believed by 
 man as a condition of his salvation. But understanding 
 and believing should not be so identified. The doctrine 
 of the Trinity is a mystery which we can never under- 
 stand fully. We can only catch glimpses of it. But 
 different from not understanding this doctrine is to reject 
 and to ridicule it as the Antitrinitarian teachers have 
 done. It is a doctrine of fundamental importance for the 
 teaching of the Church which is entrusted with the care 
 of souls. And even simple Christians, although they may 
 not appreciate the doctrine connectively as theologians 
 can, the more they are real living Christians the more 
 will they be practical believers in the Holy Trinity. 
 
 ARTICLE TWO. 
 Oe Original Sin. 
 
 Also they teach, that since the fall of Adam, all men begotten 
 according to nature, are born with sin, that is, without the fear 
 of God, and with concupiscence; and that this disease, or vice 
 of origin, is truly sin, even now condemning and bringing eternal 
 death upon those not born again through baptism and the Holy 
 Ghost. 
 
 They condemn the Pelagians and others, who deny that the 
 vice of origin is sin, and who, to obscure the glory of Christ's 
 merit and benefits, argue that man can be justified before God by 
 his own strength and reason. 
 
 I. What is to be said on the importance of this 
 article? 
 
 We keep in mind that Article IV on Justification is the 
 central article of our Confession. And now this Article 
 II establishes the need of justification. As Melanchthon 
 says in the Apology : ''The recognition of original sin is 
 necessary. For the magnitude of the grace of Christ 
 cannot be understood, unless our diseases be recognized." 
 (Book of Concord, p. 80.) Article II of original sin is 
 
Thk Augsburg Concession. (i'j 
 
 the organic basis of the doctrine of justification by faith. 
 Claus Harms says : ''He who rejects original sin over- 
 throws the whole of Christianity." 
 
 2. Where does our article trace the origin of man's 
 sinful condition? 
 
 a. Back to the ''Fall of Adam" in paradise. It is 
 inherited. Therefore it is called ''disease or vice of 
 origin." The term "original sin" is not found in the 
 Scriptures, but the doctrine is there. In Romans 5:12 we 
 read : "Wherefore by one man sin entered into the 
 world and death by sin ; and so death passed upon all 
 men, for that all have sinned." In John 3 : 6 the Lord 
 says : "That which is born of the flesh is flesh." 
 
 Parallel passages on the subject of Original Sin are 
 found in the Apology, Article II ; Smalcald Articles, Part 
 II, Article I; Form of Concord, Article I (pp. 493, and 
 
 573). 
 
 b. But tracing our sinful condition backward zve must 
 stop zvith ''the Fall of Adam.'' We must not go still 
 further back, even to the creation of man as the Mani- 
 cheans did who said that he was created by an evil being 
 (Compare Article XIX of our Confession on the Cause 
 of Sin). If this was true then man could not be re- 
 deemed. Sin does not belong to our substance, but it has 
 come into man as something foreign to him. He was 
 created in the image of God (Gen. i : 27), and this image 
 which was lost in the fall of Adam is to be restored again 
 (Eph. 4: 24; Col, 3 : 10) through the regenerating power 
 of the Holy Spirit, or, as our article says, by being "born 
 again through baptism and the Holy Spirit." 
 
 3. Does our article have anything on the extent of 
 original sin? 
 
 It says that "all men, begotten according to nature, are 
 born with sin." So Christ is excluded because He was 
 born in a supernatural way through the influence of the 
 Holy Spirit. But Mary, the mother of our Lord, is 
 included (against the Roman Catholic Church) as she 
 was "begotten according to nature." 
 
68 The Augsburg Confession. 
 
 4. What definition of original sin do we find here? 
 
 *'Born with sin, that is without the fear of God, with- 
 out trust in God, and with concupiscence." First some- 
 thing negative and then something positive is mentioned. 
 (In the German text the order is reversed.) 
 
 a. N'egafive: "Without the fear of God, without trust 
 in God." In the second edition of the Confession, Mel- 
 anchthon took the Uberty of expressing it this way : ''and 
 can have by nature no true fear of God, no true love of 
 God, no true faith in God." We can have by nature a 
 false fear, or an instinctive fear of God, but not a true 
 fear. So we may also have a false trust in God, or a 
 relying on His kindness which forgets that He cannot 
 be love at the expense of His holiness. Let us be careful 
 to note what our fathers at Augsburg meant by this. In 
 the Apology, Melanchthon points to the German copy of 
 the Confession to show that it was not any sinful act, 
 but the inability of fearing and trusting God that they 
 had had in mind when writing the Confession. We must 
 distinguish between the mability of fearing and trusting 
 God and the actually not fearing and trusting Him. Dr. 
 Krauth says : ''There must be something in a child that 
 can love before it does love, and that something is born 
 with the child." (Conservative Reformation, p. 387.) 
 There is a lack of power to fear, trust and love God with 
 a true fear, trust and love. 
 
 b. Positive: "and with concupiscence." The old 
 translation ("and with evil propensities") was mislead- 
 ing. Our Confessors did not have in mind any individual 
 outbreaks of the evil within us, but they meant the de- 
 pravity which is the source of all evil inclinations. 
 Neither does concupiscence have special reference to the 
 sexual desires nor to the perv-erted and polluted exercise 
 of them. The word concupiscence is here used as Paul 
 does, Romans 7 : 7 and 8. Here he speaks of a "lust" 
 that has "wrought in me all manner of concupiscence." 
 As Luther says that he had begun to learn "not what sins 
 are, but what sin is." Luther speaking of original sin 
 says : "This sin is not done like all other sin, but it is, it 
 lives and does all sin, it is the essential sin which does not 
 
Th^ Augsburg Confession. 69 
 
 sin for an hour or for a certain time, but wherever and 
 as long as the person is there and that long is this sin 
 also." Therefore Paul, Romans 7, calls it sin fourteen 
 times, and he names the law of sin warring against the 
 law of the mind, an evil, a sinning sin. If concupiscence 
 had reference chiefly to the sins of the sixth command- 
 ment then many prominent sins would be left out of 
 consideration : pride, hatred, envy, and, above all, the 
 many sins springing from selfishness. (Compare Col. 
 2:18; 2 Cor. 10:2; Gal. 3:3; 3:19.) Melanchthon 
 says : "Flesh, when contrasted with spirit, does not mean 
 a part of man, but the whole man consisting of soul and 
 body. . . . Original sin is a living impulse producing 
 fruits, i. e., sins, in all parts of man and at all times of 
 his being, sins many of which the natural man does not 
 regard as sins : covetousness, unholy ambition, hatred, 
 envy, jealousy, pride, lust, wrath and so forth. So un- 
 fathomable is the corruption that its true character can be 
 learned only through the law of God," (Loci, ed. of 
 Plitt, pp. 119, 133.) Dr. Krauth: "It (this concupis- 
 cence) is that in which all other sins in some sense take 
 their origin. It throws its life into them; without it 
 they might not be : it is not only original, it is also the 
 originating sin, or that sin which gives the origin to all 
 others." (Conservative Reformation, p. 390.) 
 
 5. Why does our Confession, after having given the 
 definition of v^hat original sin is, add the statement 
 "that this disease, or vice of origin is truly sin"? 
 
 The Roman Church (on the basis of its peculiar con- 
 ception of the image of God in man) was teaching this: 
 The natural depravity is something indifferent, neither 
 good nor bad, and not properly speaking sin. It only 
 becomes sin when it develops into sinful acts. This 
 doctrine of the Roman Church — in theology we call it 
 Semi-Pelagianism — was the source of the work-right- 
 eousness and all the evils connected therewith. (Compare 
 the close of our article.) Here our Confession had to 
 clarify things. The question may be asked : How can 
 the inability to fear and to trust and to love God be 
 
70 Th^ Augsburg Confession. 
 
 reall}^ sin? We answer: It is a violation of the first 
 commandment which is the sum of all the command- 
 ments. It is a real want of conformity with God's law. 
 It is being otherwise than God wants us to be. And 
 regarding "the concupiscence" it is by no means anything 
 indifferent, or, as the Catholics say, even an incentive 
 for the better powers in man, but it is the very thing that 
 is forbidden in the ninth and tenth commandments. It 
 is, as the Apology calls it, "enmity against God, an 
 habitual corruption." Compare the quotations under the 
 preceding questions (4, b). According to Luther in the 
 Smalcald Articles, this corruption is so deep and awful 
 that man can know it only from revelation. 
 
 6. What are the natural consequences of original 
 sin? 
 
 Our text says that it is "even now condemning and 
 bringing eternal death." (a) ''Death!' What God had 
 threatened took place : "In the day that thou eatest thereof 
 thou shalt surely die." (Gen. 2: 17.) This means not only 
 temporal death, the fearful separation of body and soul 
 (Ps. 90: 7 and 11), but eternal death which "is the eternal 
 state of the soul reunited with the body and separated 
 from God." (Jacobs.) (b) "Even nozv." The penalty 
 for the state of depravity was not confined to the first 
 parents, but it is visited upon every one of their posterity, 
 because they have actually inherited this condition: the 
 inability to fear, trust and love God and the lust for evil. 
 
 7. What is the remedy for the evil? 
 
 Eternal death shall be visited only upon these "who are 
 not born again through baptism and the Holy Ghost." 
 
 a. Regeneration is necessary. There is no salvation 
 of any human creature without a change from the de- 
 praved condition into which he is born. Dr. Krauth 
 remarks: Even those who reject infant baptism usually 
 have some kind of explanation how children are made 
 acceptable to God without baptism which our Church 
 regards as the ordinary means of regeneration. If they 
 seek for no such explanation they are outright Pelagians. 
 (What Pelagianism is will be explained under question 
 
The: Augsburg Coni-1':ssion. 71 
 
 8.) As to the absolute necessity of regeneration for every 
 human creature the testimony of Scripture is very clear. 
 Jesus says : "Except a man (that is anyone and everyone) 
 be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." If 
 there is anyone who wants to evade the force of these 
 words, let him read what the Lord adds : ''That which 
 is born of the flesh is flesh," that is: every human being 
 born naturally into this world is fleshly, and needs a new 
 birth (John 3:6). A child may seem innocent as con- 
 trasted with an adult, its sin may even seem to lend a 
 charm of vivacity to the young life ; but the first budding 
 of sin is in essence the same as in the grey-haired old 
 reprobate. A person of good character is looked upon as 
 not needing regeneration in order to enter into the King- 
 dom of God. But in this second article of our Confes- 
 sion we deal with the moral nature of man, which is de- 
 praved, no matter how many excellencies the character 
 of an individual may have. Let us distinguish between 
 character and nature in this question. The young ruler 
 whom Jesus loved had a better character than Judas, but 
 both had the same nature, a nature that was not regener- 
 ated (Dr. Krauth, Conservative Reformation, pp. 415, 
 416, 420). 
 
 b. The Holy Spirit is the sole author of our regenera- 
 tion. We cannot effect the new birth ourselves, out of 
 powers of our own. Here the adult is as helpless as the 
 infant. The adult can with reflective consciousness de- 
 sire the new life, which the infant cannot, but even such 
 conscious desire is the work of the Holy Spirit. "Not 
 by works of righteousness which we have done, but 
 according to His mercy He saved us, by the washing 
 of regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy Ghost." 
 (Titus 3:5). Regeneration which is a mystery to us can 
 be wrought only by the Holy Spirit. "Before the true 
 doctrine of the supreme and sole necessity of the Holy 
 Spirit's work, as the author of regeneration, the great 
 mystery of infant salvation passes away." (Krauth, 
 p. 425.)- 
 
 *Here and in the thoughts presented under question 4 we have the 
 connecting link between Articles II and XVIII, I he eighteenth article 
 dwells upon the truth that man with the powers of his will cannot bring 
 about his conversion, but that this is the work of the Holy Spirit. 
 
']2 The Augsburg Concession. 
 
 c. Baptism is the ordinary means of the new birth. 
 Article IX treats of Baptism in a special way, and there 
 we find the statement that it ''is necessary for salvation." 
 This of course, does not mean that a person can under no 
 circumstances experience the new birth except he has 
 been baptized. If Baptism is not obtainable for him, or 
 if he does not know of its necessity then God will not 
 hold him responsible. But God will hold him responsible 
 if he is unwilling to be baptized and despises the 
 Sacrament. 
 
 8. Which are the errorists rejected? 
 
 Our article closes : **They condemn the Pelagians and 
 others, who deny that the vice of origin is sin, and who, 
 to obscure the glory of Christ's merits and benefits, argue 
 that man can be justified before God by his own strength 
 and reason?" 
 
 a. Who are the Pelagians? Pelagius was the oppo- 
 nent of the great bishop Augustine about 410. He 
 taught that the fall of Adam has had no influence upon 
 his posterity. Every man to-day is born in a state of 
 innocence and has the power of choice the same as Adam. 
 The Pelagians deny the source of sin, the depravity. 
 Concupiscence (in the sense as we have spoken of it 
 under 4, b) is to them no sin, but something innocent, a 
 necessary part of man's original nature. There is no sin 
 before there are sinful acts. Alan is in perfect possession 
 of the freedom to work out his own salvation. With 
 such a teaching it is evident that the redemption of Christ 
 is not necessary. Pelagianism, therefore, works "to 
 obscure the glory of Christ's merits and benefits" and 
 argues "that man can be justified before God by his own 
 strength and reason." 
 
 b. What are zve to understand by the words ''and 
 others"? There can be no doubt that in the first 
 place the Semi-Pelagianism of the Roman-Catholic 
 Church was meant. The Roman Catholic Church meets 
 Pelagianism half way. The Romanists will not go so far 
 as to say that the fall of the first parents has had no 
 influence upon the race. They admit that we have been 
 
The: Augsburg Conj^kssion. 73 
 
 zveakened in our moral powers. But they deny our total 
 depravity and the real smfulness of our evil inclination, 
 of the lust or the concupiscence. Here they will say like 
 the Pelagians that there is no sin before there are sinful 
 acts. The Pelagians had no real need of grace and the 
 Holy Spirit, as man is thought to be perfectly able to 
 save himself ; the Roman Catholic Church will say : Man 
 can save himself with some aid of divine grace to assist 
 him in his somewhat weakened condition. The position 
 of our Confession is that man has suffered such a de- 
 pravity and has so lost his free will in spiritual things 
 that he depends upon the Holy Spirit to create in him a 
 new spiritual life. According to Pelagianism the natural 
 man is zuell, according to Romanism he is zveak, accord- 
 ing to Lutheranism he is "dead in trespasses and sins." 
 
 It has been a matter of discussion whether also 
 Zzvingli was meant as belonging to these ''others." (See 
 on this question Krauth, p. 448; Zoeckler, Augsburg 
 Confession, p. 154; Plitt, Augustana, II, p. 129.) It can 
 hardly be denied in view of the whole situation. In the 
 Confession which Zwingli sent to Charles V in Augsburg 
 he says : "Whether we will or will not, we are forced to 
 admit that original sin as it is in the sons of Adam, is not 
 properly sin . . . for it is not a deed contrary to the 
 law. It is, therefore, properly a disease and a condition." 
 In a letter to Urban Rhegius in Augsburg he says: 
 ''What could be clearer than that original sin is not sin, 
 but a disease?" Dr. Krauth remarks that Zwingli's mis- 
 take is the ordinary one. He can see the character of sin 
 only in the deed, not in the moral nature which produces 
 the deed. According to him, as with many people, sin 
 cannot be, but it must always be done. 
 
 If we examine carefully then we will find that the doc- 
 trine of this second article of our Confession is rejected 
 by the following denominations : The Socinians, Unitar- 
 ians, the German Evangelical Protestants of Cincinnati 
 and other cities, the Universalists, the Swedenborgians 
 (these as outright Pelagians, compare question 8, a) ; 
 the Roman Catholic Church, Greek Catholic Church, the 
 Campbellites, the Mennonites, the Quakers, the Seventh 
 
74 The Augsburg Coni'Ession. 
 
 Day Adventists (these as Semi-Pelagians, compare ques- 
 tion 8, b). 
 
 ARTICLE THREE. 
 
 Oi^ THE Son of God. 
 
 Also they teach that the Word, that is, the Son of God, did 
 take man's nature in the womb of the blessed Virgin Mary, so 
 that there are Two Natures, the divine and the human, in- 
 separably conjoined in one Person, one Christ, true God and 
 true man, who was born of the Virgin Mary, truly suffered, was 
 crucified, dead and buried, that he might reconcile the Father 
 unto us, and be a sacrifice, not only for original guilt, but for all 
 actual sins of man. He also descended into hell, and truly rose 
 again the third day; afterward He ascended into heaven, that 
 He might sit on the right hand of the Father, and forever reign, 
 and have dominion over all creatures, and sanctify them that 
 believe in Him, by sending the Holy Ghost into their hearts, to 
 rule, comfort and quicken them, and to defend them against the 
 devil and the power of sin. The same Christ shall openly come 
 again to judge the quick and the dead, etc., according to the 
 Apostles' Creed. 
 
 It is at once clear that there should be between Articles 
 II, of Original Sin, and IV, of Justification, one treating 
 of the Son of God. Jesus is the Redeemer from sin, and 
 His work is the meritorious cause of the sinner's justifi- 
 cation. Zoeckler calls this article the dynamic centre in 
 the body of saving truths. 
 
 We find here no errorists expressly mentioned and 
 enumerated. There was, however, already at that time 
 a doctrinal difference between Luther and Zwingli on the 
 two natures in the person of Christ, and it seems that the 
 emphasis of our article upon the personal union of the 
 two natures was directed against the Swiss reformer. 
 And against the Church of Rome in particular the fol- 
 lowing words are directed : ''not only for original guilt, 
 but for all actual sins of men." The Papal Church taught 
 that the death of Christ had been for the original guilt 
 only, and that for the actual sins there should be satis- 
 faction on the part of man. 
 
 It is interesting to observe that our article did not yet 
 regard it necessary to take notice of those who denied 
 the divinity of Christ. True, the germs of our modern 
 
The Augsburg Confession. 75 
 
 rejection of Christ's divinity existed already in the teach- 
 ings of some of the Anabaptists, the ''new'' Samosatenes 
 of which we heard in Article I (question 3). But such 
 voices were so few that a refutation and silencing of them 
 was not considered necessary. How different it is to-day ! 
 
 I. What does our article teach with respect to the 
 origin of the Saviour? 
 
 "Also they (that is the Lutheran churches) teach that 
 the Word, that is the Son of God, did take man's nature 
 in the womb of the blessed Virgin Mary." 
 
 a. By calling the Son of God ''the Word," our Con- 
 fession reminds us of Christ's pre-existence as taught in 
 John 1:1: "In the beginning was the Word, and the 
 Word ivas with God, and the Word was God." Christ 
 had no beginning. He existed with the Father from all 
 eternity. Through Him all things were made (John 
 1:3). When God created the world, the Son was not 
 among the things created. But at that time the Son (the 
 Word) ''was" already existing. 
 
 b. When the time was fulfilled the incarnation of 
 Christ took place in order that He might be the Alediator 
 of man's salvation. Where was the initiative in this act 
 of incarnation f The Ebionites. a sect in the early 
 Church, taught that the man Jesus (who did not exist 
 from eternity) had led such a virtuous life that He was 
 adopted as Son of God. The Socinians, at the time of the 
 Reformation, developed this view into an elaborate sys- 
 tem, according to which Christ was a mere man, though 
 a great prophet, who became adopted as Son of God. 
 But in our article we read not that man became God, 
 but "that the Word, that is the Son of God, did take 
 man's nature!' The initiative in the act of incarnation 
 was taken by the Son of God, the eternal Word. Ration- 
 alistic Christology of to-day is Ebionitic and Socinian. 
 
 c. The Virgin Birth. This incarnation took place "in 
 the womb of the blessed Virgin ]\Iary." This will always 
 remain an essential part in our creed. Without the Virgin 
 birth the true divinity of Christ, especially His sinless- 
 ness, cannot be maintained. 
 
"^6 The: Augsburg Conjpession. 
 
 d. Christ assumed human nature. Not a human per- 
 son already existing, else we would have had two persons, 
 a divine and a human, contrary to i Tim. 2 : 5. But the 
 Son of God did take man's nature which is common to 
 us all. Hence He redeemed not a particular man, but all 
 men as partakers of the nature. 
 
 2. What does our article emphasize regarding the 
 personal union of the two natures in Christ? 
 
 ''So that there are Two Natures, the divine and the 
 human, inseparably conjoined in one Person, one Christ, 
 true God and true man." 
 
 a. Under the preceding question we heard of the act 
 of incarnation by which two natures were united into one 
 person. Here we have the result of this act: the personal 
 union as a condition in Christ, the Saviour of man. Our 
 Lutheran Church has always laid much emphasis upon 
 this union of the two natures in Christ. 
 
 b. The discussion of the relation of the tzvo natures 
 in the history of doctrines. The relation of the two 
 natures in Christ was most thoroughly discussed in the 
 first half of the fifth century. The question was then 
 settled at the two oecumenical councils held at Ephesus 
 (431) and Chalcedon (451), and the doctrinal state- 
 ments adopted can be found in the second half of the 
 Athanasian Creed. There were two extremes between 
 which a union had to be found : The Nestorians believed 
 in two natures, but not in a real personal union of these 
 two natures; they practically believed in two separate 
 persons. The other extreme (Monophysitism) took the 
 position that in reality there was in Christ after His 
 incarnation only one nature which was a mixture of the 
 divine and the human. The first of these views was 
 irreconcilable with the true divinity of Christ, the 
 second with His true humanity. In the Reformation age 
 this question came up again as a difficulty between Luther 
 and Zwingli, and here were the roots of their differences 
 on the Lord 's Supper. Zwingli, in his doctrine of the 
 person of Christ, so tenaciously denied the participation 
 of the one nature in the life and experiences of the other 
 
The: Augsburg Coni^sssion. 'j'j 
 
 that the reaHty of the personal union was lost. Wher- 
 ever in the Scriptures something human is ascribed to 
 Christ's divinity, or something divine to His humanity, 
 there Zwingli would say that it was not so meant, that it 
 was simply the custom of the Scriptures, in a merely 
 rhetorical way, to say something of one nature which, 
 strictly speaking, can be said only of the other. This was 
 Zwingli's ''alloiosis" which was emphatically rejected by 
 Luther. Luther emphasized the person of Christ, the 
 personal union embracing the two natures : "One Christ, 
 true God and true man." The "two natures, the divine 
 and the human" are "inseparably conjoined in one 
 person." 
 
 c. The practical religious interest in this seemingly 
 speculative question. Luther said : If Christ's human 
 nature can have no part in the attributes of His divinity, 
 if His glorified body has no part in the attribute of omni- 
 presence, then Christ cannot be present with His human- 
 itv at the Lord's Supper. And Zwingli said: Because 
 Christ is omnipresent only according to His divine 
 nature, but not with His human nature, therefore Christ 
 can be present at the Supper only in a spiritual way, 
 but not with His humanity which is confined to a certain 
 place at the right hand of God. Yet, Luther's doctrine 
 of the person of Christ was not a mere invention for 
 the purpose of furnishing a support for the doctrine of 
 the Real Presence in the Lord's Supper. No, what 
 Luther wanted to establish with his strong emphasis upon 
 the personal union was nothing less than the full value 
 of the atonement wrought by Christ, the Godman. If 
 the humanity of Christ is so separated from His divinity 
 that there is no real communion, no communication of 
 the divine attributes to the humanity, then there is no 
 real validity in the sufferings of Christ. Luther writes: 
 "If the devil should persuade me that in Christ a mere 
 man was crucified and died for me, then I would be lost, 
 but if I can attach to it the importance that Christ died 
 for me as real God and IMan, then such doctrine will 
 outweigh and destroy sin, death, hell and all misery." 
 And again with reference to Zwingli's theory : "Beware, 
 
78 The Augsburg Confession. 
 
 beware, I tell you of the alloiosis, it is a mask of the 
 devil ! For in the end it constructs a Christ, after which 
 I would not like to be a Christian ; a Christ whose suffer- 
 ings and life do not mean more than that of any ordinary 
 saint." 
 
 3. What is to be noted regarding the states of 
 Christ? 
 
 There is the distinction between the state of humilia- 
 tion and the state of exaltation. This part is much like 
 that in the second article of the x^postles' Creed. 
 
 a. The state of humiliation is described with the fol- 
 lowing words : "who was born of the Virgin Mary, truly 
 suffered, was crucified, dead and buried." The thought 
 here to be emphasized is that not only the man in Christ 
 suft'ered this, but the Godman. The Word, that is the 
 Son of God who became incarnated and united Himself 
 with the humanity, experienced these acts of humiliation 
 in the human nature. Neither was the suffering of the 
 Godman a delusion (as some Gnostics said) ; to meet 
 such thoughts we read here : "truly suffered." In the 
 German text we have : "wahrhaftig geboren." 
 
 b. The state of exaltation begins with the words: 
 "He also descended to hell." ''He also," that means the 
 same person of which wx have spoken, the Godman. 
 Everywhere this emphasis is laid upon the personal 
 union. Then follow the other parts belonging to the 
 exaltation of Christ : His resurrection, His ascension, 
 His sitting at the right hand of the Father, and His 
 return to judgment. But note the way in which His 
 sitting on the right hand of the Father is here spoken of : 
 "That He might sit on the right hand of the Father, 
 and forever reign, and have dominion over all creatures, 
 and sanctify them that believe in Him, by sending the 
 Holy Ghost into their hearts, to rule, comfort and quicken 
 them, and to defend them against the devil and the 
 power of sin." This is the purpose of it all. The evident 
 intention of our article is to emphasize that Christ is a 
 living Saviour. He is not like Mohammed who invented 
 a religion and then passed away without being more to 
 his followers than a person that had once lived. 
 
The Augsburg Confkssion. 79 
 
 4. What doctrine of atonement do we find in this 
 article? 
 
 It is the doctrine of vicarious atonement. Christ, the 
 Godman, experienced the humiliation in order ''that He 
 might reconcile the Father unto us, and be a sacrifice." 
 It is not man who is to be reconciled to God, by receiving 
 impressions of God's kindness, so that He might give up 
 his enmity against God. No, it is God who is to be recon- 
 ciled. The German text speaks of God's wrath which is 
 to be appeased ("versoehnet"). In connection with this 
 the death of Christ can have no other but a substitutional 
 significance. Article IV also says that Christ ''by His 
 death, hath made satisfaction for our sins."* 
 
 ARTICLE FOUR. 
 
 Of Justification. 
 
 Also they teach, that men cannot be justified before God by 
 their own strength, merits or works, but are freely justified for 
 Christ's sake through faith, when they believe that they are 
 received into favor and that their sins are forgiven for Christ's 
 sake, who, by His death, hath made satisfaction for our sins. 
 This faith God imputes for righteousness in His sight. Romans 
 3 and 4. 
 
 I. What can v/e say in appreciation of this article? 
 
 This article is the centre of the doctrines treated in 
 the Confession. The leading question for Luther was 
 not: Who is God, and what do we know of Him? but: 
 How can I come to God and be assured that He is my 
 Father? This had already been the question during the 
 middle ages. Only it had not been answered right. The 
 advice had been given that we should efTect communion 
 with God through the doing of good works. This could 
 never bring the assurance of favor with God to the dis- 
 tressed sinner as he would always be troubled with the 
 fear whether he had done enough. Luther found the 
 
 *Passages in the other Confessions that should be studied in connection 
 with this article are the following: Apology, Article III; Smalcald Arti- 
 cles, Part I; Small Catechism, Creed, Article II; Larger Catechism, Creed, 
 Article II; Form of Concord, Article VIII in both parts. 
 
8o The: Augsburg Coni^ession. 
 
 answer of the Gospel to that question. It is : BeHeve in 
 Christ who has made satisfaction for our sins and on 
 account of whose merits God justifies freely the believ- 
 ing sinner who suffers under the burden of his guilt. 
 This doctrine brings peace to the soul and is (as will be 
 shown in articles VI and XX) the true source of real 
 good works. How Luther himself valued this article 
 can be seen from the following words found in the Smal- 
 cald Articles (Part II, Article I) : "Of this article 
 nothing can be yielded nor surrendered, even though 
 heaven and earth and all things should sink to ruin. . . . 
 And upon this article all things depend, which, against 
 the Pope, the devil, and the whole world, we teach and 
 practice. Therefore we must be sure concerning this 
 doctrine and not doubt, for otherwise all is lost, and the 
 Pope and devil and all things against us gain the victory 
 and suit." (Book of Concord, p. 312.) And in the 
 Form of Concord we find these w^ords : "This article 
 concerning Justification by Faith (as the Apology says) 
 is the chief in the entire Christian doctrine, without 
 which no poor conscience has any firm consolation, or 
 can know aright the riches of the grace of Christ as Dr. 
 Luther has written: *If only this article remain in view 
 pure, the Christian Church also remains pure, and is 
 harmonious and without all sects ; but if it do not remain 
 pure, it is not possible to resist any error or any fanatical 
 spirit.'" (Book of Concord, p. 571.) If we should read 
 the whole Augsburg Confession even in a cursory way, 
 we should be impressed with the fact that the leading 
 principle in every direction was to reform whatever 
 tended to obscure the precious doctrine of justification by 
 faith. 
 
 2. Where in the Confessions of the Lutheran Church 
 do v^^e find something more on this important article? 
 
 Our fourth article is very brief, and since every 
 phrase contains something fundamental the student will 
 gladly avail himself of additional references. As has 
 been mentioned it is a good plan to study in connection 
 with this article the articles VI and XX. The Apology 
 
The^ Augsburg Confession. 8i 
 
 also has lengthy expositions on this subject. The second 
 chapter of the Apology, pp. 84-103 in the Book of Con- 
 cord, deals with Justification, while the third, pp. 104- 
 161, treats of 'Xove and the fulfilling of the Law," thus 
 offering an exposition of Article VI of our Confession. 
 It is profitable to study these parts together. Special 
 care should be used to observe the relation between 
 justification and sanctification. The confounding of these 
 two doctrines was the fundamental error of the Roman 
 Catholic Church. But there are many non-Catholics who 
 fall into the same mistake. The Form of Concord also 
 has some valuable contributions on this subject. Read 
 especially Article III on "the Righteousness of Faith 
 before God" and Article IV "Of Good Works." Even 
 the following articles V '*of Law and Gospel" and VI 
 on "The Third use of the Law" can be studied with 
 profit in this connection. Using the Form of Concord 
 it is well to remember that this Confession always treats 
 of the same subject in two parts: first briefly in the 
 "Epitome" and then more in length in a "Comprehensive 
 Summary." 
 
 3. Hov;^ may this article be divided for a profitable 
 discussion? 
 
 I. Renunciation oe the Error. 
 
 Text: "Also they (the Lutheran Churches) teach that 
 men cannot be justified before God by their own strength, 
 merits or works." 
 
 I. The history of this error: 
 
 a. In the early Church, soon after the death of the 
 Apostles, Paul's doctrine of free grace dropped into the 
 background, and a doctrine of law and works prevailed. 
 (See Kurtz, Church History, §30, 2.) 
 
 b. Augustine agreed with Lutheranism when he said, 
 that in fallen man there are no powers left to bring 
 about his spiritual renewal and that all must be expected 
 from divine grace ; but he was a Roman Catholic in his 
 conception of justification as a gradual growth in right- 
 
82 The Augsburg Confession. 
 
 eousness. He confounded justification and sanctification 
 by saying that God justified man not only by forgiving 
 his sins, but by more and more infusing the divine right- 
 eousness into his Hfe. He failed to take justification as 
 a declarative act. Thus, this error originated. 
 
 c. The teachers of the middle ages (Thomas Aquinas, 
 Duns Scotus, Gabriel Biel and others) developed this 
 teaching into the form, in which it became the accepted 
 doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church at the Council 
 of Trent. 
 
 2. Why were our Reformers so outspoken in re- 
 jecting this doctrine? 
 
 a. The Scriptures teach us to exclude the merits of 
 man from that by which he is actually saved. Eph. 2 : 
 8-9 ; Rom. 3 : 24 ; Rom. 3 : 24. 
 
 b. It leaves the sinner in uncertainty as to his salva- 
 tion. Augustine taught consistently that man could never 
 be absolutely sure of his salvation. 
 
 c. It was the fruitful source of many errors: work- 
 righteousness in all its forms (monastic seclusion, pil- 
 grimages, penances, the belief that man may even do 
 something in excess of what God has the right to demand 
 of him and thus merit special grace, a grace which is 
 stored up in a treasure of "superabundant works" and 
 applied for the benefit of others). 
 
 II. Statement oe the True Doctrine. 
 
 1. The source of justification, or the efficient cause. 
 Text : "freely justified." Rom. 3 : 24; Rom. 5 : 15. 
 
 2. The ground of justification, or the meritorious 
 cause. Text : "for Christ's sake," and "who, by His 
 death, has made satisfaction for our sins." An espe- 
 cially striking passage of Scripture is Rom. 3 : 24-25. 
 
 3. The true meaning of justification : It is not making 
 a man righteous, as the Roman Church takes it, by infus- 
 ing sanctifying grace into his life. Then we would have 
 no peace of our soul as we would always have to ask 
 whether the process of sanctification has advanced suffi- 
 
Tnii Augsburg Confession. 83 
 
 ciently. No, justification is an act of God, by which the 
 sinner is declared to be justified for Christ's sake. God 
 regards the sinner just notwithstanding the fact that he 
 is actually sinful. Our article refers to the entire argu- 
 ment of the third and fourth chapters of Paul to the 
 Romans. A negative and positive side are to be dis- 
 tinguished : 
 
 a. Negative: A non-imputation, or forgiveness of 
 sins. Text: "That their sins are forgiven." Rom. 
 
 4:7-8. 
 
 b. Positive: The act of justification. The act of par- 
 don and forgiveness takes from the sinner what he has, 
 but justification gives him what he has not : the right- 
 eousness of Christ. But how does the act of justification 
 take place? The text of our article says: "This faith 
 God imputes for righteousness in His sight." Sometimes 
 it is the "righteousness of Christ" and at other times it is 
 our "faith" that is said to be imputed to us. But that 
 involves no contradiction. For "faith" is here meant 
 only as apprehending "the righteousness of Christ." The 
 Scripture basis is Rom. 6 : 3-6. The emphasis is upon 
 the idea of imputation. If we believe on Christ then His 
 righteousness is imputed to us. The Roman Catholic 
 Church and those of similar position cannot appreciate 
 such an "imputed" righteousness. Adam Moehler, a 
 Romanist, says : "The Protestant theory of justification 
 expects of God to regard an Ethiopian as white." But 
 this is not the case, for in our doctrine of justification 
 we do not consider the sinner as he is in himself, but we 
 consider him in his relation to and in his union with 
 Christ. 
 
 4. Faith as the instrumental or apprehending cause 
 of justification on man's part. Text : "Through faith." 
 
 a. What kind of faith is meant? Article XX of our 
 Confession was written to supplement Article IV, and 
 here we find beautiful thoughts with which to answer this 
 question. "Faith does not only signify a knowledge of 
 the history, which may be in the wicked and in the devil," 
 though such knowledge is the basis of faith. No, justi- 
 
84 The Augsburg Confession. 
 
 fying faith must be ''a faith which beheveth the article 
 of the remission of sins, namely, that by Christ we 
 have grace, righteousness and remission of sins." It 
 means "a trust, which doth comfort and lift up dis- 
 quieted minds." Even our brief Article IV offers a 
 fitting description of what justifying faith is: 'Svhen 
 we believe that we are received into favor and that their 
 sins are forgiven for Christ's sake." Such faith is a 
 living and a transforming one. That is the leading 
 thought in the last part of Article XX. The Apology 
 says: '*We speak of faith as being not an ideal fancy, 
 but a new light, life and power in the heart, that renews 
 the heart and disposition, transforms man into a new 
 creature." See also Form of Concord, p. 573 (19-20). 
 
 b. But while this belongs to the nature of faith, it is 
 not the sanctifying character of faith that justifies us. 
 We must guard against making faith a meritorious work. 
 Our article simply says : "through faith," not : for the 
 sake of faith. We must never forget these words of 
 our article: ''freely justified for Christ's sake through 
 faith" (propter Christum, per fidem). 
 
 We are now prepared to see how this article is the 
 central article of all the rest of the Confession, even of 
 the second part, which treats of the abuses.* 
 
 ARTICLE FIVE. 
 
 On the Origin and the Causes oe Faith. 
 
 (Of the Office of the Ministry.) 
 
 That we may obtain this faith, the Office of teaching the 
 Gospel and administering the Sacraments was instituted. For 
 through the Word and Sacraments as through instruments, the 
 Holy Ghost is given, who worketh faith where and when it 
 pleaseth God in them that hear the Gospel, to wit, that God, 
 not for our own merits, but for Christ's sake, justified those 
 who believe that they are received into favor for Christ's sake. 
 
 *The chief opponents to the Lutheran doctrine of justification as a 
 judicial act on the part of God are the Roman Catholic Church, the Greek 
 Catholic Church, the Quakers, the Unitarians, the Universalists. The 
 Reformed churches are here in agreement with the Lutheran Church. 
 Only they do not give to this doctrine the central place which it holds 
 in the Lutheran Church. 
 
Thk Augsburg Coni^ession. 85 
 
 They condemn the Anabaptists and others, who think that the 
 Holy Ghost cometh to men without the external Word, through 
 their own preparations and works. 
 
 1. What is the leading theme of this article? 
 
 Remember that in the preceding article faith was men- 
 tioned as the instrumental or the apprehending cause of 
 salvation. Now the question comes : How is this justi- 
 fying faith obtained ? The answer is : Faith is wrought 
 in us through the means of grace. The custom has been 
 to write over this article as superscription : "Of the 
 Office of the Ministry." But the ministry is here spoken 
 of only in an incidental way, namely, as the office which 
 is charged with administering the means of grace. The 
 ministry is specifically treated in Article XIV. If we 
 read thoughtfully the beginning of Article V we cannot 
 help but receiving the impression that Melanchthon here 
 wants to teach us how faith is obtained. The super- 
 scriptions over the articles of our Confession have been 
 added at a later time. 
 
 2. How is justifying faith obtained? 
 
 a. It is wrought in us through the Holy Ghost ("the 
 Holy Ghost is given, who worketh faith"). Compare 
 with this the phrase in Article XVIII: "but this right- 
 eousness is wrought in the heart when the Holy Ghost 
 is received through the word." This is in agreement 
 with Luther's explanation of the Third Article of the 
 Apostles' Creed : "I believe that I cannot by my own 
 reason and strength believe in Jesus Christ my Lord, or 
 come to Him, but the Holy Ghost has called me, etc." 
 We can resist the Holy Spirit, but we cannot do His 
 work. We must "hear the Gospel" and we must respond 
 to the preaching of the Word, but every bit of the new 
 life that comes into us is a work of the Holy Spirit. 
 
 b. Even occasion and time of such working of faith 
 in us is in the hand of God : "Who worketh faith where 
 and when it pleaseth God in them that hear the Gospel." 
 Does this sound arbitrary? Suppose God should work 
 faith in one individual later than in another and should 
 let him struggle longer than another before full confi- 
 
86 The: Augsburg Coni?e;ssion. 
 
 dence in the Saviour brings him the peace of his soul, 
 who knows whether this will not in the end mean a 
 deeper and a better founded and humbler Christian? 
 Some obtain faith in consequence of an early Christian 
 training, others after first having lost themselves in the 
 world, some late in life. God in His providence chooses 
 time and place with the best interests of our soul in view. 
 
 3. Through what instruments does the Holy Ghost 
 work faith in us? 
 
 a. ''Through the Word and Sacraments as through 
 instruments." These are the divinely appointed means 
 of grace. By the Word we understand the Law and the 
 Gospel. Much depends upon using these in their proper 
 relation to each other. Read in the Form of Concord 
 Articles V and VI. The Sacraments are Baptism and 
 the Lord's Supper. Why do we admit these only to be 
 Sacraments? A Sacrament must have all of the follow- 
 ing three marks: (i) the institution by Jesus Christ 
 Himself; (2) the visible sign; (3) the communication 
 of a heavenly gift. Read the fourth and fifth parts of 
 Luther's Small Catechism, and the same parts in his 
 Larger Catechism. 
 
 b. A special ''office of teaching the Gospel and admin- 
 istering the Sacraments" has been instituted. It is an 
 ''ofiice" of serv'ice, not, as in the Roman Catholic Church, 
 an order of propagating itself and with the right to rule 
 the Church. 
 
 4. What errorists are here rejected? 
 
 ''They condemn the Anabaptists and others, who think 
 the Holy Ghost cometh to men without the external 
 Word, through their own preparations and works." 
 
 a. The Anabaptists at the time of the Reformation 
 despised the "external Word," i. e., the written word of 
 the Scriptures. Their emphasis was upon the Spirit, by 
 which they understood an inner light in those w^ho had 
 received the Holy Spirit, manifesting itself in inspira- 
 tions and revelations. 
 
 b. There were ''others" at that time who took an 
 
Thi$ Augsburg Confession. 87 
 
 equal position. Among them was Carlstadt, Zwingli, 
 Schwenkfeld. A leading thought in the Reformed 
 Church from the beginning was this, that the divine 
 influences upon men are experienced in an immediate 
 way. Created things (like words of the Bible and the 
 elements of the Sacraments) are not believed to be used 
 by God as necessary instruments and vehicles of His 
 gracious influence upon man, but the Holy Spirit is be- 
 lieved to work immediately. The last consequences of 
 this spiritualism have been drawn by the Quakers, a 
 denomination which in this respect must be regarded as 
 a legitimate daughter of the Reformed Church. 
 
 c. "Through their ozvn preparations and zvorks." All 
 who are laboring to work themselves into a state of 
 spiritual exaltation by anything that is calculated to excite 
 the feelings fall under the sentence of this article. 
 Examples : exciting prayer meetings through which 
 sentiment is worked up during evangelistic campaigns; 
 mannerism in preachers, mostly evangelists, through 
 which they try to bring their hearers under the spell of 
 their personality ; the employment of drastic language in 
 revival meetings. At the basis of it all lies a despising 
 of the God-appointed means of grace. 
 
 ARTICLE SIX. 
 O]? the: Ne:w Obkdienci:. 
 
 Also the}^ teach, that this faith is bound to bring forth good 
 fruit and that it is necessary to do good works commanded by 
 God, because of God's will, but not that we should rely on those 
 works to merit justification before God. For remission of sins 
 and justification are apprehended by faith, as also the voice of 
 Christ attests : "When ye shall have done all these things, say : 
 We are unprofitable servants" (Luke 17: 10). The same_ is also 
 taught by the leathers. For Ambrose says: "It is ordained of 
 God that he who believes in Christ, is saved; freely receiving 
 remission of sins, without works, by faith alone." 
 
 I. What kind of faith will alw^ays be the source of 
 good works? 
 
 Our article answers : ''this faith." The faith, namely, 
 that was described in Article IV as the confidence "that 
 
88 The Augsburg Confe:ssion. 
 
 they are received into favor, and that their sins are for- 
 given for Christ's sake." The faith which, according to 
 Article V, has been wrought by the Holy Ghost through 
 Word and Sacrament. 
 
 2. How does our article describe the nature of this 
 faith with reference to the production of good works? 
 
 **That this faith is bound to bring forth good fruits, 
 and that it is necessary to do good works." Note in the 
 German text the words *'soH" and ''muesse," in the Latin 
 ''debeat" and ''oporteat." Faith cannot co-exist with a 
 purpose to sin, and a true believer cannot live in sin. 
 The person with a living faith is under an inner neces- 
 sity to do good works. Luther says : ''Faith is a divine 
 work in us. It changes us and regenerates us. It morti- 
 fies the natural man in us and makes us new men in heart, 
 spirit, mind and all powers, and it cannot be without the 
 Holy Spirit. Oh, it is a living, busy and powerful thing 
 about faith. It is impossible that it should not always 
 do good works. It does not stop and ask where good 
 works can be done, but before there can be any asking, 
 it does good works and is always doing them." Such 
 inner necessity for doing good works (read Form of 
 Concord, Article IV, 6, p. 505) is fundamentally different 
 from being driven by an outward compulsion of the law, 
 which can result only in works that have the appearance 
 of being good, but which in reality have no value in the 
 sight of God. Article VI in the Form of Concord con- 
 tains valuable statements on the distinction between 
 works of the law and works of the Spirit. 
 
 3. What kind of works will faith bring forth? 
 
 "Good works commanded by God." This remark is 
 directed against the self-chosen works of the Roman 
 Catholic Church. The Romanists had developed the 
 theory of the so-called "evangelical counsels." An 
 opportunity should be given to do more good works than 
 God has commanded. It was taught that the doing of 
 such works would bring special credits, and that such 
 credits of all good men accumulated were constituting 
 
The Augsburg Coni^ession. 89 
 
 a treasury of superabundant good works, a credit over 
 which the Church was manager and could help others in 
 purgatory who had a shortage of credits. There were 
 especially three good works which were regarded as not 
 demanded by God and for this reason considered to be 
 highly meritorious: (i) not to marry, (2) to remain 
 poor, and (3) to live a life of absolute obedience to the 
 Church. These are the vows of Monasticism, never 
 appreciated by the Lutheran Church, because they repre- 
 sented a self-chosen sanctity, with no foundation in the 
 Scriptures. The Lutherans took the position that any- 
 thing which love, growing out of faith, compels us to do 
 is simply our Christian duty and in no way optional. 
 They regarded those aforementioned works as useless. 
 Matthew 15:9 we read: "But in vain they do worship 
 me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." 
 The Scriptures, containing the commandments of God, 
 are the guide, enabling us to determine which are good 
 works, and which are not. 
 
 4. What shall be the motive? 
 
 On this we have a double statement, first a positive 
 and then a negative. 
 
 Positive: "because of God's will." In the Apology 
 three reasons are mentioned why a believer should do 
 good works: (i) out of gratitude to God; (2) for the 
 exercise and development of faith; (3) as a testimony 
 before the world. 
 
 b. Negative: "but not that we should rely on those 
 works to merit justification before God." This article 
 stands for a careful distinction between justification and 
 sanctification. Many sincere Christians deceive them- 
 selves by reasoning in the following way : Since '4t is 
 necessary to do good works," it must be concluded that 
 they belong to the ground of salvation. But as soon as 
 this is admitted our salvation is uncertain, because we 
 can never do all we should and will always have to stand 
 under the words of Christ : "When ye shall have done all 
 these things, say: We are unprofitable servants" (Luke 
 17 : 10). Guided by this consideration, the Form of Con- 
 
90 The: Augsburg Confession. 
 
 cord (see p. 504), rejected the statements of George 
 Major: ''Good works are necessary for salvation," "it 
 is impossible to be saved without good works," "no one 
 has ever been saved without good works." The ground 
 of our salvation, as we saw in Article IV, is Jesus Christ 
 "who, by His death, hath made satisfaction for our sins" ; 
 and our assurance of salvation is God's act of freely jus- 
 tifying us for Christ's sake, through faith when we be- 
 lieve that we are received into favor and that our sins 
 are forgiven for Christ's sake. In Eph. 2 : 8 and 9 we 
 read : "By grace are ye saved through faith ; and that not 
 of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not of works, lest 
 any man should boast." The opponent of George Major 
 (Nic. Amsdorf) went so far as to say: "Good works are 
 injurious to salvation." This the Form of Concord also 
 rejects. Good works will become injurious if "we rely 
 upon those works to merit justification before God," as 
 our article says, but the fact remains that faith is "bound 
 to bring forth good fruits and that it is necessary to do 
 good works." 
 
 Article XX of our Confession was added to elucidate 
 this article as well as Article IV. 
 
 ARTICLE SEVEN. 
 
 Oi^ THK Church. 
 
 Also they teach that One holy Church is to continue forever. 
 The Church is the congregation of saints, in which the Gospel is 
 rightly taught and the Sacraments rightly administered. And 
 to the true unity of the Church, it is enough to agree concern- 
 ing the doctrine of the Gospel and the administration of the 
 Sacraments. Nor is it necessary that human traditions, rites, 
 or ceremonies, instituted by men, should be everywhere alike. 
 As Paul says : "One faith, one baptism, one God and Father of 
 all," etc. (Eph. 4:5, 6). 
 
 I. What is the Church? 
 
 a. It is not, as the Catholics teach, an external 
 organization under the Pope of Rome and his bishops 
 and priests. If that were the Church then Luther and his 
 followers certainly were outside of it, because they were 
 excommunicated. 
 
The: Augsburg Coni^kssion. 91 
 
 b. "The church is the congregation of saints." Wher- 
 ever there are souls who have been regenerated through 
 the Holy Spirit and believe in Christ as their Saviour, 
 there the Christian Church is, and these souls are mem- 
 bers of it, forming part of the "One holy Church," no 
 matter how far apart they may live and by what denomi- 
 national name they may be known. 
 
 c. Yet while our Confession could not consent to the 
 Roman Catholic conception of the Church as one certain 
 circumscribed outward organization, neither could it 
 agree with the Anabaptists who believed in no congrega- 
 tion of the saints, but just in individual saints, with no 
 obligation whatever to assemble. Against this view 
 Melanchthon writes in the Apology: The Church is not 
 a Platonic state, but it has a real existence. Therefore 
 he calls it in our article "the congregation of saints, in 
 which the Gospel is rightly taught and the Sacraments 
 rightly administered." 
 
 2. Have the Lutherans not destroyed the unity of 
 the Church? 
 
 At the beginning of this article it is admitted "that 
 one holy church is to continue forever." But by reject- 
 ing the traditions, rites and ceremonies of the Roman 
 Catholic Church the Lutherans seem to have destroyed 
 this unity of the Church. To this grave charge an 
 answer had to be made in this article. We find it in the 
 following words : "And to the true unity of the Church, 
 it is enough to agree concerning the doctrine of the Gos- 
 pel and the administration of the Sacram^ents." This is 
 the positive part of the answer. A very important state- 
 ment : Where there is agreement in the teaching of the 
 Gospel and in the administration of the Sacraments there 
 is unity, but only there. Then follows the negative: 
 statement : "Nor is it necessary that human traditions, 
 rites and ceremonies, instituted by men, should be every- 
 where alike." These words are also important. Such 
 traditions, rites and ceremonies are not here uncondition- 
 ally rejected. Some, of course, must be rejected, as will 
 be seen in i\rticle XV, namely, such as have been "insti- 
 
92 The Augsburg Con^e:ssion. 
 
 tuted to propitiate God, to merit grace and to make satis- 
 faction for sins" ; but not those "which may be observed 
 without sin, and which are profitable unto tranquilhty and 
 good order in the Church." Yet while some of these 
 ''human traditions, rites and ceremonies, instituted by 
 men," may be right and even helpful, we are not war- 
 ranted in making the observance of them essential to 
 unity in the Church. 
 
 3. How are we to judge of the various denomina- 
 tions as to the question where the true Church of 
 Christ is to be found? 
 
 The true Church is found where "the Gospel is rightly 
 taught and the Sacraments rightly administered." Can 
 this be said of the Lutheran Church? To answer this 
 question correctly we have to divide it into two ques- 
 tions : (i) Can we say of the Lutheran Church as repre- 
 sented by her Confessions that she is pure in her teaching 
 of Word and Sacraments? Every one who is a Lutheran 
 of conviction, having examined the Confessions in the 
 light of the Scriptures, will affirm this. And it seems 
 to us that others also, if they could just rid themselves 
 of prejudices, would, after a candid examination, reach 
 the same conclusion. The Scripturalness of the Lutheran 
 Confessions will captivate him who gives himself to a 
 thorough study of them. But (2) Can we claim of the 
 Lutheran churches everyufhere that they actually do teach 
 the Gospel rightly and that their administration of the 
 Sacraments rests upon the Scriptural conceptions? This 
 is an altogether different question. The Lutheran name 
 does not always guarantee a teaching after the Lutheran 
 Confessions. There are Lutherans who find themselves 
 in disagreement with the doctrine of man's total deprav- 
 ity as taught in Article H, who teach a Christ that can 
 be no Saviour (against x\rticle III), who in their concep- 
 tions of justification and sanctification (Articles IV and 
 VI) are moving on Roman Catholic ground, who ignore 
 the appointed means of grace and expect to draw the Holy 
 Spirit by all kinds of human eft"orts (against Article V), 
 who can never learn the meaning of Holy Baptism for 
 
The: Augsburg Confession. 93 
 
 the life of the Christian and to whom the Sacraments 
 are nothing but symbols (against Articles II, IX and X). 
 Occasionally we find more Scriptural conceptions in 
 other churches than in Lutheran churches. So in answer- 
 ing this question we can only say : Lutheran churches 
 are representatives of the true Church of Christ only in 
 so far as they actually live up to their Confessions in 
 teaching and practice. 
 
 This has paved the way for a brief discussion of how 
 we should regard the other denominations. Can we say 
 of the other churches that they are true churches of 
 Christ in the sense of our article? Here also we must 
 be guarded by the words : ''The Church is the congrega- 
 tion of saints, in which the Gospel is rightly taught and 
 the Sacraments rightly administered." Do not say that 
 this word "rightly" may not have been so seriously meant, 
 so that we would be justified to treat it as a mere slip 
 of Melanchthon's pen. We know that it was not in 
 the first drafts of the Confession, as can be seen in 
 the manuscript which was found in the Nuremberg 
 archive, a few years ago, but it was put in before 
 the Confession was finished, which shows that it is 
 there for a purpose. Can we as Lutherans admit that 
 in the other churches "the Gospel is rightly taught and 
 the Sacraments rightly administered"? If we believe 
 that our Confessions are Scriptural then we must regard 
 the teaching of the other churches as unscriptural in the 
 points where they reject the teaching of our Confessions. 
 Yes and No cannot dwell together in one conviction. 
 
 But can ive not say that the differences consist only 
 in the viezvpoints taken, so that both sides have the Gos- 
 pel from a different point of view? It is true, for in- 
 stance, that the Calvinists have with us the doctrine of 
 justification. But they have it from peculiar view- 
 point, the sovereignty of God. This does not do away 
 with the Gospel, yet the Gospel of free grace becomes 
 beclouded. Under Calvinistic preaching, God appears to 
 us more as a stern Lord than as a loving Father. We 
 are more His obeying servants than His confiding chil- 
 dren. A wrong viewpoint can seriously affect the 
 
94 'The: Augsburg Confession. 
 
 teaching of the Gospel. But now take another doctrine, 
 for instance, the Lord's Supper. Here the difference 
 is not in viewpoints, but the one side positively rejects 
 what the other side accepts. The difference between 
 Lutherans and Baptists on the Sacrament of Baptism is 
 another case. The difference is a radical one : what 
 the Lutherans regard as a real means of grace and the 
 source of the new religious life, this is to the Baptists 
 a mere act of obedience on the part of the converted. 
 In these, as in many other cases, it is not a mere differ- 
 ence in viewpoints, but a question of Yes and No. A 
 Lutheran who believes that the Confessions of his 
 Church are Scriptural cannot include the opposing 
 denominations as such in the Church ''in which the Gospel 
 is rightly taught and the Sacraments rightly admin- 
 istered." 
 
 And yet, w^e would not want to deny that the Church 
 of Christ has its existence also among the other denomi- 
 nations. Thank God that it has. Absolute purity of 
 doctrine, let us remember, is an ideal that has not been 
 reached by all Lutherans either. The Confessions of our 
 Church are Scriptural, but to what extent have we suc- 
 ceeded in embracing their truth in all directions? It is 
 the goal for the development in many parts of the Luth- 
 eran Church. On the other hand, many of the churches 
 which by name are opposing Lutheranism have so much 
 of Gospel truth left in the systems of their teaching that 
 souls can be regenerated to a life with Christ. The 
 unscriptural principles of their creeds and traditions 
 frequently do not work themselves out in the convictions 
 of their ministers and members. The Bible with much 
 truly Scriptural literature is constantly counteracting 
 these influences. In some churches, it is true, the errors 
 overshadow the truth in a most deplorable manner, so 
 that it is hard to discover even som.e remnants of the one 
 Holy Church of which our article speaks. But of many 
 churches we rejoice to admit that notwithstanding some 
 of their unscriptural conceptions of doctrine so much is 
 preserved of the means of grace that in them also the 
 Holy Spirit can have His work for the regeneration of 
 
The: Augsburg Confession. 95 
 
 souls. And where the Holy Spirit can operate for man's 
 regeneration there must be a representation of the one 
 holy Church. 
 
 ARTICLE EIGHT. 
 
 The Ministry or Evie Men in the Church. 
 
 What the Church Is. 
 
 Although the Church properly is the Congregation of Saints 
 and true believers, nevertheless, since, in this life, many hypo- 
 crites and evil persons are mingled therewith, it is lawful to use 
 the Sacraments, which are administered by evil men ; according 
 to the saying of Christ : "The Scribes and the Pharisees sit in 
 Moses' seat," etc. (Matt. 23:2.) Both the Sacraments and Word 
 are effectual by reason of the institution and commandment of 
 Christ, notwithstanding they be administered by evil men. 
 
 They condemn the Donatists, and such Hke, who denied it to 
 be lawful to use the ministry of evil men in the Church, and 
 who thought the ministry of evil men to be unprofitable and of 
 none effect. 
 
 1. What is the main object of this article? 
 
 This article does not intend to present a deliverance 
 on what the Church is. On that subject we heard in the 
 preceding article. In the way of mere repetition or, 
 perhaps, for the purpose of emphasis only we read here : 
 "that the Church properly is the congregation of saints 
 and true believers." It is rightly remarked by Prof. 
 Kolde that the old superscription "What the Church is ?" 
 is not well chosen. (The superscriptions over the articles 
 of the Confession have been added at a later time.) The 
 object of this article is to establish an important principle 
 with reference to the ministry of evil men in the Church. 
 
 2. Are the means of grace effectual when adminis- 
 tered by unregenerated persons? 
 
 This is the real theme of this article. On this impor- 
 tant question the Church of the Reformation had to 
 express itself. First the statement is made that "in this 
 life many hypocrites and evil persons are mingled with 
 the Church. It cannot be otherwise in this life where 
 we can see into no man's heart and where we cannot be 
 
96 The: Augsburg CoNi^E:ssioN. 
 
 absolutely sure as to the sincerity of his profession. But 
 now, if this is a fact how can we be sure, absolutely 
 sure, that even the ministers of the congregations are 
 always godly men? They are of flesh and blood and 
 tempted to sin like the rest of humanity. But now the 
 serious question comes : Are the ministerial acts of un- 
 godly men valid? How with the preaching of the Word 
 of such men? To this our article nswers : ''It is lawful 
 to use the Sacraments, which are administered by evil 
 men ; according to the saying of Christ : The Scribes and 
 the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat, etc. (Matt. 23 : 2). Both 
 the Sacraments and the Word are effectual by reason of 
 the institution and commandment of Christ, notwith- 
 standing they be administered by evil men." The valid- 
 ity lies in the ''institution and commandment of Christ." 
 If a man is regularly called into the ministry (see Article 
 XIV) then we must believe in the efficacy of the means 
 of grace administered by him. 
 
 3. Who are quoted here as opponents of this prin- 
 ciple? 
 
 "The Donatists, and such like." 
 
 a. The Donatists, a strong separatistic sect in North 
 Africa about the fourth century, taught that holy men 
 only should be tolerated in the Church, and that only 
 such priests as had been consecrated by holy bishops and 
 were blameless in their lives could administer the Sacra- 
 ments rightly, and that the ministerial acts of unholy 
 priests had no effect. 
 
 b. ''And such like:' Wiklef was not sound on this 
 point. If Luther had followed him here, it would have 
 meant the stamp of a sect upon the Church which he 
 founded. There is also a Donatistic tendency in 
 Methodism. 
 
 ARTICLE NINE. 
 On Baptism. 
 
 Of baptism, they teach, that it is necessary to salvation, and 
 that through Baptism is offered the grace of God; and that 
 children are to be baptized, who, being offered to God through 
 Baptism, are received into His grace. 
 
The: Augsburg Confession. 97 
 
 They condemn the Anabaptists, who allow not the baptism of 
 children, and say that children are saved without Baptism. 
 
 1. Where in our Confessions do we find a more 
 exhaustive treatment of the Sacrament of Baptism? 
 
 In the Catechisms of Luther. The fourth part of 
 Luther's Small Catechism especially must be carefully 
 studied by him who wants to have a full view of what 
 our Church teaches on Baptism. This article is exceed- 
 ingly brief. We know from the draft of the Confession 
 which a few years ago was found in the Nuremberg 
 archive that at first the intention was simply to insist 
 on infant Baptism against the Anabaptists. The ar- 
 ticle was changed to its present form during the last 
 days before the delivery of the Confession. A few 
 doctrinal statements on Baptism in general were inserted. 
 We must keep in mind that the Augsburg Confession 
 does not aim at a complete exhibition of the doctrines of 
 the young church. In fact, at the time of the preparation 
 of the Confessions, Melanchthon wrote with the thought 
 in his mind that the Lutherans were to remain a part of 
 the Roman Catholic Church. The doctrines which the 
 Lutherans held in common with their opponents were not 
 dwelt upon much except when there was a special reason 
 to do so. This explains the brevity of this article as 
 well as the following on the Sacrament. 
 
 2. Does our article make Baptism a real means of 
 grace ? 
 
 Here appears a point of division between the Luth- 
 erans and all other denominations, if we leave the peculiar 
 position of the Roman and the Greek Catholic Churches 
 out of consideration. All other Protestant denominations 
 can see in Baptism no means of creating a new spiritual 
 life. To them Baptism is only a symbol of regeneration. 
 It does not work the forgiveness of sins, but it is merely 
 an illustration of how God will wash man's sins away. 
 Some also speak of Baptism as a seal of the forgiveness 
 of sins which has taken place independent of Baptism. 
 To all these, Baptism is no real means of grace, no means 
 through which God communicates His grace to the soul. 
 
98 The: Augsburg Confi^ssion. 
 
 Now the question is : Does our brief article offer a 
 testimony on this question ? Indeed it does ! We read 
 that "through Baptism is offered the grace of God." 
 Are we justified in taking this word "offered" in the 
 meaning of a real communication of grace? What does 
 Luther's Small Catechism answer to the question : What 
 gifts or benefits does Baptism confer? He says: "It 
 worketh forgiveness of sins, delivers from death and the 
 devil, and confers everlasting salvation on all who believe 
 as the Word and promise of God declare." I ask again : 
 How is this word "offered" to be taken without doing 
 violence to the text of our article? If we take in connec- 
 tion with it the closing words of the first paragraph 
 "who, being offered to God through Baptism, are received 
 into His grace" then the teaching of Article IX of the 
 Augsburg Confession is the same as that of Luther's 
 Catechism. Perhaps someone will say: The word 
 "regeneration" is not in this article. But how did we 
 read in Article II on Original Sin? There we read that 
 this sin was "condemning and bringing eternal death 
 upon those not born again through Baptism and the Holy 
 Ghost." The Scriptures speak of Baptism as a real 
 means of grace in the following passages : Acts 2 : 38 ; 
 22 : 16; John 3:5; Tit. 3:5-7; Eph. 5 : 25-27 ; Mark 16. 
 
 3. What suggestion may we take from the fact that 
 our article has no statement on the mode of Baptism? 
 
 In the question whether Baptism should be adminis- 
 tered by sprinkling or by immersion our Church is not 
 interested. It cannot be proved by the Scriptures to be 
 an essential matter. 
 
 4. What does this article emphasize against the Ana- 
 baptists? 
 
 That children also are to be baptized. The position 
 of the Anabaptists and their followers "that children are 
 saved without baptism" is rejected. If God in His mercy 
 will make exceptions and not punish children because 
 they were not brought to Baptism yet we have no right 
 to make an established rule of such gracious exceptions 
 
The: Augsburg Confession. 99 
 
 and keep children from the means of grace. The objec- 
 tion that children should not be baptized because they 
 cannot yet understand and believe rests upon a miscon- 
 ception. While there is no conscious faith in a child, yet 
 there is need of salvation. It must come into contact 
 with Him who came as a Saviour into this world and 
 who said: ''Suffer the little children to come unto me, 
 and forbid them not : for such is the Kingdom of God." 
 (Mark 10: 14.) 
 
 5. What should be our attitude to what the Germans 
 call "Nottaufe," a Baptism by laymen in the case of 
 extreme necessity? 
 
 If Baptism is "necessary to salvation" as our article 
 says, if it is an appointed means of grace, through which 
 we are ''born again" (Article II) and through which we 
 "are received into His grace," then we should not be 
 deprived of this Sacrament in the hour of our death, 
 merely because an ordained minister is not at hand. In 
 such case a layman, even a woman, may administer Bap- 
 tism. This has always been customary in the Lutheran 
 Church. The following passage of Scripture has been 
 quoted in favor of this practice : "Then Zipporah took 
 a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son" (Ex. 
 4:25). Other churches are not favorable to such prac- 
 tice. But to them there is no real necessity for Baptism, 
 since they regard it as a mere symbolic rite. To us it is 
 a necessary means of grace. Therefore the order of the 
 Church in respect to the administration of the Sacrament 
 by ordained ministers is second to the need. 
 
 6. But is Baptism under all circumstances "necessary 
 for salvation"? 
 
 We would not say that, as was already stated in our 
 interpretation of Article II. But while God is not bound 
 to the rule and can find other ways, we have no right to 
 make the exceptions. We are tied to the rule, and God 
 will hold us responsible when we treat his Sacrament 
 with indifference or contempt. 
 
100 Thk Augsburg Confession. 
 
 ARTICLE TEN. 
 Of the Lord's Supper. 
 
 Of the Supper of the Lord, they teach, that the Body and 
 Blood of Christ are truly present, and are distributed to those 
 who eat in the Supper of the Lord; and they disapprove of 
 those that teach otherwise. 
 
 1. Where do we find something more on this impor- 
 tant subject? 
 
 Above all read the fifth part of Luther's Small Cate- 
 chism. All the Confessions treat of the Lord's Supper. 
 A very thorough discussion is found in Article VII of 
 the Form of Concord. Read first the brief summary 
 (Epitome) in the first part, and then the more extensive 
 exposition in the second part. 
 
 2. What is, according to our article, the Sacramental 
 gift in the Lord's Supper? 
 
 Not bread and wine only, not certain spiritual influ- 
 ences from the exalted Christ exclusively, but "the Body 
 and Blood of Christ." This is the clear teaching of the 
 words of institution. The Body and Blood of Christ in 
 the glorified condition of His humanity as He is risen 
 from the dead and has ascended to heaven and is now 
 sitting at the right hand of God the Father with the 
 power of being present wherever He wills — the Body 
 and Blood of this Christ is the Sacramental gift in the 
 Lord's Supper. As Luther says in his Small Catechism : 
 ''It is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, 
 under the bread and wine, given unto us Christians to 
 eat and to drink, as it was instituted by Christ Himself." 
 The gift here is something different from what we receive 
 in other religious services. Matt. 26 : 26-28. 
 
 3. For what purpose do we receive the Sacramental 
 gift of Body and Blood of Christ in the Supper? 
 
 Our article does not express itself on this question. 
 But Luther does in the Catechism. Speaking of the bene- 
 fits derived from such eating and drinking he says : 
 ''They are pointed out in these words: 'Given, and shed 
 
The Augsburg Confession. ioi 
 
 for you, for the remission of sins.' Namely, through 
 these words, the remission of sins, Hfe and salvation 
 are granted unto us in the Sacrament. For where there 
 is remission of sins, there are also life and salvation." 
 The spiritual gifts communicated in the Lord's Supper 
 are ''the remission of sins, Hfe and salvation." This 
 must be received through faith in God's promises. But 
 the Body and the Blood are, on one hand, a means for 
 communicating these spiritual gifts. This is apparent 
 from the words : "Given and shed for you." They are, 
 on the other hand, a pledge and a seal by which these 
 spiritual gifts are assured to us. This is clear from the 
 words: "For the remission of sins." (Larger Cate- 
 chism, pp. 478, 479.) 
 
 4. How do we come in contact with the Body and 
 Blood of Christ in the Supper? 
 
 The basis for our answer are the words of our text: 
 "The Body and Blood of Christ are truly present and are 
 distributed to those who eat in the Supper of our Lord." 
 We need not secure Christ's presence by drawing Him 
 down from heaven through our faith as is taught by Cal- 
 vin. He is present at the communion. And not only 
 according to His divinity, but also according to His 
 humanity. We need not lift ourselves up by a strong 
 faith to the right hand of God in order there to partici- 
 pate in Christ's humanity which, according to Calvin, is 
 confined to a certain place in heaven ; no, Christ's 
 humanity has been glorified, it is omnipresent with His 
 divinity, and, therefore, His Body and Blood "are truly 
 present" in the Supper. So our article can speak of a 
 distribution and an eating. It is through an eating and 
 drinking that we receive the Body and Blood of Christ 
 in the communion. 
 
 5. Are the words of our text meant in the sense of 
 Transubstantiation ? 
 
 By transubstantiation we understand the changing of 
 bread and wine into Body and Blood of Christ. Our 
 article does not intend to teach this Roman Catholic 
 
102 The: Augsburg Confession. 
 
 doctrine. This we can tell by referring to the German 
 text of our article, which reads : "It is taught that the 
 true Body and Blood of Christ are truly present under 
 the form of bread and wine in the Supper." The same 
 language we find in Luther's Small Catechism : "It is 
 the true Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, under 
 the bread and wine.'' This shows that the Lutheran 
 Church does not teach transubstantiation. But does she 
 not teach consuhstantlation? If by this term we are to 
 understand the creation of a third substance out of the 
 two substances (bread and wine on the one hand, Body 
 and Blood on the other), then the Lutheran Church also 
 rejects consubstantiation. According to the Confessions 
 of our Church the earthly elements of bread and wine 
 remain w^hat they are, unchanged, but "in, with and 
 under" these elements, in a mysterious way, the true 
 Body and Blood of Christ are received. 
 
 6. Who are meant by the closing words of our arti- 
 cle : "and they (the Lutheran churches) disapprove of 
 those that teach otherwise"? 
 
 a. Of course, all opponents to the Lutheran doctrine, 
 the Roman Catholic Church included. Even though it 
 may be true that Melanchthon, at this critical moment, 
 was anxious to say as little as possible of the opposition 
 of the Lutherans to the Catholic Church, yet the theory 
 of transubstantiation was not held by the Lutherans. 
 Luther had rejected it positively. 
 
 b. But it is historically sure that this closing sentence 
 of our article was especially intended as an expression 
 against Zwingli and his adherents. We know that from 
 Melanchthon's correspondence at that time. Philip of 
 Hessia whose sympathies were on the side of Zwingli 
 was opposed to this phrase of rejection, and he tried his 
 best to move those who were to give their signatures to 
 the Confession to strike it out. He wanted to make it 
 possible for Zwingli with his symbolical conception of 
 the Lord's Supper to come in under this article. But 
 neither Melanchthon nor the rest of the Lutherans as- 
 sembled at Augsburg could be persuaded. So Philip of 
 
The Augsburg Conl^kssion. 103 
 
 Hessia yielded. Out of consideration for him the 
 milder term ''disapprove" instead of "condemn" (as 
 in Articles I, II, V, VIII, IX, XII, XIII, XVI, 
 XVII, XVIII) was used at this place. But our Lutheran 
 fathers at Augsburg felt that it was their duty not only 
 to state their doctrine, but also to reject the teaching 
 that had been opposed to it by the Swiss reformer and 
 the "Sacramentarians" in general.* 
 
 7. Is it right for the Augsburg Confession to reject 
 the teaching of the Reformed churches regarding the 
 Lord's Supper? 
 
 a. What do zve understand by the ''Reformed" 
 churches, and hozv do they teach on the Lord's Supper? 
 By the Reformed churches we understand, in the first 
 place, the Church which took its beginning from the 
 work of Zwingli, but then received its stamp from Calvin. 
 It is the Church of the Heidelberg Catechism. This 
 Church was at an early time transplanted to Holland, to 
 Scotland and to England. In England and Scotland it 
 divided on the question of church government and estab- 
 lished itself under the names of the Episcopal, of the 
 Presbyterian and the Congregational churches, with con- 
 fessions agreeing with the Heidelberg Catechism in the 
 doctrine of the Lord's Supper. The Methodists and the 
 different kinds of Baptists are daughters of the Reformed 
 Church and have the conception of the Heidelberg Cate- 
 chism in the doctrine of the Lord's Supper. What do all 
 these Reformed churches teach on the Lord's Supper? 
 All agree on this : Bread and wine are mere signs of 
 the absent Body and Blood of Christ. Bread and wine 
 
 *Ivater, 1540, in the so-called altered Augsburg Confession fVariata), 
 after the death of Zwingli, Melanchthon eliminated this phrase: "and they 
 disapprove of those who teach otherwise." He also removed the words 
 "truly present" which were a stumbling block to the sympathizers with 
 Zwingli. He must have done it with the viev/ of uniting the Reformed 
 with the Lutherans on the basis of the Augsburg Confession. At first no 
 special objection was made against it. But when at a later time it was 
 found that the followers of Melanchthon. who went further than Melanch 
 thon himself would have done, were taking steps to sell out to Calvinism, 
 and when they tried to accomplish it under the cover of the altered edition 
 of 1540, then the Lutherans becam.e alarmed, and from now on demanded 
 that the "unaltered" Augsburg Confession, meaning by that the edition of 
 1530-31, should be accepted. 
 
104 'I'he Augsburg Coni^ession. 
 
 remind us of the crucified Body and the shed Blood of 
 Christ. It is as if we would look at a painting of the 
 crucified Saviour and be reminded of His death for us. 
 This was as far as Zwingli would go. Calvin and the 
 churches following him went a little further: If our 
 faith is strong enough then it lifts itself up in the power 
 of the Holy Spirit to the right hand of God where 
 Christ's humanity is confined and there we become par- 
 takers of His Body and Blood. The Body and Blood of 
 Christ are not present in the Supper, because Body can be 
 only in one place at one time. We can therefore not take 
 part of the Body of Christ orally, but only spiritually 
 through faith. If we come to examine carefully what 
 some of the Reformed Confessions mean by partaking of 
 the Body and Blood of Christ we will find that they mean 
 nothing more than to partake of the power of Christ's 
 sufferings and death. In the Lord's Supper we receive 
 substantially the same that we receive already in the 
 Word. 
 
 b. Hoiv zvould we sum up the difference between 
 the Lutheran Church and the Reformed churches on the 
 doctrine of the Lord's Supper f i. The Real Presence. 
 The Lutherans say : The Body and Blood of Christ are 
 present in the Supper, and this heavenly gift can be pres- 
 ent, because the humanity of Christ in its glorified condi- 
 tion is like His divinity: omnipresent, omnipotent, etc. 
 The Reformed say: Christ according to His humanity is 
 not present in the Supper, because as man He is con- 
 fined to that one place at the right hand of God, His 
 humanity has no part in the attributes of His divine 
 nature, it is not omnipresent. 2. The communication. 
 The Lutherans say : Since Body and Blood of Christ are 
 present, the believer needs not to strain himself at the 
 altar, as if to draw down the heavenly gift. If he is 
 spiritually hungry and thirsty, he simply needs to eat and 
 to drink. This is the means of communication. The 
 Reformed say : Since the humanity of Christ is far away 
 from the communicant he must make special efforts to 
 bring himself into communion with Christ. The com- 
 munion becomes the test of a strong faith instead that 
 
The Augsburg Confession. 105 
 
 it should be the nourishment for a weak faith. 3. The 
 character of the Sacrament. The Lutherans say : There 
 is an essential difference between a preaching ser\^ice and 
 a Communion. At the Communion the object, of course, 
 is also the reconciliation of man with God. But in addi- 
 tion to this we have the confirmation of the forgiveness 
 of sins through the Body and Blood of Christ as a pledge 
 and a seal. And in the Communion we come in real con- 
 tact with Christ as our brother. The Reformed say : 
 There is no essential difference between a common reli- 
 gious service and the Communion. In both cases the 
 heavenly gift consists of spiritual influences which must 
 be received by a special exercise of our faith. Very 
 characteristic is the following which is told of a Method- 
 ist congregation. On Communion Sundays this con- 
 gregation always has a weak attendance, because people 
 say: Oh, to-day it is just Communion; we will wait 
 until there is preaching. Quite consistent! If the aim is 
 merely to be reminded of Christ's death and to strengthen 
 our faith in Christ then a preaching service is more help- 
 ful than a Communion. 
 
 c. Now we will be prepared to answer our question : 
 7^ it right for the Augsburg Confession to reject the 
 teaching of the Reformed churches on the Lord's Supper? 
 We have seen that the two positions are opposed to each 
 other like Yes and No. They cannot be harmonized into 
 one view. It has been tried many times in history, and 
 it has always failed. If the "German Evangelical Synod 
 of North America" has succeeded in establishing an 
 organization which unites Lutherans and Reformed into 
 one body then it has been done on the basis that the 
 distinguishing points are matters of indifference. This 
 certainly is unfaithfulness to truth. Such position carries 
 with it laxness in Scripture truth in every direction. No, 
 it cannot be otherwise : the Reformed must reject our 
 position and we must reject the position of the Reformed. 
 It is a plain case of Yes and No, both of which cannot 
 dwell together in one conviction. The Augsburg Confes- 
 sion wisely refuses to endorse that middle-of-the-road- 
 policy which has gained favor with many in our day. 
 
io6 The Augsburg Coni^ession. 
 
 When it establishes a doctrine on the basis of the divine 
 Word then it calls the opposing doctrine an error and 
 rejects it. 
 
 ARTICLE ELEVEN. 
 O^ Concession. 
 
 Of Confession, they teach, that Private Absolution ought to 
 be retained in the churches, although in confession an enumera- 
 tion of all sins is not necessary. For it is impossible, according 
 to the Psalm: "Who can understand his errors?" (Ps. 19: 12). 
 
 1. What do we understand by auricular Confession? 
 
 At the fourth Lateran Synod, 121 5, it was decreed 
 that all mortal sins of which a person has knowledge 
 should be confessed to the priest. Not only should the 
 sins be mentioned, but the circumstances under which 
 they have been committed are to be told. With the infor- 
 mation thus secured, the priest, as a divinely appointed 
 judge, is to say what steps are to be taken to secure the 
 divine forgiveness. 
 
 2. Why does our article reject auricular Confession? 
 
 a. "An enumeration of all sins is not necessary." 
 It is not commanded in the Scriptures. The priest has 
 not been appointed by God as a judge over the consciences 
 of men. 
 
 b. "For it is impossible, according to the Psalm : 
 'Who can understand his errors'?" (Ps. 19: 12). We 
 can easily deceive ourselves in judging the nature of our 
 own sins. In Jer. 17:9 we read: "The heart is deceitful 
 above all things, and desperately wicked : who can know 
 it?" Neither will it be possible for us always to dis- 
 tinguish between "mortal'' and "venial" sins. We can- 
 not accept the artificial distinction of the Roman Church 
 which names seven mortal sins. We say : every sin com- 
 mitted by the unregenerated and by him who is not 
 justified is a mortal sin, and all sins in the regenerated 
 which do away with and nullify justification are mortal 
 sins. An attempt, therefore, at enumerating the mortal 
 sins before a priest will easily be a deceptive practice. 
 
The Augsburg Confession. 107 
 
 3. What do we understand by private absolution? 
 
 We distinguish it from the general confession and 
 absolution which takes place at the preparation of the 
 congregation for the Lord's Supper. Read Article XXV 
 in the second part of our Confession. In private absolu- 
 tion an individual, feeling the burden of special sins or 
 his general sinfulness, comes of his own free will to his 
 pastor seeking spiritual comfort, and the pastor pro- 
 nounces to him individually the forgiveness of sins. 
 
 4. Is private Confession compulsory? 
 
 a. The Scriptures teach in many places that we must 
 confess our sins (i John 1:9; Prov. 28:13; Ps. 51), 
 but we find no conclusive proof that confession must be 
 made to the spiritual leader of the congregation, as a 
 condition of the forgiveness of sins. 
 
 b. Luther, who put a very high estimate upon volun- 
 tary private confession, took the position that it must not 
 be made compulsory, that we may confess to whom- 
 soever we will, that the all important thing is that we 
 confess to God. From this position Luther never 
 wavered, although he always warmly recommended volun- 
 tary private confession. (In Erlangen Edition of 
 Luther's works compare vol. 28, pp. 248, 249, 250, 308; 
 vol. 29, p. 353 ; vol. 10, p. 401 ; vol. 23, p. 86.) 
 
 c. Our article says with precaution ''that Private 
 Absolution ought to he retained in the churches." That 
 compulsion is here not intended we see from the follow- 
 ing words of the Schwabach Articles : ''Private Confes- 
 sion should not be forced with laws." And in the elev- 
 enth of the Marburg Articles, written by Luther, we read 
 that "Confession, or the seeking of counsel from the 
 pastor or a friend (Nachste) should not be forced, but 
 be free." Since these articles were the sources which 
 Melanchthon used for writing our Confession they are 
 suggestive in the interpretation of the article under con- 
 sideration. 
 
 5. Why was private absolution retained in the Luth- 
 eran Church? 
 
 If private absolution is used aright and care is taken 
 
io8 The Augsburg Coni^ession. 
 
 not to let it degenerate into the auricular confession of 
 the Roman Church it can become a valuable means for 
 promoting the religious life in the congregation. It calls 
 especially for ministers of the right kind. The question 
 is — as Origen said already at the beginning of the third 
 century — whether ''high-priest-like-personalities can be 
 found, merciful as Christ and the Apostles." (Seeberg, 
 History of Doctrines I, § 15). Such ministers will 
 remember that it is not within their rights to ask imperti- 
 nent questions, like a Roman Catholic priest will do. 
 They will remember that as far as duty to confess sins 
 goes, the sinner needs to confess to God alone ; but that 
 it is the privilege of those with a troubled conscience to 
 make use of the office of the ministry for counsel and 
 assurance of divine grace. Luther emphasized the 
 thought that one may also make confession to a friend, 
 in accordance with James 5:16: ''Confess your faults 
 one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may 
 be healed." 
 
 ARTICLE TWELVE. 
 
 O^ Repentance. 
 
 Of Repentance, they teach, that for those that have fallen 
 after Baptism, there is remission of sins whenever they are 
 converted ; and that the Church ought to impart absolution to 
 those thus returning to repentance. 
 
 Now repentance consists properly of these two parts : One 
 is contrition, that is, terrors smiting the conscience through the 
 knowledge of sin; the other is faith, which, born of the Gospel, 
 or of absolution, believes that, for Christ's sake, sins are for- 
 given, comforts the conscience and delivers it from terrors 
 Then good works are bound to follow, which are the fruits of 
 repentance. 
 
 They condemn the Anabaptists, who deny that those once 
 justified can lose the Holy Ghost. Also those who contend that 
 some may attain to such perfection in this life that they cannot 
 sin. The Novatians also are condemned, who would not absolve 
 such as had fallen after Baptism, though they returned to re- 
 pentance. They also are rejected who do not teach that remis- 
 sion of sins cometh through faith, but command us to merit 
 grace through satisfactions of our own. 
 
 This article is directed against four special errors 
 
 which are enumerated in the last paragraph of our text. 
 
The Augsburg Confession. 109 
 
 We have a rejection (i) of the Anabaptists; (2) of the 
 Perfectionists; (3) of the Novatians, and (4) of the 
 Romanists. The latter are not mentioned by name. The 
 first paragraph of our article ofifers the positive doctrine 
 of our Lutheran Church against the Novatians, and in 
 the second paragraph we have the doctrine of repentance 
 as opposed to the Romanists. 
 
 I. Can those once justified lose the Holy Ghost? 
 
 The Anabaptists denied it. The Schwenkfeldians at 
 the time of the Reformation took the same position. The 
 strict Calvinists also deny that he who has been justified 
 can fall from grace. He may fall into sins, offend the 
 Holy Spirit and wound his conscience and lose the feel- 
 ing of grace for a time (Synod of Dort), but he cannot 
 fall forever. This is in harmony with the doctrine of 
 absolute and unfailing predestination. Our article says: 
 ''They (the Lutheran churches) condemn the Ana- 
 baptists, who deny that those once justified can lose the 
 Holy Ghost." Such doctrine is clearly against the teach- 
 ing of the Scriptures. Matt. 26:41: ''Watch and pray 
 that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is 
 willing, but the flesh is weak." i Peter 5:8: "Be sober, 
 be vigilant ; because your adversary the devil, as a roar- 
 ing lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour." 
 I Cor. 10:12: "Wherefore let him that thinketh he 
 standeth take heed lest he fall." Gal. 5:4: "Ye are 
 fallen from grace." This matter is further discussed by 
 Luther in the Smalcald Articles in Part III, Article HL 
 line 42, and in the Form of Concord, Article IV, line 31 
 (second part). 
 
 2. What is the teaching of the Perfectionists and 
 what is our attitude toward them? 
 
 a. It is the contention "that some may attain to such 
 perfection in this life that they cannot sin." The Roman 
 Catholic Church, at the Council of Trent, confirmed the 
 doctrine that the justified can perfectly live up to the 
 commandments of God. The Methodists of all kinds 
 emphasize Christian perfection and perfect holiness. 
 
no The Augsburg Confession. 
 
 The so-called Oxford Movement (Pearsall Smith) stood 
 for this doctrine. Some say that after conversion a 
 second religious experience is to follow which will lead 
 to perfect holiness. 
 
 b. To this we answer: The sanctification and the 
 renewal of the believers is a gradual growth, but it will 
 always remain imperfect in this life. Paul says : "Not 
 as though I had already attained, either were already 
 perfect : but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that 
 for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus." 
 (Phil. 3: 12.) And in i John i : 8 we read: "If we say 
 that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth 
 is not in us." Here the perfectionists like to oppose: 
 While we may have sin, yet we need not to sin ; to have 
 sin and to sin are two quite different things. But how' 
 will they then answer the loth verse in the same chapter? 
 It reads : "If we say that we have not sinned, we make 
 him a liar, and his word is not in us." 
 
 Where in our Confessions do we find more on this subject? 
 See Apology, Article IV, 9; Article VI, 25; Smalcald Articles, 
 Part III, Article XIII, 2; Small Catechism. Part II, Article 
 III; Part III, fifth petition; Part IV, 12. Larger Catechism, 
 Part II, Article III, 57. Fifth petition 86; Form of Concord, 
 First Part, Article VI, 4; Second Part, Article I, 14; Article 
 ir, 68, 84; Article III, 23; Article VI, 7, 21. 
 
 3. What was the error of the Novatians, and what 
 do we oppose? 
 
 a. This sect of the early Church "would not absolve 
 such as had fallen after Baptism, though they returned 
 to repentance." The Novatians stood for absolute purity 
 of the Church. If Christians after their Baptism had 
 fallen into grave sins they were to be excommunicated 
 and not to be admitted again even upon repentance. They 
 should be left to the mercy of God, but the Church should 
 not defile itself with them. 
 
 b. The Lutheran Church also stands for excommuni- 
 cation of those who are living in grave sins and are im- 
 penitent, according to i Cor. 5:4, 5, 11. Paul says 
 in the 13th verse: "Therefore put away from among 
 yourselves that wicked person." But at the same time 
 
The Augsburg Confession. hi 
 
 our Church says in this twelfth article of its Confession 
 ''that for those that have fallen after Baptism, there is 
 remission of sins whenever they are converted ; and that 
 the Church ought to impart absolution to those thus 
 returning to repentance." This is the plain teaching of 
 the Scriptures, i John i : 7 we read : "The blood of 
 Jesus Christ, his Son, cleanseth us from all sin," The 
 admission of all to repentance is emphasized in the fol- 
 lowing passages : "Come unto me, all ye that labour and 
 are heavy laden, and I will give you rest." (Matt, ii : 
 28.) "Him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out." 
 (John 6: 37.) The Lord "is not willing that any should 
 perish, but that all should come to repentance." 2 Pet. 
 3:9). And it is utterly against the spirit of the Scrip- 
 tures that they whom Christ accepts should be excluded 
 from the "Holy Christian Church and the Communion 
 of Saints" where according to Luther's explanation of 
 the third article of the Apostles' Creed "he daily forgives 
 abundantly all my sins, and the sins of all believers"; 
 it is inconceivable that they should remain excluded from 
 the Sacrament of the Altar which was instituted as a 
 means of grace. 
 
 4. What part of our article is especially directed 
 against the Roman Catholic Church? 
 
 Note the closing words : "They also are rejected who 
 do not teach that remission of sins cometh through faith, 
 but command us to merit grace through satisfactions of 
 our own." With this passage, which plainly reminds us 
 of Article R', the second paragraph of our article may 
 fittingly be taken together. It is a very valuable defini- 
 tion of what repentance is in the conception of the Luth- 
 eran Church. 
 
 a. Of zuhat parts does repentance consist according to 
 Roman Catholic theology? Of three parts: (i) contri- 
 tion of the heart; (2) oral confession; (3) satisfaction 
 through good works. Of these, contrition only can be 
 admitted. What is our objection against the two other 
 parts? They deprive the penitent sinner of the assurance 
 of the forgiveness of sins and thus of true comfort. If 
 
112 The: Augsburg Confession. 
 
 the genuineness of repentance is to be dependent upon 
 an enumeration of all mortal sins in auricular Confes- 
 sion then the penitent sinner will always have to ask: 
 Did I do all my duty ? Did I mention all sins ? Further- 
 more, if works of satisfaction are part of repentance as 
 the condition of the forgiveness of sins, then he with a 
 troubled conscience will always have to ask : Did I do 
 enough ? Were my works sufficient ? 
 
 b. What doctrine does our article oppose? "Now 
 repentance consists properly of these two parts : One is 
 contrition, that is, terrors smiting the conscience through 
 the knowledge of sin; the other is faith, which, born of 
 the Gospel, or of absolution, believes that, for Christ's 
 sake, sins are forgiven, comforts the conscience, and 
 delivers it from terrors." Contrition and faith are the 
 two parts of which repentance consists. Read the follow- 
 ing passages of Scripture: Luke 18:13; Ps. 51:19; 
 Acts 16:30-31. The other Confessions deal with this 
 subject in the following places : Apology, Article XII. 
 Smalcald Articles, Part III, Article III. Form of Con- 
 cord, Second Part, Article II, 14. Article V, 7 f. 
 
 Re:mark. — Good works are excluded from the definition of re- 
 pentance, because it would lead to work-righteousness. Yet they 
 must follow as our article says : "Then good works are bound to 
 follow, which are the fruits of repentance." 
 
 ARTICLE THIRTEEN. 
 
 Of thk Use 01^ THK Sacraments. 
 
 Of the Use of the Sacraments, they teach, that the Sacraments 
 were ordained, not only to be marks of profession among men, 
 but rather to be signs and testimonies of the will of God toward 
 us, instituted to awaken and confirm faith in those who use 
 them. Wherefore we must so use the Sacraments that faith 
 be added to believe the promises which are offered and set forth 
 through the Sacraments. 
 
 They therefore condemn those who teach that the Sacraments 
 justify by the outward act, and do not teach that, in the use of 
 the Sacraments, faith which believes that sins are forgiven, is 
 required. 
 
 I. What was ONE purpose for ordaining the Sacra- 
 ments to be used in the Church? 
 
The; Augsburg Confession. 113 
 
 "To be marks of profession among men." By using 
 Baptism and Lord's Supper men will know each other 
 as Christians. He who is not baptized and does not go 
 to the Sacrament of the Altar is no Christian. This was a 
 thought emphasized by Zwingli. To him the Sacraments 
 with their symbolic meaning were chiefly ''marks of pro- 
 fession among men." 
 
 2. But for what purpose have the Sacraments been 
 MAINLY instituted? 
 
 "But rather to be signs and testimonies of the will 
 of God toward us, instituted to awaken and confirm 
 faith in those who use them." Baptism is to "awaken" 
 faith in us. It is to us a testimony, a seal and a pledge for 
 the forgiveness of our sins and our regeneration through 
 the Holy Spirit. Through all our life we shall use it 
 for this purpose. The Sacrament of the Altar is to 
 "confirm" faith in us. It is testimony, seal and pledge 
 of the closest communion with our Saviour whose Body 
 and Blood we eat and drink for the remission of sins. 
 
 3. What is, therefore, necessary for receiving the 
 benefits of the Sacraments? 
 
 "That faith be added to believe the promises which are 
 offered and set forth through the Sacraments." The 
 Sacrament as such exists independently of faith, but 
 faith is the hand with which we receive the benefit which 
 it oft'ers. Mark 16:16; i Cor. 11:26. 
 
 4. What viev^^ is here condemned? 
 
 "That the Sacraments justify by the outward acts," 
 or "ex opere operato," as we read in the original. This 
 last paragraph was not in the documents delivered at 
 Augsburg, but was added by Melanchthon when the first 
 edition for print was prepared. It is not in the German 
 copy because this dates from a time when the Confession 
 was not fully finished as we have seen in Part Two of this 
 book. This paragraph is directed against the Roman 
 Catholic Church which says that the Sacraments com- 
 municate their benefits to every participant who does not 
 intentionally hinder the operation of grace, faith not 
 
114 'I'he Augsburg Confession. 
 
 being necessary. In foreign missionary work Roman 
 Catholic missionaries have taken children from their 
 heathen parents, secretly baptizing them, and then re- 
 ported them as Christians. According to this an idiot 
 would participate with profit in the Holy Communion. 
 
 ARTICLE FOURTEEN. 
 
 Of Ecclesiastical Order. 
 
 Of Ecclesiastical Order, they teach, that none should publicly 
 teach in the Church or administer the Sacraments, unless he be 
 regularly called. 
 
 1. What is the object of this article? 
 
 To establish a principle with respect to administering 
 the means of grace, that will secure good order in the 
 Church. 
 
 The office of teaching the Word and administering 
 the Sacraments belongs to the Church as a whole. It 
 is not a possession of the bishops only, as the Roman 
 and Greek Catholics say. The congregations, repre- 
 sented in church bodies (synods), co-operate in pro- 
 ducing the ministry (theological seminaries). The local 
 congregations have the right to extend the call to their 
 ministers. In addition to this, we believe in the universal 
 priesthood of all believers (i Pet. 2:9). In cases of 
 extreme necessity even laymen can administer Baptism. 
 And to-day we employ our laymen in Sunday schools and 
 all kinds of meetings. 
 
 The question now is : How can the Lutherans, when 
 giving such rights to the congregations, maintain the 
 order necessary in the Church of Christ with reference 
 to teaching and administering the Sacraments ? 
 
 2. What principle is here established? 
 
 ''That no one should publicly teach in the church or 
 administer the Sacraments, unless he he regularly called 
 (nisi rite vocatus)." Rom. 10:15; Heb. 5:4. 
 
Thk Augsburg Confession. 115 
 
 3. What would we consider a regular call to the 
 ministry? 
 
 a. We stated that the congregations have the right 
 to call their pastors. But suppose some local congrega- 
 tion should be misled by a worthless individual, would 
 such an one have the right to regard himself as a minister 
 of the Gospel and could he expect to be called by other 
 congregations? Certainly not. This then shows that 
 as far as the calling to the ministry in general is con- 
 cerned there must be other factors to co-operate with 
 the local congregation if anyone is to have the regular 
 call. 
 
 b. Not the mere fact that he holds a call from a local 
 congregation makes a man a minister of the Gospel in 
 the Christian Church, but in addition to an inner call, 
 he must have received a training for this office, and 
 during such period of training he must have been tested 
 by teachers and finally must have received the recom- 
 mendation for an ordination to the ministry, and this 
 ordination must have been carried out by men who had 
 an instruction to do so by a representation of Christian 
 congregations. If the call from a congregation comes 
 as the crowning act upon these preceding acts, then he 
 has the right to teach publicly in the church and to 
 administer the Sacraments. 
 
 c. This question is sometimes confused by not dis- 
 tinguishing between the call to the ministry in general 
 and the call to administer the means of grace in a given 
 congregation. If we have in mind the work of a minister 
 in an individual congregation and do not include his 
 recognition by the Church at large then even the fact 
 that the congregation may have been misled in calling 
 him would not make his ministerial acts invalid. Here 
 the principle expressed in Article VIII on the basis of 
 Matt. 23 : 2 would hold : "The scribes and the Pharisees 
 sit in Moses' seat." God will forgive what has been 
 sinned in ignorance. But it would be a dangerous prin- 
 ciple to say: Since this man has succeeded in being 
 called by a congregation he is now a regular minister 
 
ii6 The: Augsburg Confession, 
 
 of the Gospel and can claim the right to be presented to 
 any congregation. 
 
 4. But how about the teaching of laymen in our 
 churches? 
 
 a. According to the reading of this article, can they 
 who have not been ordained for the ministry teach in 
 Sunday schools and conduct devotional services in Young 
 People's meetings? Note that it here says "that no one 
 should publicly teach in the church," etc. By this was 
 meant the public preaching of the Word on Sundays in 
 the pulpit. This is a work that shall be left to the regu- 
 larly called pastor of the congregation. 
 
 b. If an able layman or a theological student in times 
 of vacancy should be called by a congregation to help out 
 temporarily then he would have for such limited time 
 the regular call. 
 
 The object is that everything be done ''decently and 
 in order" in the Church (i Cor. 14:40). 
 
 ARTICLE FIFTEEN. 
 Of Ritks and Usages. 
 
 Of Rites and Usages in the Church, they teach, that those 
 ought to be observed which may be observed without sin, and 
 which are profitable unto tranquiUity and good order in the 
 Church, as particular holydays, festivals, and the like. 
 
 Nevertheless, concerning such things, let men be admonished 
 that consciences are not to be burdened, as though such 
 observance was necessary to salvation. They are admonished 
 also that human traditions instituted to propitiate God, to merit 
 grace and to make satisfaction for sins, are opposed to the 
 Gospel and the doctrine of faith. Wherefore vows and tradi- 
 tions concerning meats and days, etc., instituted to merit grace 
 and to make satisfaction for sins, are useless and contrary to 
 the Gospel. 
 
 I. What is the aim of this article? 
 
 To lay down principles regarding usages in the Church 
 that cannot claim to have a divine commandment to sup- 
 port them. Things that God has clearly commanded in 
 His Word must be observed. There can be no argument 
 
The: Augsburg Confession. 117 
 
 about that. But how with so many things which have 
 come to be usages in the whole Church, or in parts of 
 the Church, on which there may be difference of opinion 
 as to whether they can be demanded or not? For in- 
 stance, what shall be our attitude toward the order of 
 service (liturgy), toward the question of holydays and 
 festivals (Christmas, Easter, Good Friday, Ascension 
 Day, Pentecost) ? The special aim of this article is to 
 lay down principles by which we may be guided. 
 
 2. What rites and usages ought to be observed? 
 
 Such as "are profitable unto tranquillity and good order 
 in the Church." An institution such as the Church will 
 develop out of its own life and experience a good many 
 things that are helpful for the promotion of good order. 
 A few examples may be cited : It is an order of the 
 Church that a marriage shall be formally solemnized with 
 an appropriate service before the married life begins. 
 The custom of not going to Communion before Confirma- 
 tion is also an order of the Church. Ordination even 
 does not rest upon a divine command, but it is a most 
 wholesome usage of the Church, helpful to discriminate 
 against those that should not be entrusted with the 
 sacred office. A good Scriptural liturgy, which gives 
 proportion and solemnity to the services of the sanctuary, 
 and helps to edify the w^orshiping congregation is also 
 an ordinance. Of such, and many other things, we 
 would say that they ''ought to be observed." 
 
 3. What should be the motives for observing them? 
 
 a. They ''are profitable/' If we take each case by 
 itself we can easily show in what way they are profitable. 
 
 b. Parts of Article XXVIII should be studied in 
 connection with this article. There, on page 65 (line 55), 
 we read of the following motive : *'It is proper that the 
 churches should keep such ordinances for the sake of 
 charity and tranquillity, so far that one do not offend 
 another." 
 
 c. Another motive for observing such ordinances of 
 the Church is that they can ''be observed zmthout sin!' 
 
ii8 The Augsburg Confession. 
 
 4. But what should never be the motive for their 
 observance? 
 
 •'Xet men be admonished that consciences are not to 
 be burdened, as though such observance was necessary 
 to salvation." Beware of making meritorious works of 
 these observances! If we should urge the observance of 
 these things by speaking of them as if they were neces- 
 sary for salvation then we would burden the consciences. 
 Article XXVIII dwells upon this thought. 
 
 5. Does the Sunday also come under the discussion 
 of "Rites and Usages" in the Church? 
 
 a. The Augsburg Confession. The Sunday is not 
 mentioned in this article, which speaks only of ''particular 
 holydays, festivals, and the like." But in Article XXVIII 
 (page 65, line 53) we read: "What, then, are we to 
 think of the Sunday and like rites in the house of God?" 
 Again: "Of this kind, is the observance of the Lord's 
 Day, Easter, Pentecost, and like holydays and rites. For 
 those who judge that, by the authority of the Church, 
 the observance of the Lord's Day, instead of the Sabbath 
 Day, was ordained as a thing necessary, do greatly err. 
 Scripture has abrogated the Sabbath Day ; for it teaches 
 that, since the Gospel has been revealed, all the cere- 
 monies of Moses can be omitted. And yet, because it 
 was necessary to appoint a certain day, that the people 
 might know when they ought to come together, it appears 
 that the Church (the Apostles) designated the Lord's 
 Day for this purpose; and this day seems to have been 
 chosen all th^ more for this additional reason, that men 
 might have an example of Christian liberty, and might 
 know that the keeping neither of the Sabbath, nor of 
 any other day, is necessary." It is admitted (i) that by 
 not observing the day we may make ourselves guilty of 
 the sin of giving "offence to others." That this must be 
 avoided is repeated three times : "sine offensione aliorum" 
 (without offence to others). The thought always re- 
 curs : "It is proper that the churches should keep such 
 ordinances for the sake of charity and tranquillity." It 
 
The Augsburg Coni^ession. 119 
 
 is admitted (2) that it is lawful for the authorities of 
 the Church *'to appoint a certain day, that the people 
 might know when they ought to come together" for wor- 
 ship, so that ''things be done orderly in the Church." 
 But it is insisted upon (3) that the observance of the 
 day is not "necessary to salvation," as it is to be num- 
 bered among "the ceremonies of Moses," which have 
 been "abrogated," according to Col. 2: 16. 
 
 b. Luther's Larger Catechism must be taken together 
 with the expositions of Alelanchthon in the Augsburg 
 Confession. Luther, in his interpretation of the Third 
 Commandment, says that this commandment "according 
 to its gross sense does not pertain to us Christians." The 
 Sabbath "in this gross sense" is numbered among "the 
 other ordinances of the Old Testament," "which have 
 now been made free through Christ." Yet Luther wants 
 the day to be recognized as a day of rest, "first of all 
 for bodily causes and necessities, which nature teaches 
 and requires ; and for the common people, man-servants 
 and maid-servants, who are occupied the whole week 
 with their work and trade, that for a day they may for- 
 bear, in order to rest and be refreshed." Luther agrees 
 with Melanchthon than an observance of the Lord's 
 Day cannot be based upon the law of Moses. He bases 
 it upon the order of creation. He retains the command- 
 ment : "Remember the Sabbath (Feiertag, day of rest) 
 to keep it holy." He asks : "What is meant by keeping 
 it holy?" and he answers: "Nothing else than to be 
 occupied in holy words, works and life. For the day 
 needs so 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 thee." The chief thing for Luther is to 
 "sanctify the Sabbath, or Day of Rest," "through God's 
 Word," "so that to this day belongs a special holy exer- 
 cise." But through this "holy exercise" we shall sanctify 
 the day. Luther says : "Since, therefore, so much de- 
 pends upon God's Word that without it no Sabbath can 
 be kept holy, we ought to know that God will insist upon 
 a strict observance of this commandment, and will punish 
 
120 The Augsburg Coni^i:ssion. 
 
 all who despise His Word and are not willing to hear 
 and learn it, especially at the time appointed for the 
 purpose." 
 
 6. What rites and usages are positively to be ex- 
 cluded from observance? 
 
 We read in our Article XV: "They are admonished 
 also that human traditions instituted to propitiate God, 
 to merit grace and to make satisfaction for sins, are 
 opposed to the Gospel and the doctrine of faith. Where- 
 fore vows and traditions concerning meats and days, 
 etc., instituted to merit grace and to make satisfaction 
 for sins, are useless and contrary to the Gospel." For 
 an illustration of what here is meant read xA.rticle XXVI. 
 
 ARTICLE SIXTEEN. 
 O^ Civil Afi^airs. 
 
 1. What are the leading thoughts of this article? 
 
 a. Civil government is a divine institution. 
 
 b. It is right to hold property. 
 
 c. Marriage is a state pleasing to God. 
 
 2. What does our Church teach on civil govern- 
 ment? 
 
 a. ''That it is right for Christians to bear civil office." 
 Compare Apolog}% Article XVI ; Form of Concord, First 
 Part, Article XII, 12, etc.; Second Part, Article XII, 17.; 
 In Romans 13: i we read: ''There is no power but of 
 God : the powers that be are ordained of God." The 
 Anabaptists taught that among Christians there was no 
 government necessary. The Quakers forbid their mem- 
 bers to bear civil office because of the danger of com- 
 promising their principles with respect to war, oath, 
 etc. The Mennonites take the same position. The 
 Reformed Presbyterians (Covenanters) say that a Chris- 
 tian cannot bear civil office, unless the constitution of 
 the government recognizes God as the source of all 
 power. 
 
The: Augsburg Confe;ssion. 121 
 
 b. It is right for Christians "to sit as judges, to 
 determine matters by the Imperial and other existing 
 laws, to award just punishments." The "existing laws" 
 of a country are not always identical with the divine 
 laws. They cannot be. The divine laws as contained in 
 the Holy Scriptures, in many cases, have to express the 
 Christian ideal, while the laws of a civil government, 
 under the existing conditions of society, cannot go above 
 the level of general ethics. For instance, the divorce 
 laws of a country cannot be confined to the same as what 
 the Scriptures admit as grounds for a divorce. But then 
 the question comes : Can a Christian be a judge and 
 determine matters by the "existing laws"? According 
 to our article, he can. He need only be "just." The 
 Lutheran Church does not believe in a theocracy such 
 as Calvin endeavored to establish in Geneva, and Knox 
 had intended for Scotland. Lutheranism has always 
 stood for a separation between Church and state. 
 
 c. It is also right for Christians "to engage in just 
 wars, to serve as soldiers." This follows from Romans 
 13: I. Read Article XVI in the Apology. 
 
 d. Our article teaches obedience to the government: 
 "Therefore, Christians are necessarily bound to obey 
 their own magistrates and laws." Paul taught obedience 
 to the government even though a Nero was on the throne. 
 According to Romans 13 we must be subject to the 
 "powers that be." An evil government is better than no 
 government. It is characteristic of the Lutheran Church 
 that she has always been opposed to revolution. In this 
 Lutherans differ from the Reformed people who have 
 always been quick to take up arms against the govern- 
 ment. Our article says that we are only justified in not 
 obeying the government when it commands us to sin, 
 "for then we ought to obey God rather than men." (Acts 
 5:29.) 
 
 3. What does this article say on the question of 
 holding property? 
 
 It is right for Christians "to make legal contracts, 
 to hold property." This is opposed to the manifold 
 
122 The Augsburg Coni^ession. 
 
 forms of communism. Melanchthon says in Article XVI 
 of the Apology : ''For Scripture does not command that 
 property be common, but the Law of the Decalogue, 
 when it says (Ex. 20: 15) : 'Thou shalt not steal,' dis- 
 tinguishes rights of ownership, and commands each one 
 to hold what is his own." 
 
 4. What does our article say on the state of mar- 
 riage? 
 
 That it is right for Christians "to marry, to be given 
 in marriage." The further exposition of this part of 
 our article is found in Article XXIII of our Confession, 
 and also in Article XXIII of the Apology. There all 
 passages of Scripture bearing on this subject are quoted. 
 The Roman Catholic Church regarded the married life 
 as an inferior state and therefore demanded celibacy for 
 the priests. The Lutheran Church takes the position that 
 the Christian virtues shall be exercised in the state of 
 marriage. 
 
 ARTICLE SEVENTEEN. 
 Christ's Return to Judgment. 
 
 Also they teach, that, at the Consummation of the World, 
 Christ shall appear for judgment, and shall raise up all the dead; 
 He shall give to the godly and elect eternal life and everlasting 
 joys, but ungodly men and the devils He shall condemn to be 
 tormented without end. 
 
 They condemn the Anabaptists who think that there will be 
 an end to the punishments of condemned men and devils. They 
 condemn also others who are now spreading certain Jewish 
 opinions, that, before the resurrection of the dead, the godly 
 shall take possession of the kingdom of the world, the ungodly 
 being everywhere suppressed (exterminated). 
 
 This article closes the body of doctrines treated in the 
 Augsburg Confession. The following three articles are 
 supplementary : XVIII and XIX to Article II, and XX 
 to Articles IV and VI. The last article of the first part 
 of the Confession (XXI on Invocation of Saints) pre- 
 pares for the articles of the second part on abuses. 
 
The Augsburg Confession. 123 
 
 1. What is taught concerning Christ's coming at the 
 consummation of the world? 
 
 a. "Christ shall appear." It means that He shall 
 appear visibly. In Acts i : 11 we read: "This same 
 Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so 
 come in like manner as ye have seen Him go into 
 heaven." 
 
 b. He "shall appear for judgment." John 5 : 22 : 
 "For the Father . . . hath committed all judgment 
 unto the Son." And, referring to the thought in Article 
 III, we emphasize that Christ will hold judgment accord- 
 ing to both of His natures. We have no right here to 
 divide Christ and say, as the Reformed do, that He will 
 be judge only according to His divine nature. In John 
 5:27 we read: "And (the Father) hath given Him 
 authority to execute judgment also, because He is the 
 Son of man." The opponents to the doctrine of Christ's 
 return to judgment are the Swedenborgians, the Uni- 
 tarians, the Universalists, the Independent Protestants 
 of Cincinnati, etc., and the Christian Scientists. 
 
 2. What is the teaching of this article concerning 
 those to be judged? 
 
 a. Christ "shall raise up all the dead." It is inter- 
 esting to observe that in a former draft of our Confes- 
 sion Melanchthon had written "that all deceased men 
 shall be raised up with the same body in which they 
 died." This he changed before the delivery of the 
 Confession to the present reading. It reminds us of 
 the discussion there has been on the question, whether 
 we should speak of a resurrection of the body, or of the 
 flesh. The Apostles' Creed, in the original, had "flesh." 
 Luther translated it into the German with "Fleisch" 
 (Auferstehung des Fleisches). In English the word 
 "body" (resurrection of the body) has been employed. 
 The Nicene Creed simply speaks of the "resurrection 
 of the dead." In the Apology IMelanchthon used pre- 
 cisely the words of our article: "and shall raise up all 
 the dead." In his Large Catechism (p. 446, Book of 
 Concord) Luther writes on this as follows : "But the 
 
124 The Augsburg CoNr^iissioN. 
 
 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 the shambles. But in 
 good German idiom we would say Auferstehung des 
 Leihs, or Leichnahms (resurrection of the body). Yet 
 it is not a matter of much moment, if we only under- 
 stand the words in their true sense." But what is their 
 true sense? In the Form of Concord, Part Two, Article 
 II, p. 548, we read: ''In the article of resurrection, 
 Scripture testifies that it is precisely the substance of 
 this our flesh, but without sin, which will rise again, 
 and that in eternal life we will have and retain precisely 
 this soul, but without sin." In Isaiah 26:19 we read: 
 "Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body 
 shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in the 
 dust : for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth 
 shall cast out the dust." 
 
 b. There will be the two classes : ( i ) "the godly and 
 elect" to whom shall be given "eternal life and ever- 
 lasting joys," and (2) the "ungodly men and the devils" 
 who shall be condemned and tormented without end. 
 This stumbling block of the Universalists and the Uni- 
 tarians is brought to an unequivocal expression, because 
 it is the unmistakable teaching of the Scriptures in many 
 places ; John 5 : 29 ; Dan. 12:2; Matt. 25 : 41-46. 
 
 c. "They condemn the Anabaptists who think that 
 there will be an end to the punishments of the condemned 
 men and devils." That in the end all will be saved was 
 taught for the first time by the Church father, Origen. 
 Some Universalists believe that there will be in the future 
 world a punishment for a time, but that it will be a mere 
 process of purification and that all will be saved in the 
 end. Others again (Adventists and Russellites) believe 
 that the wicked will in the end be annihilated. The 
 word "eternal," in Matthew 25 : 41, is opposed to this. 
 
 3. What is the attitude of this article to Chiliasm? 
 
 "They condemn also others, who are now spreading 
 certain Jewish opinions that, before the resurrection of 
 
The x\ugsburg ConfkssioxNT. 125 
 
 the dead, the godly shall take possession of the kingdom 
 of the world, the ungodly being everywhere suppressed 
 (exterminated)." The word chiliasm is derived from 
 the number 1000 in Greek, which is chilioi. The chiliasm 
 here rejected is that interpretation of some obscure pas- 
 sages of Scripture to the effect that Christ shall reign on 
 this earth in a visible manner, for a thousand years, over 
 the saints of the first resurrection, and that this visible 
 and earthly kingdom shall destroy the enemies of God. 
 This strange doctrine which grew on Jewish soil is at war 
 with other clear passages of Scripture, with the analogy 
 of faith, or the "proportion of faith," according to 
 Romans 12:6, and is, therefore, rejected by our Con- 
 fession. 
 
 ARTICLE EIGHTEEN. 
 Of Free Wile. 
 
 Of the Freedom of the Will, they teach, that man's will has 
 some liberty for the attainment of civil righteousness, and for 
 the choice of things subject to reason. Nevertheless, it has no 
 power, without the Holy Ghost, to work the righteousness of 
 God, that is. spiritual righteousness; since the natural man re- 
 ceiveth not the things of the Spirit of God (i Cor. 2:14); 
 but this righteousness is wrought in the heart when the Holy 
 Ghost is received through the Word. These things are said in 
 as many words by Augustine in his Hypognosticon, Book HI : 
 "We grant that all men have a certain freedom of will in judg- 
 ing according to (natural) reason; not such freedom, however, 
 whereby it is capable, without God, either to begin, or much less 
 to complete aught in things pertaining to God, but only in works 
 of this life, whether good or evil. 'Good,' I call those works 
 which spring from the good in Nature, that is, to have a will to 
 labor in the field, to eat and drink, to have a friend, to clothe 
 oneself, to build a house, to marry, to keep cattle, to learn divers 
 useful arts, or whatsoever good pertains to this life, none of 
 which things are without dependence on the providence of God ; 
 yea, of Him and through Him they are and have their beginning. 
 'Evil,' I call such works as to have a will, as to worship an idol, 
 to commit murder," etc. 
 
 They condemn the Pelagians and others who teach that, with- 
 out the Holy Ghost, by the power of nature alone, we are able 
 to love God above all things ; also to do the commandment of 
 God as touching "the substance of the act." 
 
 For, although nature is able in some sort to do the outward 
 
126 The: Augsburg Confession. 
 
 work (for it is able to keep the hands from theft and murder), 
 yet it cannot work the inward motions, such as the fear of God, 
 trust in God, chastity, patience, etc. 
 
 I, If this article was placed in the Confession for 
 the purpose of supplementing Article II, on Original 
 Sin, then we ask: Where is the connecting link be- 
 tween these two articles? 
 
 In Article II we learned of man's total depravity. 
 That naturally raises the question as to his free will 
 after the fall. We want to know in particular whether 
 man can effect his salvation in his own natural powers, 
 or whether he can do it with the aid of the Holy Spirit, 
 or whether it is the work of the Holy Spirit altogether. 
 
 Remark. — In discussing man's free will, four different view- 
 points can be taken, says the Form of Concord in an introduction 
 to Article II. We can ask (i) How it was with man's free will 
 before the fall; (2) how since the fall and before regeneration; 
 (3) how after regeneration; and, finally, (4) how after the resur- 
 rection from the dead. Here in this article the discussion is ex- 
 clusively from the second viewpoint: in what condition is man's 
 free imll since the fall and before regeneration? 
 
 How can we divide this article for a profitable discus- 
 sion of what it teaches of the condition of man's will 
 since the fall and before regeneration? 
 
 The doctrinal contents of this article deal with two 
 leading questions: (i) What can the unregenerated do 
 by means of his own natural powers? (2) What is he 
 unable to do before he is regenerated? Then follows 
 (3) the rejection of the opponents. 
 
 I. WHAT CAN THE UNREGENERATE DO BY 
 MEANS OF HIS OWN NATURAL POWERS? 
 
 Our article says, stating the condition in a general 
 way: "That man's will has some liberty for the attain- 
 ment of civil righteousness, and for the choice of things 
 subject to reason." Before conversion, then, man is 
 free in external things, in "outward work," in "things 
 subject to reason." Here he can choose between alterna- 
 tives. The world will hold him responsible for his acts. 
 He is a personality which cannot be without a free will 
 
The: Augsburg Coni^ession. 127 
 
 in external things subject to reason. But this article 
 makes a distinction between things exclusively external 
 and things that are external in the moral life of man: 
 
 1. Things exclusively external. Text: to have a 
 will to ''labor in the field, to eat and drink, to have a 
 friend, to clothe oneself, to build a house, to marry, to 
 keep cattle, to learn divers arts or whatsoever good 
 pertains to this life." Into this class, says Quenstedt, 
 belong also such things "as pertain to the external 
 government and discipline of the Church, such as to 
 teach and hear the Word of God, to observe certain 
 ceremonies, to give and receive the Sacraments, and 
 similar external works, affecting the external senses. 
 
 Remark. — Yet do not overlook the word "some'' ("man's will 
 has some liberty"). Even in these altogether external things man 
 cannot act independent^ of Divine Providence. We read in the 
 text : "none of which things are without dependence on the provi- 
 dence of God; yea. of Him and through Him they are and have 
 their beginning." 
 
 2. Things that are external in the moral life of man. 
 
 Our article mentions ''civil righteousness" (German: 
 "aeusserlich ehrbar zu leben," translated: outwardly to 
 lead an honest life) ; it also speaks of ''evil things," 
 "works as to have a will to worship an idol, to com- 
 mit murder," etc. Man "is able to keep his hands from 
 theft and murder." In these things, also, which are not 
 morally indifferent, even the unregenerated man has the 
 choice of alternatives. Of course, if we say that a man 
 has a free will to do the good, we must be careful that 
 by "good" we do not understand the things pertaining to 
 salvation. It is only a "civil righteousness." In the 
 Apology it is called a "righteousness of works," also a 
 "righteousness of the flesh which the carnal nature, i. e., 
 reason by itself without the Holy Ghost, renders." 
 Scripture also calls it a "righteousness of the Law," 
 because reason and observation tell man that there is 
 misery in the way of the transgressor. This civil right- 
 eousness can even go together with an hatred of Christ. 
 Dr. Baugher, in his lecture on our article in the first 
 series of the Holman Lectures tells a significant little 
 
128 The Augsburg Coni^kssion. 
 
 story, of a man whose life was so exemplary that every- 
 one wondered wdiy he did not become a member of the 
 Church. He seemed to be such in every thing except the 
 profession. And when that man lay upon his dying bed 
 and was asked by the ambassador of Christ, under whose 
 ministrations he had so often sat, what do you think of 
 Christ? the poor man, with conscious knowledge of his 
 own heart and with rare candor, replied : ''I hate Him !" 
 (Hoi. Lect., First Series, pp. 711-712.) 
 
 Remark. — But here also (regarding civil righteousness and 
 what is the opposite of it) we do not want to overlook the phrase 
 "that man's will has some liberty" (Latin: "aliquam libertatem ;" 
 German, "etlichermassen") and that he has only a "certain free- 
 dom." As reason is given in the Apology that "the power of con- 
 cupiscence is such that men more frequently obey evil dispositions 
 than sound judgment. And the devil, who is efficacious in the 
 godless, as Paul says (Eph. 2:2), does not cease to incite this 
 feeble nature to various offences." (Book of Concord, p. 230) 
 And the phrases "some liberty," "some freedom" have reference 
 also to the "evil" things. God does not always permit an evil in- 
 tention to become a deed, especially in cases where it would 
 thwart the plans of His government. Illustrations are : Abime- 
 lech (Gen. 20:6), Laban (Gen. 31:24), Balaam (Num. 22: 12). 
 
 II. WHAT IS MAN UNABLE TO DO BEFORE 
 HE IS REGENERATED? 
 
 In one respect the will of man after the fall and before 
 regeneration is not free. We read in our article: 
 "Nevertheless, it has no power, without the Holy Ghost, 
 to work the righteousness of God, that is spiritual right- 
 eousness, since the natural man receiveth not the things 
 of the Spirit of God (i Cor. 2: 14) ; but this righteous- 
 ness is wrought in the heart when the Holy Ghost is 
 received through the Word." ''Nature . . . cannot 
 work the inward motions, such as the fear of God, trust 
 in God, chastity, patience," etc. 
 
 I. Do these v/ords from the pen of Melanchthon 
 agree with Luther's interpretation of the third article 
 of the Apostles' Creed? The words of the Catechism 
 are: ''I believe that I cannot by my own reason and 
 strength believe in Jesus Christ, my Lord, or come to 
 Him, but the Holy Ghost has called me by the Gospel, 
 
Th^: Augsburg Coni^kssion. 129 
 
 enlightened me with His gifts, sanctified and kept me 
 in the true faith," etc. Here man's conversion appears 
 exclusively as the work of the Holy Spirit. Does not 
 this eighteenth article of our Confession admit more 
 with respect to man's part in the process of conversion? 
 When this article says that man's will has no power 
 ivithout the Holy Ghost does not that mean: the will 
 has such power zvith the Holy Ghost ? The German text 
 reads : ''Aber ohne Gnad, Hilfe und Wirkung des 
 Heiligen Geistes," etc. ; i. e., translated into English : 
 ''Without grace, help and Wirkung of the Holy Ghost 
 man cannot become pleasing before God." How are we 
 to harmonize this language with the words of Luther? 
 
 a. We answer first: This Article XVHI of the 
 Augsburg Confession also teaches unmistakably that 
 man's conversion is the work of the Holy Spirit : "This 
 righteousness is wrought in the heart when the Holy 
 Ghost is received through the Word." German : "Denn 
 solches geschieht durch den heiligen Geist." Latin: 
 "Sed haec fit in cordibus." 
 
 b. But by so teaching our article does, of course, not 
 deny that it is and must be man's own will which is 
 subjected to the divine influences, and that the decision 
 in conversion is through (not by the power of) this will. 
 
 c. The word "help," (Hilfe) in the German text, 
 will impress us differently when we keep in mind that 
 the three words there employed (Gnad, Hilfe und 
 Wirkung) present a gradation, a climax from the general 
 to the specific. First grace in general ; then help, assist- 
 ance, which already is more specific ; finally "Wirkung," 
 which is difficult to translate into English with the full 
 meaning of the German. The Lexicon gives "operation," 
 but it means more. Wirkung is not merely Wirken, 
 operation; it means the result of an operation, some- 
 thing that has been effected, Bewirktes. So we have in 
 those three words (grace, help, Wirkung) a gradation, 
 and it is the last word that receives the emphasis. The 
 fact remains that the will of the natural man is unable 
 to effect spiritual righteousness. This is done by a 
 decisive influence (Wirkung) of the Holy Ghost. 
 
130 The x\ugsburg Con:^ession. 
 
 2. Does the Form of Concord (Article II) go materi- 
 ally beyond the Augustana in the doctrine of Free- 
 Will? We know that it is more outspoken, and that 
 it takes pains in guarding against misinterpretations of 
 this doctrine, which is to be explained by the experiences 
 of Lutheranism in the synergistic controversies in the 
 post-Reformation age, but does the Form of Concord 
 offer a nezv doctrine f 
 
 a. The Form of Concord teaches that there are only 
 two efficient causes of conversion, namely, the Holy 
 Ghost and the Word (580, 12). Man's will must not be 
 co-ordinated as a third cause (569, 90), as was done by 
 Melanchthon in his Examen Ordinandorum. Conver- 
 sion, faith in Christ, regeneration, renewal belong alone 
 to the Holy Ghost and the Word of God as the instru- 
 ment, ''not to the human powers of the natural free will, 
 either entirely, or half, or the least or most inconsiderable 
 part" (557, 25). This is not irreconcilable with Article 
 XVHI of our Confession. 
 
 b. The Form of Concord, quoting Luther, says "that 
 man's will is in his conversion purely passive" (499, 18; 
 569, 89). Even this phrase is not against the doctrine 
 of our article. H the spiritual righteousness is "wrought 
 in our heart," and if it is a "Wirkung" of the Holy 
 Ghost, who "renews and purifies us," and if it is God 
 who "imparts life and motion" (Melanchthon's Schoha 
 on Colossians), then man's will is passive in the act of 
 conversion. 
 
 c. The Form of Concord approves of Luther's strong 
 and drastic expressions that in conversion "man is like 
 a pillar of salt, like Lot's wife, yea, like a log and a stone, 
 like a lifeless statue" (556, 20). This has often given 
 offence, but there was no intention with these expres- 
 sions to say that in conversion God does not act with 
 man as with a personal being. The Form of Concord 
 says again : "God has ... a way of working in a man, 
 as in a rational creature, quite different from His way 
 of working in another creature that is irrational or is a 
 stone and block" (564, 62). Therefore the Holy Ghost 
 "effects conversion, not without means, but uses for this 
 
Thi: Augsburg Confession. 131 
 
 purpose the preaching and hearing of God's Word, 
 Rom. 1 : 16; 10: 17" (497, 4)- It is "through the heard 
 Word" that God's vSpirit "lays hold upon man's will" 
 (500, 20). God draws man "in such a way that his 
 understanding, in place of darkened, becomes enlight- 
 ened, and his will, in place of perverse, becomes 
 obedient" (564, 60). If man is, with the words of 
 Luther, compared to a "pillar of salt," to "a log and a 
 stone," then such is a description of the spiritual death 
 in which grace finds him : "For man neither sees nor 
 perceives the fierce and terrible wrath of God on account 
 of his sin and death, but he continues even knowingly 
 and willingly in his security . . . and no prayers, no 
 supplications, no admonitions, yea, also no threats, no 
 reprimands are of any avail ; yea, all teaching and preach- 
 ing are lost upon him, until he is enlightened, converted 
 and regenerated by the Holy Ghost" (556, 21). But while 
 man can "of himself and of his own natural powers" con- 
 tribute to his own conversion or regeneration "as little as 
 a stone or a block of clay" (556, 24), yet God's work in 
 man is "not as a statue is cut in a stone or a seal impressed 
 into wax, which knows nothing of it" (569, 89), but it is 
 through a "drawing of the Holy Ghost, that God changes 
 stubborn and unwilling into willing men" (569, 88). 
 This is not opposed to the teaching of Article XVIII 
 in the Confession. Even the expression: "It (man's 
 will) has no power, without the Holy Ghost, to work 
 the righteousness of God," etc. (at the beginning of 
 Article XVIII) has its parallels in the Form of Con- 
 cord, for instance, when it says, 498, 6: "For, without 
 His grace, and if He do not grant the increase, our 
 willing and running, our planting and watering, all are 
 nothing, as Christ says (John 15:5): 'Without me ye 
 can do nothing.' "* 
 
 *Passages of Scripture confirming our article are these: i Cor. 2: 14: 
 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for 
 they are foolishness unto him; neither can he know them, because they 
 are spiritually discerned. John 6: 44: No man can come unto me except 
 the father which hath sent me draw him. i Cor. 12: 3: No man can say 
 that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. Rom. 7: 18: For I know 
 that in me (that is in my flesh) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is 
 present with me; etc. Also, 2 Cor. 3:5; Phil. 2: 13. 
 
132 The: Augsburg Confe:ssion. 
 
 So our conclusion is that in the Form of Concord 
 (Article II) there is no doctrine of Free Will materially 
 different from that in Article XVIII of the Confession. 
 It is the original Lutheran doctrine of God as the sole 
 cause of man's conversion, fortified, of course, against 
 the objections of Melanchthon's later views. It may 
 be admitted that already before 1530 (after the contro- 
 versy of Luther with Erasmus, 1525) Melanchthon began 
 to develop in the direction of Synergism, but the specifi- 
 cally synergistic doctrine of the three concurring causes 
 in conversion (Word, Holy Spirit and man's will assent- 
 ing to and not resisting) was not yet put into the 
 Confession at the time of its delivery at Augsburg. 
 
 III. WHO ARE THE OPPONENTS OF THIS 
 ARTICLE? 
 
 Our text reads: "They (the Lutheran churches) con- 
 demn the Pelagians and others who teach that, without 
 the Holy Ghost, by the power of nature alone, we are 
 able to love God above all things ; also to do the com- 
 mandments of God as touching 'the substance of the act.' " 
 
 1. "The Pelagians." We read of them in Article II 
 of Original Sin. As they believe that man is born with- 
 out sin so they also believe that man's will is free in spirit- 
 ual things and that he, in case that he should leave God, 
 could turn to Him again out of his own spiritual powers. 
 There is no sect to-day known under the name of Pela- 
 gians, but Pelagianism permeates all churches that are 
 Socinian or rationalistic in character. The Unitarians, 
 the Independent Protestants of Cincinnati, etc., the 
 Universalists, the Campbellites, the Swedenborgians, are 
 Pelagian in doctrine. And the ideas of Pelagianism 
 are being disseminated in the literature of our day and 
 in the public institutions of learning. Pelagianism is in 
 a special sense the religion of the natural man. 
 
 2. "The Pelagians and others." The Romanists were 
 Semi-pelagians, which means that they believe man, 
 endowed with a free will in spiritual things, to be the 
 principal factor in the process of conversion, the Holy 
 
The Augsburg Coni^kssiox. 133 
 
 Spirit merely aiding. This is the doctrine of the Roman 
 Catholic Church up to our day. So the Greek Catholic 
 Church also teaches. In the Reformed Church, as a 
 reaction against the Calvinistic doctrine of predestina- 
 tion, Arminianism arose, which, after the death of its 
 founder, became practically Semi-pelagianism. The 
 Free- Will Baptists are Arminianistic in principle. The 
 Methodists seem to take a different position (according 
 to Article VIII of their Articles of Faith), but their 
 revival meetings show that in practice they are Armin- 
 ians. The same is to be said of the Evangelical Asso- 
 ciation, the Quakers, the Seventh Day Adventists. 
 
 Remark. — In the Lutheran Church, Melanchthon, the writer of 
 the Augsburg Confession himself, at a later time, began to em- 
 phasize more than he first had done, man's will as a factor in the 
 process of conversion. He gave some expression to it in his so- 
 called altered edition of the Augsburg Confession of 1540, as he 
 had already done in a new edition of his Loci. But this "s3'ner- 
 gism," as it was styled, did not receive an abiding place in the 
 Lutheran Church. It was rejected in Article II of the Form of 
 Concord. See pp. 498 (line 11) and 567 (line ']']'). What is the 
 difference between Roman Semi-pelagianism and Melanchthonian 
 Synergism? The answer to tnis question cannot be made clearer 
 than by the following t vo brief paragraphs in the first part of the 
 Form of Concord: i. "We reject also the enor of the Semi-pela- 
 gians, who teach that man, by his own powers, can make a begin- 
 ning of his conversion, but without the grace of the Holy Ghost can- 
 not complete it." 2. "Also that when it is taught that, although 
 man by his free will before regeneration, is too weak to make a 
 beginning, and by his own powers, to turn itself to God, and in 
 heart to be obedient to God; yet, if the Holy Ghost, by the preach- 
 ing of the Word, has made a beginning, and offered therein His 
 grace, then the will of man, from its own natural powers, to a cer- 
 tain extent, although feebly, can add, help and co-operate there- 
 with, can qualify and prepare itself for grace, and embrace and 
 accept it, and believe the Gospel." The concessions to man's free 
 will, in this second paragraph, seem to be insignificant. Yet they 
 have introduced a type of preaching which is at variance with the 
 spirit of Lutheranism. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump. 
 
 ARTICLE NINETEEN. 
 
 The: Cause; of Sin. 
 
 Of the Cause of Sin, they teach, that although God doth 
 create and preserve nature, yet the cause of sin is the will of 
 
134 'I'he Augsburg CoNi^itssioN.' 
 
 the wicked, that is, of the devil and imgodl}^ men ; which will, 
 unaided of God. turns itself from God, as Christ says (John 
 8:44) : "When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own." 
 
 1. Why was this article put into the Confession? 
 
 Dr. Eck had among his charges one in which he 
 accused the Lutherans of making God the cause of 
 sin. This was based on some expressions bordering 
 on absolute predestination, which Luther had used in 
 his controversy with Erasmus. The natural place to 
 treat of this matter is here, following the article of 
 Free Will. From the assertion that man has no free 
 will in spiritual things, as it was made in Article XVIH, 
 it could easily be inferred that God has created him in 
 such a condition. And this gives us the connecting link 
 between this nineteenth article and Article II of Original 
 Sin. For this article also is to supplement Article II. 
 We discover the theme of this article by asking the 
 following question : 
 
 2. If original sin "is truly sin, even nov^^ condemn- 
 ing and bringing eternal death," and if "all men . . . 
 are born with" sin, must sin then not be charged to 
 the Creator? 
 
 No. For God did not create man with sin. This 
 Manichean doctrine was already condemned in Article 
 II, because it dates original sin not from man's creation, 
 but from "the fall of Adam." Sin has come in with 
 the fall. It does therefore not belong to the substance 
 of human nature. This Manichean error, to which even 
 the strict Lutheran Matthias Flacius fell a victim, is 
 dealt with in Article I of the Form of Concord. The 
 following passages of Scripture taken together teach that 
 man was not created sinful : i John 1:5: God is light, 
 and in Him is no darkness at all. Job. 10:8: Thine 
 hands have made me and fashioned me together round 
 about. Gen. i : 27 : So God created man in His own 
 image, in the image of God created He him. Man's 
 nature is not sin, but sinful. "Much as one may suffer 
 from diphtheria or typhoid fever, no one can be said to 
 be either of these diseases" (Dr. Jacobs). We must 
 
Thi: Augsburg Confession. 135 
 
 not identify nature with the vicious quality of sin. 
 Sin is Hke the mildew on bread. 
 
 3. But why does God preserve sinful nature? 
 
 Does not that show that He wills the existence of sin? 
 It is not sin that God preserves or intends to preserve, 
 but human nature, the person. It is possible for the sin- 
 ner to be cleansed of his sin. So, also, regarding man's 
 creation, there was the possibility of his fall. But that 
 did not keep God from creating man. The possibility 
 of man's falling into sin was included in God's plan of 
 redemption. This explains also His preservation of 
 sinful humanity. If the sinner is the object of God's 
 preservation, and if, according to our old dogmaticians, 
 we can even speak of a certain concurrence of God 
 regarding the sinful acts of men, (compare Article 
 XVIII, exposition I, 2, note, at the close) even this 
 does not make God the cause of sin. ''If the murderer 
 raises his hand, then the strength is from God, but in 
 the sin itself God has no part." Compare here what our 
 dogmaticians taught concerning "Permission," "Hin- 
 drance," "Direction," "Determinism." 
 
 4. What is the cause of sin? 
 
 Our article says : "The cause of sin is the will of the 
 wicked, that is, the devil and ungodly men." The possi- 
 bility of sinning was in the nature of the will, in the fact 
 that man is a personality. If God had created animals, 
 plants or minerals instead of man, there would have 
 been no possibility of a fall. But He created angels and 
 man, v^^ho could use their will in choosing the wrong. 
 
 5. How did the fall of man take place? 
 
 a. The will of the devil is mentioned first. This is 
 the first cause of sin. The temptation by the devil 
 accounts for the fall of man and for the condition of 
 his will which becomes, in a secondary way, the cause 
 uf actual sins. 
 
 1). But how does the choice of sin on the part of man 
 take place? Here this article has a phrase which 
 
136 The Augsburg Coni^ession. 
 
 is not easy to understand, namely : 'Vhich will, unaided 
 of God, turneth itself from God." This means that God 
 did not put anything into the will that in the moment of 
 temptation caused the decision to fall in the fatal direc- 
 tion. The difficulty is not so much with the Latin text, 
 of which our English is a translation, as it is with the 
 German text, which reads : ''So Gott die Hand abgetan," 
 which in English is : when God withdrew His hand, or, 
 ''which, as scon as divine aid is withdrawn, turneth from 
 God unto evil." The meaning seems to be that in man's 
 temptation there are moments "when God withdraws His 
 hand," when man is left to decide for himself. The 
 meaning is, that God does not decide for man, and does 
 not annihilate the tempter before he approaches. This 
 has the confirmation of Scripture, in 2 Chron. 32:31, 
 where we read of Hezekiah : ''God left him to try him 
 that he might know all that was in his heart." So the 
 German text supplements the Latin in a very suggestive 
 manner. The Latin, of which our English text is a 
 translation, makes the negative statement, that God in no 
 wise aids in the sinful act ; the German adds the thought, 
 that this should not be interpreted as God exempting 
 man from the test in the smelting-furnace of temptation. 
 
 ARTICLE TWENTY. 
 Of Good Works. 
 
 Our teachers are falsely accused of forbidding Good Works. 
 For their published writings on the Ten Commandments, and 
 others of like import, .bear witness that they have taught to 
 good purpose concerning all estates and duties of life, as to 
 what estates of life and what works in every calling be pleas- 
 ing to God. Concerning these things preachers heretofore 
 taught but little, and urged only childish and needless works, 
 as particular holydays, particular fasts, brotherhoods, pilgrim- 
 ages, services in honor of saints, the use of rosaries, monasti- 
 cism. and such like. Since our adversaries have been admon- 
 ished of these things they are now unlearning them, and do 
 not preach these unprofitable works as heretofore. Besides 
 they begin to mention faith, of which there was heretofore 
 marvelous silence. They teach that we are justified not by 
 works only, but they conjoin faith and works, and say that we 
 are justified by faith and works. This doctrine is more toler- 
 
The Augsburg Confession. 137 
 
 able than the former one, and can afford more consolation 
 than their old doctrine. 
 
 Forasmuch, therefore, as the doctrine concerning faith, which 
 ought to be the chief one in the Church, has lain so long 
 unknown, as all must needs grant that there was the deepest 
 silence in their sermons concerning the righteousness of faith, 
 while onh' the doctrine of works was treated in the churches, 
 our teachers have instructed the churches concerning faith as 
 follows : 
 
 First, that our works cannot reconcile God or merit for- 
 giveness of sins, grace and justification, but that we obtain this 
 only by faith, when we believe that we are received into favor 
 for Christ's sake, who alone has been set forth the Mediator 
 and Propitiation [i Tim. 2:5], in order that the Father may 
 be reconciled through Him. Whoever, therefore, trusts that 
 by works he merits grace, despises the merit and grace of 
 Christ, and seeks a way to God without Christ, by human 
 strength, although Christ has said of Himself: "I am the 
 Way, the Truth and the Life" [John 14: 6]. 
 
 This doctrine concerning faith is everywhere treated by Paul 
 [Eph. 2:8]: "By grace are ye saved through faith ; and that 
 not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works," etc. 
 
 And lest anyone should craftily say that a new interpretation 
 of Paul has been devised by us, this entire matter is sup- 
 ported by the testimonies of the Fathers. For Augustine, in 
 many volumes, defends grace and the righteousness of faith, 
 over against the merits of works. And Ambrose, in his De 
 Vocationc Gentium, and elsewhere, teaches to like effect. For 
 in his De Vocatione Gentium he says as follows: "Redemption 
 by the Blood of Christ w^ould become of little value, neither 
 would the pre-eminence of man's works be superseded by the 
 mercy of God, if justification, which is wrought through grace, 
 were due to the merits going before, so as to be, not the free 
 gift of a donor, but the reward due to the laborer." 
 
 But. although this doctrine is despised by the inexperienced, 
 nevertheless God-fearing and anxious consciences find by experi- 
 ence that it brings the greatest consolation, because consciences 
 cannot be pacified through any works, but only by faith, when 
 they are sure that, for Christ's sake, they have a gracious God. 
 As Paul teaches [Rom. 5:1]: "Being justified by faith, we 
 have peace with God." This whole doctrine is to be referred 
 to that conflict of the terrified conscience ; neither can it be 
 understood apart from that conflict. Therefore inexperienced 
 and profane men judge ill concerning this matter, who dream 
 that Christian righteousness is nothing but the civil righteous- 
 ness of natural reason. 
 
 Heretofore consciences were plagued with the doctrine of 
 works, nor did they hear any consolation from the Gospel. 
 Some persons were driven by conscience into the desert, into 
 monasteries, hoping there to merit grace by a monastic life. 
 
138 The Augsburg Confession. 
 
 Some also devised other works whereby to merit grace and 
 make satisfaction for sins. There was very great need to 
 treat of and renew this doctrine of faith in Christ, to the end 
 that anxious consciences should not be without consolation, 
 but that they might know that grace and forgiveness of sins 
 and justification are apprehended by faith in Christ. 
 
 Men are also admonished that here the term "faith" doth 
 not signify merely the knowledge of the history, such as is in 
 the ungodly and in the devil, but signifies a faith which believes, 
 not merely the history, but also the effect of the history, namely, 
 this article of the forgiveness of sins, to wit, that we have 
 grace, righteousness, and forgiveness of sins, through Christ. 
 
 Now he that knoweth that he has a Father reconciled to 
 him through Christ, since he truly knows God, knows also 
 that God careth for him, and calls upon God ; in a word, he 
 is not without God, as the heathen. For devils and the un- 
 godly are not able to believe this article of the forgiveness of 
 sins. Hence, they hate God as an enemy; call not upon Him; 
 and expect no good from Him. Augustine also admonishes 
 his readers concerning the word "faith," and teaches that the 
 term "faith" is accepted in the Scriptures, not for knowledge 
 such as is in the ungodl3^ but for confidence which consoles 
 and encourages the terrified mind. 
 
 Furthermore, it is taught on our part, that it is necessary to 
 do good works, not that we should trust to merit grace by 
 them, but ,because it is the will of God. It is only by faith 
 that forgiveness of sins and grace are apprehended. And 
 because through faith the Holy Ghost is received, hearts are 
 renewed and endowed with new affections, so as to be able to 
 bring forth good works. For Ambrose says : "Faith is the 
 mother of a good will and right doing," For man's powers 
 without the Holy Ghost are full of ungodly affections, and 
 are too weak to do works which are good in God's sight. Be- 
 sides, they are in the power of the devil, who impels men to 
 divers sins, to ungodly opinions, to open crimes. This we 
 may see in the philosophers, who, although they endeavored 
 to live an honest life, could not succeed, but were defiled with 
 many open crimes. Such is the feebleness of man, when he 
 is without faith and without the Holy Ghost, and governs him- 
 self only by human strength. 
 
 Hence it may be readily seen that this doctrine is not to be 
 charged with prohibiting good works, but rather the more to 
 be commended, because it shows how we are enabled to do 
 good works. For without faith, human nature can in no wise 
 do the works of the First or of the Second Commandment. 
 Without faith, it does not call upon God, nor expect anything 
 from Him, nor bear the cross; but seeks and trusts in man's 
 help. And thus, when there is no faith and trust in God, all 
 manner of lusts and human devices rule in the heart. Where- 
 
The: Augsburg Con:pession. 139 
 
 fore Christ said [John 15 : 5] : "Without me ye can do nothing," 
 and the Church sings : 
 
 "Without Thy power divine 
 In man there nothing is, 
 Naught but what is harmful." 
 
 This article is a further exposition of Articles IV and 
 VI, here added for the purpose of meeting the persistent 
 objection of the Romanists, that the doctrine of Justifica- 
 tion quenches the striving after righteousness of life. 
 We shall give this longest of all articles of the first part 
 of our Confession in the form of an outline as we find 
 it in a little book on the Augsburg Confession wTitten in 
 German for laymen, by a layman (a major of a city in 
 Germany), who was so modest that he did not even give 
 his name. This Httle book of 104 pages was pubHshed 
 in Heidelberg (Germany) by Carl Winter's Univer- 
 sitaetsbuchhandlung. The outline is as follows : 
 
 I. The accusation that the doctrine of justification 
 by faith kills the striving after righteousness of life is 
 false, because it is manifest that the writings of Luther 
 and his brethren have given a new impulse even to the 
 preaching of the opponents who now lay more emphasis 
 upon the things which the Word of God demands con- 
 cerning the daily life of the Christian, in place of the 
 unnecessary things that were preached before (on holy- 
 days, fasts, pilgrimages, the use of rosaries, etc.) 
 
 II. The Roman doctrine concerning works is false 
 and harmful for the following four reasons: 
 
 1. It casts contempt upon Christ, and man invents a 
 way of his own for salvation, notwithstanding Christ has 
 said: I am the way (John 14:6). 
 
 2. It leaves the troubled conscience without comfort 
 and peace ("Heretofore consciences were plagued with 
 the doctrine of works," etc. 
 
 3. It leaves out of consideration that zvithout faith and 
 outside of Christ and zvithout the Holy Ghost, we are too 
 zveak to do works pleasing to God: "Without me ye can 
 do nothing" (John 15:5). 
 
140 The; Augsburg Confe:ssion. 
 
 4. hi connection zvith it is held that faith signifies 
 "merely the knowledge of the history, such as it is in 
 the ungodly and the devil." 
 
 III. Over against these negative statements our 
 article asserts in a more positive way the folloiving 
 three things: 
 
 1. This doctrine is divinely true, because 
 
 (a) It is taught in the Gospel, especially by Paul. Eph. 
 2:8. 
 
 (b) It is the old doctrine ''supported by the testimonies 
 of the fathers." Augustine and Ambrose are quoted. 
 
 2. This doctrine is necessary, because 
 
 (a) It represents the most fundamental thing in Chris- 
 tianity ; 
 
 (b) It gives peace to the timid and terrified consciences 
 (''But although this doctrine is despised by the inexperi- 
 enced, nevertheless," etc.) ; 
 
 (c) It does not lose sight of the essence of faith, v^hich 
 is confidence in God, and the trust that in Christ we have 
 the forgiveness of sins. 
 
 3. This is a safe doctrine, 
 
 (a) Because on the one hand it teaches us about real 
 good works, not that we should put our trust in them and 
 try to merit grace, hut that by doing them we should 
 honor and glorify God ; 
 
 (b) Because, on the other hand, we are taught that 
 God not only wants such works, hut also that through 
 faith He gives us the Holy Ghost who endows us with 
 strength to lead a holy life. 
 
 Conclusion: For all these reasons the opponents ought 
 to praise this doctrine of faith and should not undertake 
 to persecute those who have accepted it. 
 
 ARTICLE TWENTY-ONE. 
 
 Of thk Worship of Saints. 
 
 Of the Worship of Saints, they teach, that the memory of 
 saints may be set before us, that we may follow their faith and 
 good works, according to our calling, as the Emperor may follow 
 the example of David in making war to drive away the Turk 
 
The Augsburg Con:^ession. 141 
 
 from his country. For both are kings. But the Scripture 
 teaches not the invocation of saints, or to ask help of saints, 
 since it sets before us Christ, as the only Mediator, Propitiation, 
 High-Priest and Intercessor. He is to be prayed to, and hath 
 promised that He will hear our prayer; and this worship He 
 approves above all to wit, that in all afflictions He be called 
 upon (i John 2:1): "li any man sin, we have an Advocate 
 with the Father," etc. 
 
 The author of this book delivered the Hohiian lecture 
 in the Theological Seminary at Gettysburg, Pa., in the 
 spring of 1909, on this article, and he takes the liberty 
 of referring the reader, who is looking for an extensive 
 treatment of this article, to that lecture, v^hich was pub- 
 lished in the Lutheran Quarterly of July, 1909. We 
 shall confine ourselves here to a brief outline. 
 
 This article discriminates between a true and a false 
 veneration of the saints. The first is commanded, the 
 second is rejected. 
 
 I. The true veneration of saints consists in this, 
 that we shall 
 
 1. Remember them for the strengthening of our faith; 
 
 2. That their good works shall be an example to us for 
 imitation. 
 
 II. The false veneration consists in this, that men 
 call on the saints in prayer and make them mediators 
 before God. 
 
 1. This is not commanded in Scripture, nor can it be 
 substantiated by Scripture, because there we are led to 
 Christ. 
 
 2. There is no divine promise that such prayer shall 
 be heard. 
 
 Passages of Scripture bearing on this subject: Heb. 
 13:7; James 5: 10; Matt. 4: 10; Acts 10:25, 26; Rev. 
 19:10; Isaiah 63:16; John 14:13; John 5:22, 23; 
 Ps. 50:15. 
 
142 The Augsburg Confession. 
 
 THE CLOSING PARAGRAPH TO THE FIRST 
 TWENTY-ONE ARTICLES, OR THE DOCTRINAL 
 PART OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION : 
 
 This is about the Sum of our doctrine, in which, as 
 can be seen, there is nothing that varies from the Scrip- 
 tures, or from the church CathoHc, or from the church 
 of Rome, as known from its writers. This being the 
 case, they judge harshly who insist that our teachers 
 should be regarded as heretics. The disagreement, how- 
 ever, is on certain abuses, which have crept into the 
 Church without rightful authority. And even in these, 
 if there were some difference, there should be proper 
 lenity on the part of bishops to bear with us by reason 
 of the Confession which we have now drawn up; because 
 even the Canons are not so severe as to demand the same 
 rights everywhere, neither at any time, have the rites of 
 all churches been the same ; although among us, in large 
 part, the ancient rites are diligently observed. For it is 
 a false and malicious charge that all the ceremonies, all 
 the things instituted of old, are abolished in our churches. 
 But it has been a common complaint that some abuses 
 were connected with the ordinary rites. These, inasmuch 
 as they could not be approved with a good conscience, 
 have been to some extent corrected. 
 
 How can our Confession say that in the articles which 
 have been treated ^'there is nothing that varies from the 
 Scriptures, or from the church Catholic, or from the 
 church of Rome as known from its writers"? 
 
 1. We believe, of course, that the doctrines of the 
 Augsburg Confession agree with the Scriptures. 
 
 2. But does our Confession agree with the ''Church 
 Catholic/' and the ''Church of Rome"? Melanchthon, 
 speaking of the "Church Catholic," did not mean the 
 opponents of the Lutherans. He took the position that 
 the Lutherans were the true representatives of the 
 Catholic Church, and that their opponents, such as the 
 Pope, Dr. Eck and all who were now persecuting the 
 cause of the Gospel, were out of harmony with the 
 
The ArcsBURG Confession. 143 
 
 true Catholic Church. The aim all through the Confes- 
 sion has been to show that the Lutherans had not de- 
 parted from the true Catholic Church. When Melanch- 
 thon spoke of the ''Church of Rome" and claimed 
 agreement with it, he meant by that, such writers as 
 Augustine, Ambrose, Leo the Great, Gregory the Great, 
 Saint Bernard. He meant the Roman Church before it 
 was corrupted by the abuses of which he was going to 
 speak in the second part of the Confession. That 
 IMelanchthon in this statement was too optimistic as to 
 the evangelical teaching of even these ''writers" must be 
 admitted. We know to-day that the "writers" which 
 Melanchthon had in mind, some of which he had quoted 
 in different articles of the first part of the Confession, 
 were far from being in entire accord with the doctrinal 
 system of the Lutheran Church. 
 
 ARTICLES, IN WHICH ARE REVIEWED THE 
 ABUSES WHICH HAVE BEEN CORRECTED. 
 
 Inasmuch then as our churches dissent in no article of the 
 Faith from the Church Catholic, but omit some Abuses which 
 are new, and which have been erroneously accepted by fault 
 of the times, contrary to the intent of the Canons, we pray 
 that Your Imperial Majesty would graciously hear both what 
 has been changed, and also what were the reasons, in order 
 that the people be not compelled to observe those abuses 
 against their conscience. Nor should Your Imperial Majesty 
 believe those, who, in order to excite the hatred of men 
 against our part, disseminate strange slanders among our people. 
 Having thus excited the minds of good men, they have first 
 given occasion to this controversy, and now endeavor, by the 
 same arts, to increase the discord. For Your Imperial Majesty 
 will undoubtedly find that the form of doctrine and of cere- 
 monies with us, is not so intolerable as these ungodly arid 
 malicious men represent. Furthermore, the truth cannot be 
 gathered from common rumors, or the revilings of our enemies. 
 But it can readily be judged that nothing would serve better 
 to maintain the dignity of worship, and to nourish reverence and 
 pious devotion among the people than that the ceremonies be 
 rightly observed in the churches. 
 
 Article XXII. 
 To the laity are given Both Kinds in the Sacrament of the 
 Lord's Supper, because this usage has the commandment of the 
 
144 'I'h^ Augsburg Coni^e:ssion. 
 
 Lord [in Matt. 26:27]: "Drink ye all of it"; where Christ has 
 manifestly commanded concerning the cup that all should drink; 
 and lest any man should craftily say that this refers only to 
 priests, Paul [in i Cor. 11:27] recites an example from which it 
 appears that the whole congregation did use both kinds. And this 
 usage has long remained in the Church, nor is it known when, 
 or by whose authority, it was changed; although Cardinal 
 Cusanus mentions the time when it was approved. Cyprian in 
 some places testifies that the Blood was given to the people. The 
 same is testified by Jerome, who says: "The priests administer 
 the Eucharist, and distribute the Blood of Christ to the people." 
 Indeed, Pope Gelasius commands that the sacrament be not di- 
 vided (Dist. ii., De Consecratione, Cap. Comperimus) . Only 
 custom, not so ancient, has it otherwise. But it is evident that 
 any custom introduced against the commandments of God is not 
 to be allowed, as the Canons witness (Dist. iii.. Cap. Veritate, 
 and the following chapters). But this custom has been received, 
 not only against the Scripture but also against the old Canons 
 and example of the Church. Therefore if any preferred to use 
 both kinds of the sacrament, they ought not to have been com- 
 pelled with offence to their consciences to do otherwise. 
 
 And because the division of the sacrament does not agree with 
 the ordinance of Christ, we are accustomed to omit the proces- 
 sion, which hitherto has been in use. 
 
 Article XXIII. 
 
 There has been common complaint concerning the Examples 
 of Priests, who were not chaste. For that reason also. Pope 
 Pius is reported to have said that there were certain reasons 
 why marriage was taken away from priests, but that there were 
 far weightier ones why it ought to be given back ; for so Platina 
 writes. Since, therefore, our priests were desirous to avoid these 
 open scandals they married wives, and taught that it was lawful 
 for them to contract matrimony. First, because Paul says [i Cor. 
 7:2]: "To avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife." 
 Also [9] : "It is better to marry than to burn." Secondly, Christ 
 says [Matt. 19:11]: "All men cannot receive this saying," 
 where he teaches that not all men are fit to lead a single life ; 
 for God created man for procreation [Gen. 1:28]. Nor is it in 
 man's power, without a singular gift and work of God, to alter 
 this creation. Therefore those that are not fit to lead a single 
 life ought to contract matrimony. For no man's law, no vow, 
 can annul the commandment and ordinance of God. For these 
 reasons the priests teach that it is lawful for them to marry 
 wives. It is also evident that in the ancient Church priests were 
 married men. For Paul says [i Tim. 3:2] that a bishop should 
 be the husband of one wife. And in Germany, four hundred 
 years ago for the first time, the priests were violently compelled 
 to lead a single life, who indeed offered such resistance that the 
 Archbishop of Mayence, when about to publish the Pope's decree 
 
Th£: Augsburg Con]?ession. 145 
 
 concerning this matter, was almost killed in the tumult raised 
 by the enraged priests. And so harsh was the dealing in the 
 matter that not only were marriages forbidden for the time to 
 come, but also existing marriages were torn asunder, contrary to 
 all laws, divine and human, contrary even to the Canons them- 
 selves, made not only by the Popes but by most celebrated Coun- 
 cils. 
 
 Seeing also that, as the world is aging, man's nature is gradu- 
 ally growing weaker, it is well to guard that no more vices steal 
 into Germany. Furthermore, God ordained marriage to be a 
 help against human infirmity. The Canons themselves say that 
 the old rigor ought now and then, in the latter times, to be re- 
 laxed because of the weakness of men; which it is to be de- 
 voutly wished were done also in this matter. And it is to be 
 expected that the churches shall at length lack pastors, if mar- 
 riage should be any longer forbidden. 
 
 But while the commandment of God is in force, while the 
 custom of the Church is well known, while impure celibacy 
 causes many scandals, adulteries, and other crimes deserving the 
 punishments of just magistrates, yet it is a marvellous thing that 
 in nothing is more cruelty exercised than against the marriage 
 of priests. God has given commandment to honor marriage. 
 By the laws of all well-ordered commonwealths, even among the 
 heathen, marriage is most highly honored. But now men, and 
 also priests, are cruelly put to death, contrary to the intent of 
 the Canons, for no other cause than marriage. Paul [in i Tim. 
 4: 3] calls that a doctrine of devils, which forbids marriage. This 
 may now be readily understood when the law against marriage is 
 maintained by such penalties. 
 
 But as no law of man can annul the commandment of God, 
 so neither can it be done by any vow. Accordingly Cyprian also 
 advises that women who do not keep the chastity they have 
 promised should marry. His words are these [Book I., Epistle 
 xi.] : "But if they be unwilling or unable to persevere, it is bet- 
 ter for them to marry than to fall into the fire by their lusts; 
 at least, they should give no ofifence to their brethren and sis- 
 ters." And even the Canons show some leniency toward those 
 who have taken vows before the proper age, as heretofore has 
 generally been the case. 
 
 Article XXIV. 
 
 Falsely are our churches accused of Abolishing the Mass ; for 
 the Mass is retained on our part, and celebrated with the highest 
 reverence. All the usual ceremonies are also preserved, save 
 that the parts sung in Latin are interspersed here and there with 
 German hymns, which have been added to teach the people. For 
 ceremonies are needed to this end alone, that the unlearned be 
 taught. And not only has Paul commanded to use in the Church 
 a language understood by the people [i Cor. 14:2, 9], but it has 
 also been so ordained by man's law. 
 
146 Tiir. Augsburg Confession. 
 
 The people are accustomed to partake of the Sacrament to- 
 gether, if any be fit for it, and this also increases the reverence 
 and devotion of public worship. For none are admitted except 
 they be first proved. The people are also advised concerning 
 the dignity and use of the Sacrament, how great consolation it 
 brings anxious consciences, that they may learn to believe God, 
 and to expect and ask of Him all that is good. This worship 
 pleases God; such use of the Sacrament nourishes true devotion 
 toward God. It does not, therefore, appear that the Mass is 
 more devoutly celebrated among our adversaries, than among us. 
 
 But it is evident that for a long time, it has been the public 
 and most grievous complaint of all good men, that Masses have 
 been basely profaned and appUed to purposes of lucre. For it is 
 unknown how far this abuse obtains in all the churches, by what 
 manner of men Masses are said only for fees or stipends, and how 
 many celebrate them contrary to the Canons. But Paul severely 
 threatens those who deal unworthily with the Eucharist, when he 
 says [i Cor. 11 127] : "Whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink 
 this cup of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and 
 blood of the Lord." When, therefore, our priests were admon- 
 ished concerning this sin, Private Masses were discontinued 
 among us, as scarcely any Private Masses were celebrated except 
 for lucre's sake. 
 
 Neither were the bishops ignorant of these abuses, and if they 
 had corrected them in time, there would now be less dissension. 
 Heretofore, by their own negligence, they suffered many cor- 
 ruptions to creep into the Church. Now, when it is too late, 
 they begin to complain of the troubles of the Church, seeing that 
 this disturbance has been occasioned simply by those abuses, 
 which were so manifest that they could be borne no longer. 
 Great dissensions have arisen concerning the Mass, concerning 
 the Sacrament. Perhaps the world is being punished for such 
 long-continued profanations of the Mass, as have been tolerated 
 in the churches for so many centuries, by the very men who 
 were both able and in duty bound to correct them. For, in the 
 Ten Commandments, it is written (Exodus 20), "The Lord will 
 not hold him guiltless that taketh His name in vain." But since 
 the world began, nothing that God ever ordained seems to have 
 been so abused for filthy lucre as the Mass. 
 
 There was also added the opinion which infinitely increased 
 Private Masses, namely, that Christ, by liis passion, had made 
 satisfaction for original sin, and instituted the Mass wherein an 
 offering should be made for daily sins, venial and mortal. From 
 this has arisen the common opinion that the Mass taketh away 
 the sins of the living and the dead, by the outward act. Then 
 they began to dispute whether one Mass said for many were 
 worth as much as special Masses for individuals, and this 
 brought forth that infinite multitude of Masses. Concerning 
 these opinions our teachers have given warning, that they de- 
 part from the Holy Scriptures and diminish the glory of the 
 
The xA.ugsburg Confession. 147 
 
 passion of Christ. For Christ's passion was an oblation and 
 satisfaction, not for original guilt only, but also for all sins, as 
 it is written to the Hebrews (lo: lo), "We are sanctified through 
 the offering of Jesus Christ, once for all." Also, lo: 14: "By one 
 offering he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified." 
 Scripture also teaches that we are justified before God through 
 faith in Christ, when we believe that our sins are forgiven for 
 Christ's sake. Now if the Mass take away the sins of the living 
 and the dead by the outward act, justification comes of the work 
 of Masses, and not of faith, which Scripture does not allow. 
 
 But Christ commands us [Luke 22: 19], "This do in remem- 
 brance of me;" therefore the Mass was instituted that the faith 
 of those who use the Sacrament should remember what benefits 
 it receives through Christ, and cheer and comfort the anxious 
 conscience. For, to remember Christ, is to remember his benefits, 
 and to realize that they are truly offered unto us. Nor is it 
 enough only to remember the history, for this the Jew and the 
 ungodly also can remember. Wherefore the Mass is to be used 
 to this end, that there the Sacrament [Communion] may be ad- 
 ministered to them that have need of consolation ; as Ambrose 
 says : "Because I always sin, I am always bound to take the 
 medicine." 
 
 Now forasmuch as the Mass is such a giving of the Sacrament, 
 we hold one communion every holyday, and also other days, 
 when any desire the Sacrament it is given to such as ask for it. 
 And this custom is not new in the Church ; for the Fathers be- 
 fore Gregory make no mention of any private Mass, but of the 
 common Mass [the Communion] they speak very much. Chrys- 
 ostom says that the priest stands daily at the altar, inviting some 
 to the Communion and keeping back others. And it appears 
 from the ancient Canons, that some one celebrated the Mass 
 from whom all the other presbyters and deacons received the 
 Body of the Lord ; for thus the words of the Nicene Canon say : 
 "Let the deacons, according to their order, receive the Holy Com- 
 munion after the presbyters, from the bishop or from a pres- 
 byter." And Paul [i Cor. 11 : ss] commands concerning the Com- 
 munion : "Tarry one for another," so that there may be a com- 
 mon participation. 
 
 Forasmuch, therefore, as the Mass with us has the example of 
 the Church, taken from the Scripture and the Fathers, we are 
 confident that it cannot be disapproved, especially since the pub- 
 lic ceremonies are retained for the most part, like those hitherto 
 in use; only the number of Masses differs, which, because of very 
 great and manifest abuses, doubtless might be profitably reduced. 
 For in olden times, even in churches, most frequented, the Mass 
 was not celebrated every day, as the Tripartite History (Book 9, 
 chapt. 33) testifies: "Again in Alexandria, every Wednesday 
 and Friday, the_ Scriptures are read, and the doctors expound 
 them, and all things are done, except only the celebration of the 
 Eucharist." 
 
148 Th^ Augsburg Coni^e:ssion. 
 
 Article XXV. 
 
 Confession in our churches is not abolished; for it is not usual 
 to give the Body of the Lord, except to them that have been 
 previously examined and absolved. And the people are most 
 carefully taught concerning the faith and assurance of absolu- 
 tion, about which, before this time, there was profound silence. 
 Our people are taught that they should highly prize the absolu- 
 tion, as being the voice of God, and pronounced by His com- 
 mand. The power of the Keys is commended, and we show what 
 great consolation it brings to anxious consciences ; that God re- 
 quires faith to believe such absolution as a voice sounding from 
 Heaven, and that such faith in Christ truly obtains and receives 
 the forgiveness of sins. 
 
 Aforetime, satisfactions were immoderately extolled; of faith 
 and the merit ol Christ, and the righteousness of faith, no men- 
 tion was made ; wherefore, on this point our churches are by no 
 means to be blamed. For this even our adversaries must needs 
 concede to us, that the doctrine concerning repentance has been 
 most diligently treated and laid open by our teachers. 
 
 But of Confession, they teach, that an enumeration of sins is 
 not necessary, and that consciences be not burdened with anxiety 
 to enumerate all sins, for it is impossible to recount all sins, as 
 the Psalm testifies [19:13]: "Who can understand his errors?" 
 Also Jeremiah [17:9]: "The heart is deceitful, who can know 
 it?" But if no sins were forgiven, except those that are re- 
 counted, consciences could never find peace ; for very many sins 
 they neither see, nor can remember. 
 
 The ancient writers also testify that an enumeration is not 
 necessary. For, in the Decrees, Chrysostom is quoted, who thus 
 says : "1 say not to thee, that thou shouldest disclose thyself in 
 public, nor that thou accuse thyself before others, but I would 
 have thee obey the prophet who says : 'Disclose thy way before 
 God.' Therefore confess thy sins before God, the true Judge, 
 with prayer. Tell thine errors, not with the tongue, but with 
 the memory of thy conscience." And the Gloss ("Of Repent- 
 ance," Distinct, v, Cap. Consideret) admits that Confession of 
 human right only. Nevertheless, on account of the great benefit 
 of absolution, and because it is otherwise useful to the conscience, 
 Confession is retained among us. 
 
 ART1C1.E XXVI. 
 
 It has been the general persuasion, not of the people alone, 
 but also of such as teach in the churches, that making Distinc- 
 tions of Meats, and like traditions of men, are works profitable 
 to merit grace, and able to make satisfactions for sins. And that 
 the world so thought, appears from this, that new ceremonies, 
 new orders, new holydays, and new fastings were daily insti- 
 tuted, and the teachers in the churches did exact these works as 
 a service necessary to merit grace, and did greatly terrify men's 
 consciences, if they should omit any of these things. From this 
 
Thk Augsburg Coni^^ssion. i^ig 
 
 persuasion concerning traditions, much detriment has resulted 
 in the Church. 
 
 First, the doctrine of grace and of the righteousness of faith 
 has been obscured by it, which is the chief part of the Gospel, 
 and ought to stand out, as the most prominent in the Church, 
 that the merit of Christ may be well known, and that faith, 
 which believes that sins are forgiven for Christ's sake may be 
 exalted far above works. Wherefore Paul also lays the greatest 
 stress on this article, putting side the law and human traditions, 
 in order to show that the righteousness of the Christian is another 
 than such works, to wit, the faith which believes that sins are 
 freely forgiven for Christ's sake. But this doctrine of Paul has 
 been almost wholly smothered by traditions, which have pro- 
 duced an opinion that, by making distinctions in meats and like 
 services, we must merit grace and righteousness. In treating of 
 repentance, there was no mention made of faith; all that was 
 done was to set forth those works of satisfaction, and in these 
 all repentance seemed to consist. 
 
 Secondly, these traditions have obscured the commandments of 
 God; because traditions were placed far above the command- 
 ments of God. Christianity was thought to consist wholly in the 
 observance of certain holydays, fasts and vestures. These ob- 
 servances had won for themselves the exalted title of being the 
 spiritual life and the perfect life. Meanwhile the commandments 
 of God, according to each one's calling, were without honor, 
 namely, that the father brought up his family, that the mother 
 bore children, that the Prince governed the Commonwealth, — 
 these were accounted works that were worldly and imperfect, and 
 far below those glittering observances. And this error greatly 
 tormented devout consciences, which grieved that they were 
 bound by an imperfect state of life, as in marriage, in the office 
 of magistrate, or in other civil ministrations ; on the other hand, 
 they admired the monks and such like, and falsely imagined that 
 the observances of such men were more acceptable to God. 
 
 Thirdly, traditions brought great danger to consciences ; for it 
 was impossible to keep all traditions, and yet men judged these 
 observances to be necessary acts of worship. Gerson writes that 
 many fell into despair, and that some even took their own lives, 
 because they felt that they were not able to satisfy the tradi- 
 tions ; and meanwhile, they heard not the consolation of the 
 righteousness of faith and grace. 
 
 We see that the summists and theologians gather the tradi- 
 tions together, and seek mitigations whereby to ease consciences, 
 and yet they do not succeed in releasing them, but sometimes en- 
 tangle consciences even more. And with the gathering of these 
 traditions, the schools and sermons have been so much occupied 
 that they have had no leisure to touch upon Scripture, and to 
 seek the more profitable doctrine of faith, of the cross, of hope, 
 of the dignity of civil affairs, of consolation of sorely tried con- 
 sciences. Hence Gerson, and some other theologians, have griev- 
 
I50 The Augsburg Confession. 
 
 ously complained, that by these strivings concerning traditions, 
 they were prevented from giving attention to a better kind of 
 doctrine. Augustine also forbids that men's consciences should 
 be burdened with such observances, and prudently advises Janu- 
 arius, that he must know that they are to be observed as things 
 indifferent; for these are his words. 
 
 Wherefore our teachers must not be looked upon as having 
 taken up this matter rashly, or from hatred of the bishops, as 
 some falsely suspect. There was great need to warn the churches 
 of these errors, which had arisen from misunderstanding the tra- 
 ditions. For the Gospel compels us to insist in the churches upon 
 the doctrine of grace, and of the righteousness of faith; which, 
 however, cannot be understood, if men think that they merit 
 grace by observances of their own choice. 
 
 Thus, therefore, they have taught, that by the observance of 
 human traditions we cannot merit grace, or be justified; and 
 hence we must not think such observances necessary acts of 
 worship. 
 
 They add hereunto testimonies of Scripture. Christ [Matt. 15: 
 3] defends the Apostles who had not observed the usual tradi- 
 tion, which, however, seemed to pertain to a matter not unlawful, 
 but indifferent, and to have a certain affinity with the purifica- 
 tions of the law, and says [9] : "In vain do they worship me with 
 the commandments of men." He, therefore, does not exact an 
 unprofitable service. Shortly after, he adds [n] : "Not that 
 which goeth into the mouth, defileth a man." So also Paul [Rom, 
 14: 17]: "The Kingdom of God is not meat and drink." _ [Col, 
 2: 16] "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or 
 in respect of an holyday, or of the Sabbath day ;" also [v. 20, 
 sq.] : "If ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the 
 world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to 
 ordinances, touch not, taste not, handle not?" And Peter says 
 [Acts 15: 10] : "Why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck 
 of the disciples, which neither our fathers, nor we were able to 
 bear ; but we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus 
 Christ, we shall be saved, even as they." Here Peter forbids to 
 burden the consciences with many rites, either of Moses, or of 
 others. 
 
 And in i Tim. [4: i, 3] Paul calls the prohibition of meats a 
 doctrine of devils ; for it is against the Gospel to institute or to 
 do such works that by them we may merit grace, or as though 
 Christianity could not exist without such service of God, 
 
 Here our adversaries cast up that our teachers are opposed to 
 discipline and mortification of the flesh, as Jovinian. But the 
 contrary may be learned from the writings of our teachers. For 
 they have always taught concerning the cross, that it behooves 
 Christians to bear afiiictions. This is the true, earnest and un- 
 feigned mortification, to wit, to be exercised with divers afflic- 
 tions, and to be crucified with Christ. 
 
 Moreover, they teach, that every Christian ought to exercise 
 
The Augsburg Coni^e:ssion. 151 
 
 and subdue himself with bodily restraints and labors, that neither 
 plenty nor sloth fulness tempt him to sin, but not that we may 
 merit grace or make satisfaction for sins by such exercises. And 
 such external discipline ought to be urged at all times, not only 
 on a few and set days. So Christ commands [Luke 21 : 34] : 
 "Take heed, lest your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting;" 
 also [Matt. 17:21] : "This kind goeth not out but by prayer and 
 fasting." Paul also says [i Cor. 9:27] : "I keep under my body 
 and bring it into subjection." Here he clearly shows that he 
 was keeping under his body, not to merit forgiveness of sins by 
 that discipline, but to have his body in subjection and fitted for 
 spiritual things, and for the discharge of duty according to his 
 calling. Therefore, we do not condemn fasting, but the tradi- 
 tions which prescribe certain days and certain meats, with peril 
 of conscience, as though works of such kinds were a necessary 
 service. 
 
 Nevertheless, very many traditions are kept on our part, which 
 conduce to good order in the Church, as the Order of Lessons 
 in the Mass, and the .chief holydays. But, at the same time, men 
 are warned that such observances do not justify before God, and 
 that, in such things, it should not be made sin, if they be omitted 
 without scandal. Such liberty in human rites was not unknown 
 to the Fathers. For in the East they kept Easter at another time 
 than at Rome, and when, on account of this diversity, the 
 Romans accused the Eastern Church of schism, they were ad- 
 monished by others that such usages need not be alike every- 
 where. And Irenaeus says : "Diversity concerning fasting does 
 not destroy the harmony of faith." As also Pope Gregory inti- 
 mates in Dist. xii., that such diversity does not violate the unity 
 of the Church. And in the Tripartite History, Book 9, many ex- 
 amples of dissimilar rites are gathered, and the following state- 
 ment is made : "It was not the mind of the Apostles to enact 
 rules concerning holydays, but to preach godUness and a holy 
 life." 
 
 Article XXVH. 
 
 What is taught on our part, concerning Monastic Vows, will 
 be better understood, if it be remembered what has been the 
 state of the monasteries, and how many things were daily done 
 in those very monasteries, contrary to the Canons. In Augus- 
 tine's time, they were free associations. Afterward, when dis- 
 cipline was corrupted, vows were everywhere added for the pur- 
 pose of restoring discipline, as in a carefully planned prison. 
 Gradually, many other observances were added besides vows. 
 And these fetters were laid upon many before the lawful age, 
 contrary to the Canons. Many also entered into this kind of 
 life through ignorance, being unable to judge their own strength, 
 though they were of sufficient age. Being thus ensnared, they 
 were compelled to remain, even though some could have been 
 freed by the provision of the Canons. And this was more the 
 
152 The Augsburg Confession. 
 
 case in convents of women than of monks, although more con- 
 sideration should have been shown the weaker sex. This rigor 
 displeased many good men before this time, who saw that young 
 men and maidens were thrown into convents for a living, and 
 what unfortunate results came of this procedure, and what scan- 
 dals were created, what snares were cast upon consciences ! They 
 were grieved that the authority of the Canons in so momentous 
 a matter was utterly despised and set aside. 
 
 To these evils, was added an opinion concerning vows, which, 
 it is well known, in former times, displeased even those monks 
 who were more thoughtful. They taught that vows were equal 
 to Baptism; they taught that, by this kind of life, they merited 
 forgiveness of sins and justification before God. Yea, they added 
 that the monastic life not only merited righteousness before God, 
 but even greater things, because it kept not only the precepts, 
 but also the so-called "evangelical counsels." 
 
 Thus they made men believe that the profession of monasti- 
 cism was far better than Baptism, and that the monastic life 
 was more meritorious than that of magistrates, than the life of 
 pastors and such like, who serve their calling in accordance with 
 God's commands, without any man-made services. None of these 
 things can be denied ; for they appear in their own books. 
 
 What then came to pass in the monasteries? Aforetime, they 
 were schools of Theology and other branches, profitable to the 
 Church ; and thence pastors and bishops were obtained. Now it 
 is another thing. It is needless to rehearse what is known to all. 
 Aforetime they came together to learn ; now they feign that it 
 is a kind of life instituted to merit grace and righteousness ; yea, 
 they preach that it is a state of perfection, and they put it far 
 above all other kinds of life ordained of God. 
 
 These things we have rehearsed without odious exaggeration, 
 to the end that the doctrine of our teachers, on this point, might 
 be better understood. First, concerning such as contract matri- 
 mony, they teach, on our part, that it is lawful for all men who 
 are not fitted for single life to contract matrimony, because vows 
 cannot annul the ordinance and commandment of God. But the 
 commandment of God is [i Cor. 7:2]: "To avoid fornication, 
 let every man have his own wife." Nor is it the commandment 
 only, but also the creation and ordinance of God, which forces 
 those to marry who are not excepted by a singular work of God, 
 according to the text [Gen. 2:18]: "It is not good that the man 
 should be alone." Therefore they do not sin who obey this com- 
 mandment and ordinance of God. What objection can be raised 
 to this? Let men extol the obligation of a vow as much as they 
 list, yet shall they not bring to pass that the vow annuls the 
 commandment of God. The Canons teach that the right of the 
 superior is excepted in every vow ; much less, therefore, are 
 these vows of force which are against the commandments of God. 
 
 Now if the obligation of vows could not be changed for any 
 cause whatever, the Roman Pontiffs could never have given dis- 
 pensation; for it is not lawful for man to annul an obligation 
 
The: Augsburg Confession. 153 
 
 which is altogether divine. But the Roman Pontiffs have pru- 
 dently judged that leniency is to be observed in this obligation, 
 and therefore we read that many times they have dispensed from 
 vows. The case of the King of Aragon who was called back 
 from the monastery is well known, and there are also examples 
 in our own times. 
 
 In the second place, Why do our adversaries exaggerate the 
 obhgation or effect of a vow, when at the same time, they have 
 not a word to say of the nature of the vow itself, that it ought 
 to be in a thing possible, free, and chosen spontaneously and de- 
 liberately. But it is not known to what extent perpetual chastity 
 is in the power of man. And how few are there who have taken 
 the vow spontaneously and deliberately ! Young men and maid- 
 ens, before they are able to judge, are persuaded, and sometimes 
 even compelled, to take the vow. Wherefore it is not fair to 
 insist so rigorously on the obhgation, since it is granted by all 
 that it is against the nature of a vow to take it without spon- 
 taneous and deliberate action. 
 
 Many canonical laws rescind vows made before the age of 
 fifteen; for before that age, there does not seem sufficient judg- 
 ment in a person to decide concerning a perpetual life. Another 
 Canon, granting even more liberty to the weakness of man, adds 
 a few years, and forbids a vow to be made before the age ot 
 eighteen. But whether we followed the one or the other, the 
 most part have an excuse for leaving the monasteries, because 
 most of them have taken vows before they reached these ages. 
 
 But, finally, even though the violation of a vow might be re- 
 buked, yet it seems not forthwith to follow that the marriag'^s 
 of such persons ought to be dissolved. For Augustine denies 
 that they ought to be dissolved (xxvii. Qusest. I., Cap. Niip- 
 tiarum) ; and his authority is not lightly to be esteemed, although 
 other men afterwards thought otherwise. 
 
 But although it appears that God's comm.and concerning mar- 
 riage delivers many from their vows, yet our teachers introduce 
 also another argument concerning vows, to show that they are 
 void. For every service of God, ordained and chosen of men 
 without the commandment of God to merit justification and 
 grace, is wicked; as Christ says [Matt. 15 : 9] : "In vain do they 
 worship me with the commandments of men." And Paul teaches 
 everywhere that righteousness is not to be sought by our own 
 observances and acts of worship, devised by men, but that it 
 comes by faith to those who believe that they are received by 
 God into grace for Christ's sake. 
 
 But it is evident that monks have taught that services of man's 
 making satisfy for sins and merit grace and justification. What 
 else is this but to detract from the glory of Christ and to obscure 
 and deny the righteousness of faith? It follows, therefore, that 
 the vows thus commonly taken, have been wicked services, and, 
 consequently, are void. For a wicked vow, taken against the 
 commandment of God, is not valid; for (as the Canon says) no 
 vow ought to bind men to wickedness. 
 
154 The Augsburg Confession. 
 
 Paul says [Gal. 5:4]: ''Christ is become of no effect unto you, 
 whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from 
 grace." They, therefore, who want to be justified by their vows, 
 are made void of Christ and fall from grace. For such as ascribe 
 justification to vows, ascribe to their own works that which prop- 
 erly belongs to the glory of Christ. But it is undeniable that the 
 monks have taught that, by their vows and observances, they 
 were justified, and merited forgiveness of sins, yea, they invented 
 still greater absurdities, saying that they could give others a share 
 in their works. If anyone should be inclined to enlarge on these 
 things with evil intent, how many things could he bring together, 
 whereof even the monks are now ashamed ! Over and above 
 this, they persuaded men that services of man's making were a 
 state of Christian perfection. And is not this assigning justifica- 
 tion to works? It is no Hght offence in the Church to set forth 
 to the people a service devised by men, without the command- 
 ment of God, and to teach that such service justifies men. For 
 the righteousness of faith in Christ, which chiefly ought to be in 
 the Church, is obscured, when this wonderful worshipping of 
 angels, with its show of poverty, humility and chastity, is cast 
 before the eyes of men. 
 
 Furthermore, the precepts of God and the true service of God 
 are obscured when men hear that only monks are in a state of 
 perfection. For Christian perfection is to fear God from the 
 heart, again to conceive great faith, and to trust that, for Christ's 
 sake, we have a gracious God, to ask of God, and assuredly to 
 expect his aid in all things that, according to our calling, are to 
 be borne; and meanwhile, to be diligent in outward good works, 
 and to serve our calling. In these things consist the true per- 
 fection and the true service of God. It does not consist in the 
 unmarried life, or in begging, or in vile apparel. But the people 
 conceive many pernicious opinions from the false commenda- 
 tions of monastic life. They hear unmarried Hfe praised above 
 measure ; therefore they lead their married Hfe with offence to 
 their consciences. They hear that only beggars are perfect ; 
 therefore they keep their possessions and do business with of- 
 fence to their consciences. They hear that it is an evangelical 
 counsel not to avenge; therefore some in private life are not 
 afraid to take revenge, for they hear that it is but a counsel, and 
 not a commandment; while others judge that the Christian can- 
 not properly hold a civil office, or be a magistrate. 
 
 There are on record examples of men who, forsaking mar- 
 riage and the administration of the Commonwealth, have hid 
 themselves in monasteries. This they called fleeing from the 
 world, and seeking a kind of life which should be more pleasing 
 to God. Neither did they see that God ought to be served in 
 those commandments which he himself has given, and not in com- 
 mandments devised by men. A good and perfect kind of life 
 is that which has for it the commandment of God. It is nec- 
 essary to admonish men of these things. And before these times, 
 Gerson rebuked this error concerning perfection, and testified 
 
The^ Augsburg Coni^ession. 155 
 
 that, in his day, it was a new saying that the monastic life is a 
 state of perfection. 
 
 So many wicked opinions are inherent in the vows, such as 
 that they justify, that they constitute Christian perfection, that 
 they keep the counsels and commandments, that they have works 
 of supererogation. All these things, since they are false and 
 empty, make vows null and void. 
 
 Artici^e XXVIII. 
 
 There has been great controversy concerning the Power of 
 Bishops, in which some have awkwardly confounded the power 
 of the Church and the power of the sword. And from this con- 
 fusion very great wars and tumults have resulted, while the 
 Pontiffs, emboldened by the power of the Keys, not only have 
 instituted new services and burdened consciences with reserva- 
 tion of cases, but have also undertaken to transfer the kingdoms 
 of this world, and to take the Empire from the Emperor. These 
 wrongs have long since been rebuked in the Church by learned 
 and godly men. Therefore, our teachers, for the comforting of 
 men's consciences, were constrained to show the difference be- 
 tween the power of the Church and the power of the sword, and 
 taught that both of them, because of God's commandment,^ are to 
 be held in reverence and honor, as among the chief blessings of 
 God on earth. 
 
 But this is their opinion, that the power of the Keys, or the 
 power of the bishops, according to the Gospel, is a power or 
 commandment of God, to preach the Gospel, to remit and retain 
 sins, and to administer sacraments. For with that commandment, 
 Christ sends forth his Apostles [John 20:21 sqq.] : "As my 
 Father has sent me, even so send I you. Receive ye the Holy 
 Ghost. Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them ; 
 and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained." [Mark 16: 
 15] : "Go, preach the Gospel to every creature." 
 
 This power is exercised only by teaching or preaching the 
 Gospel and administering the sacraments, according to the calling, 
 either to many or to individuals. For thereby are granted, not 
 bodily, but eternal things, as eternal righteousness, the Holy 
 Ghost, eternal life. These things cannot come but by the min- 
 istry of the Word and the sacraments. As Paul says [Rom. i : 
 16] : "The Gospel is the power of God unto salvation to every 
 one that believeth." Therefore, since the power of the Church 
 grants eternal things, and is exercised only by the ministry of 
 the Word, it does not interfere with civil government ; no more 
 than the art of singing interferes with civil government. For 
 civil government deals with other things than does the Gospel; 
 the civil rulers defend not souls, but bodies and bodily things 
 against manifest injuries, and restrain men with the sword and 
 bodily punishments in order to preserve civil justice and peace. 
 
 Therefore the power of the Church and the civil power must 
 not be confounded. The power of the Church has its own com- 
 mission, to teach the Gospel and to administer the sacraments. 
 
156 The: Augsburg Confession. 
 
 Let it not break into the office of another ; let it not transfer the 
 kingdoms of this world; let it not abrogate the laws of civil 
 rulers; let it not aboHsh lawful obedience; let it not interfere 
 with judgments concerning civil ordinances or contracts; let it 
 not prescribe laws to civil rulers concerning the form of the Com- 
 monwealth. As Christ says [John 18 : 36] : "My kingdom is not 
 of this world"; also [Luke 12: 14] "Who made me a judge or a 
 divider over you?" Paul also says [Phil. 3:20]: "Our citizen- 
 ship is in Heaven" ; [2 Cor. 10 : 4] : "The weapons of our war- 
 fare are not carnal; but mighty through God to the casting 
 down of imaginations." After this manner, our teachers dis- 
 criminate between the duties of both these powers, and com- 
 mand that both be honored and acknowledged as gifts and bless- 
 ings of God. 
 
 If bishops have any power of the sword, that power they have, 
 not as bishops, by the commission of the Gospel, but by human 
 law, having received it of Kings and Emperors, for the civil ad- 
 ministration of what is theirs. This, however, is another office 
 than the ministry of the Gospel. 
 
 When, therefore, a question arises concerning the jurisdiction 
 of bishops, civil authority must be distinguished from ecclesi- 
 astical jurisdiction. Again, according to the Gospel, or, as they 
 say, according to Divine Law, to the bishops as bishops, that is, 
 to those to whom has been committed the ministry of the Word 
 and the sacraments, no jurisdiction belongs, except to forgive 
 sins, to discern doctrine, to reject doctrines contrary to the 
 Gospel, and to exclude from the communion of the Church 
 wicked men, whose wickedness is known, and this without human 
 force, simply by the Word. Herein the congregations are bound 
 by Divine Law to obey them, according to Luke 10: 16: "He that 
 heareth you, heareth me." 
 
 But when they teach or ordain anything against the Gospel, 
 then the congregations have a commandment of God prohibiting 
 obedience [Matt. 7: 15] : "Beware of false prophets"; [Gal. i : 8] : 
 "Though an angel from heaven preach any other Gospel let him 
 be accursed" ; [2 Cor. 13:8]: "We can do nothing against the 
 truth ; but for the truth." Also [v. 10] : "The power which the 
 Lord hath given me to edification, and not to destruction." So, 
 also, the Canonical Laws command (H. Q. vii. Cap. Sacer dotes 
 and Cap. Oves.) And Augustine {Contra Petiliani Bpistolam) : 
 "Not even to Catholic bishops must we submit, if they chance 
 to err, or hold anything contrary to the Canonical Scriptures of 
 God." 
 
 n they have any other power or jurisdiction, in hearing and 
 judging certain cases, as of matrimony or of tithes, they have it 
 by human law. But where the ordinaries fail, princes are bound, 
 even against their will, to dispense justice to their subjects, for 
 the maintenance of peace. 
 
 Moreover, it is disputed whether bishops or pastors have the 
 right to introduce ceremonies in the Church, and to make laws 
 concerning meats, holydays and degrees, that is, orders of min- 
 
Th^ Augsburg Coni^ession. 157 
 
 isters, etc. They that claim this right for the bishops, refer to 
 this testimony [John 16:12, 13]: "I have yet many things to 
 say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, 
 the Spirit of truth is come, he will guide you into all truth." 
 They also refer to the example of the Apostles, who commanded 
 to abstain from blood and from things strangled [Acts 15:29]. 
 They refer to the Sabbath Day, as having been changed into the 
 Lord's Day, contrary to the Decalogue, as it seems. Neither is 
 there any example whereof they make more than concerning the 
 changing of the Sabbath Day. Great, say they, is the power of 
 the Church, since it has dispensed with one of the Ten Com- 
 mandments ! 
 
 But, concerning this question, it is taught on our part (as has 
 been shown above), that bishops have no power to decree any- 
 thing against the Gospel. The Canonical laws teach the same 
 thing (Dist. ix.). Now it is against Scripture to establish or re- 
 quire the observance of any traditions, to the end that, by such 
 observance, we may make satisfaction for sins, or merit grace 
 and righteousness. For the glory of Christ's merit is dishonored 
 when, by such observances, we undertake to rnerit justification. 
 But it is manifest that, by such belief, traditions have almost 
 infinitely multiplied in the Church, the doctrine concerning faith 
 and the' righteousness of faith being meanwhile suppressed. For 
 gradually more holydays were made, fasts appointed, new cere- 
 monies and services in honor of saints instituted; because the 
 authors of such things thought that, by these works, they were 
 meriting grace. Thus, in times past, the Penitential Canons in- 
 creased, whereof we still see some traces in the satisfactions. 
 
 Again, the authors of traditions do contrary to the command 
 of God when they find matters of sin in foods, in days, and like 
 things, and burden the Church with bondage of the law, as if 
 there ought to be among Christians, in order to merit justifica- 
 tion, a service like the Levitical, the arrangement of which God 
 has committed to the Apostles and bishops. For thus some of 
 them write ; and the Pontiffs in some measure seem to be misled 
 by the example of the law of Moses. Hence are such burdens, 
 as that they make it mortal sin, even without offence to others, 
 to do manual labor on holydays, to omit the Canonical Hours, 
 that certain foods defile the conscience, that fastings are works 
 which appease God, that sin in a reserved case cannot be for- 
 given but by the authority of him who reserved it; whereas the 
 Canons themselves speak only of the reserving of the ecclesi- 
 astical penalty, and not of the reserving of the guilt. 
 
 Whence have the bishops the right to lay these traditions 
 upon the Church for the ensnaring of consciences, when Peter 
 [x^cts 15 : 10] forbids to put a yoke upon the neck of the dis- 
 ciples, and Paul says [2 Cor. 13 : 10] that the power given him 
 was to edification, not to destruction? Why, therefore, do they 
 increase sins by these traditions? 
 
 But there are clear testimonies which prohibit the making of 
 such traditions, as though they merited grace or were necessary 
 
158 The: Augsburg Concession. 
 
 to salvation. Paul says [Col. 2: 16] : *Xet no man judge you in 
 meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new 
 moon, or of the Sabbath days"; [v. 20, 23] : "If ye be dead with 
 Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living 
 in the world, are ye subject to ordinances (touch not; taste not; 
 handle not, which all are to perish with the using) ; after the 
 commandments and doctrines of men? which things have indeed 
 a show of wisdom." Also in Tit. [i: 14] he openly forbids tra- 
 ditions : "Not giving heed to Jewish fables and comm.andments 
 of men that turn from the truth." And Christ [Matt. 15 : 14] 
 says of those who require traditions: "Let them alone; they 
 be blind leaders of the blind"; and he rebukes such services [v. 
 13] : "Every plant which my Heavenly Father hath not planted, 
 shall be plucked up." 
 
 If bishops have the right to burden churches with infinite tra- 
 ditions, and to ensnare consciences, why does Scripture so often 
 prohibit to make and to listen to traditions? Why does it call 
 them "doctrines of devils"? [i Tim. 4:1]. Did the Holy Ghost 
 in vain forewarn of these things? 
 
 Since, therefore, ordinances instituted as things necessary, or 
 with an opinion of meriting grace, are contrary to the Gospel, it 
 follows that it is not lawful for any bishop to institute or ex- 
 act such services. For it is necessary that the doctrine of Chris- 
 tian liberty be preserved in the churches, namely, that the bond- 
 age of the Law is not necessary to justification, as it is written 
 in the Epistle to the Galatians [5:1]: "Be not entangled again 
 with the yoke of bondage." It is necessary that the chief article 
 of the Gospel be preserved, to wit, that we obtain grace freely 
 by faith in Christ, and not for certain observances or acts of 
 worship devised by men. 
 
 What, then, are we to think of the Sunday and like rites in 
 the house of God? To this we answer, that it is lawful for 
 bishops or pastors to make ordinances that things be done or- 
 derly in the Church, not that thereby we should merit grace or 
 make satisfaction for sins, or that consciences be bound to judge 
 them necessary services, and to think that it is a sin to break 
 them without ofifence to others. So Paul ordains [i Cor. 11:5], 
 that wom.en should cover their heads in the congregation [i Cor. 
 14-30], that interpreters of Scripture be heard in order in the 
 Church, etc. 
 
 It is proper that the churches should keep such ordinances 
 for the sake of charity and tranquillity, so far that one do not 
 offend another, that all things be done in the churches in order, 
 and without confusion; but so that consciences be not burdened 
 to think that they be necessary to salvation, or to judge that they 
 sin when they break them without offence to others; as no one 
 will say that a woman sins who goes out in public with her head 
 uncovered, provided only that no offence be given. 
 
 Of this kind, is the observance of the Lord's Day, Easter, 
 Pentecost, and like holydays and rites. For those who judge 
 that, by the authority of the Church, the observaRce of the 
 
The Augsburg Coni^ession. 159 
 
 Lord's Day instead of the Sabbath Day was ordained as a thing 
 necessary, do greatly err. Scripture has abrogated the Sabbath 
 Day; for it teaches that, since the Gospel has been revealed, all 
 the ceremonies of Moses can be omitted. And yet, because it was 
 necessary to appoint a certain day, that the people might know 
 when they ought to come together, it appears that the Church 
 [the Apostles] designated the Lord's Day for this purpose; and 
 this day seems to have been chosen all the more for this addi- 
 tional reason, that men might have an example of Christian lib- 
 erty, and might know that the keeping neither of the Sabbath, 
 nor of any other day, is necessary. 
 
 There are monstrous disputations concerning the changing of 
 the law, the ceremonies of the new law, the changing of the 
 Sabbath Day, which all have sprung from the false belief that 
 there must needs be in the Church a service like to the Levitical, 
 and that Christ had given commission to the Apostles and 
 bishops to devise new ceremonies as necessary to salvation. 
 These errors crept into the Church when the righteousness of 
 faith was not clearly enough taught. Some dispute that the 
 keeping of the Lord's Day is not indeed of divine right; but in 
 a manner so. They prescribe concerning holydays, how far it is 
 lawful to work. What else are such disputations but snares of 
 consciences? For although they endeavor to modify the tradi- 
 tions, yet the equity can never be perceived as long as the opinion 
 remains that they are necessary, which must needs remain where 
 the righteousness of faith and Christian liberty are disregarded. 
 
 The Apostles commanded to abstain from blood. Who doth 
 now observe it? And yet they that do it not, sin not; for not 
 even the Apostles themselves wanted to burden consciences with 
 such bondage ; but they forbade it for a time, to avoid offence. 
 For, in any decree, we must perpetually consider what is the aim 
 of the Gospel. Scarcely any Canons are kept with exactness, 
 and, from day to day, many go out of use even with those who 
 are the most zealous advocates of traditions. Neither can due 
 regard be paid to consciences unless this equity be observed, that 
 we know that the Canons are kept without holding them to be 
 necessary, and that no harm is done consciences, even though tra- 
 ditions go out of use. 
 
 But the bishops might easily retain the lawful obedience of the 
 people, if they would not insist upon the observance of such tra- 
 ditions as cannot be kept with a good conscience. Now they 
 command celibacy; they admit none, unless they swear that they 
 will not teach the pure doctrine of the Gospel. The churches do 
 not ask that the bishops should restore concord at the expense 
 of their honor; which, nevertheless, it would be proper for good 
 pastors to do. They ask only that they would release unjust 
 burdens which are new and have been received contrary to the 
 custom of the Church Catholic. It may be that there were 
 plausible reasons for some of these ordinances ; and yet they are 
 not adapted to later times. It is also evident that some were 
 adopted through erroneous conceptions. Therefore, it would be 
 
i6o Th^ Augsburg Confession. 
 
 befitting the clemency of the Pontiffs to mitigate them now; be- 
 cause such a modification does not shake the unity of the Church. 
 For many human traditions have been changed in process of 
 time, as the Canons themselves show. But if it be impossible to 
 obtain a mitigation of such observances as cannot be kept with- 
 out sin, we are bound to follow the Apostolic rule [Acts 5: 29], 
 which commands us to obey God rather than men. Peter [i 
 Pet. 5 : 3] forbids bishops to be lords, and to rule over the 
 churches. Now it is not our design to wrest the government 
 from the bishops, but this one thing is asked, namely, that they 
 allow the Gospel to be purely taught, and that they relax some 
 few observances which cannot be kept without sin. But if they 
 make no concession, it is for them to see how they shall give 
 account to God for having, by their obstinacy, caused a schism. 
 
 Conclusion. 
 
 These are the Chief Articles which seem to be in controversy. 
 For although we might have spoken of more Abuses, yet to 
 avoid undue length, we have set forth the chief points, from which 
 the rest may be readily judged. _ There have been great com- 
 plaints concerning indulgences, pilgrimages, and the abuses of 
 excommunications. The parishes have been vexed in many ways 
 by the dealers in indulgences. There were endless contentions 
 between the pastors and the monks concerning the parochial rites, 
 confessions, burials, sermons on extraordinary occasions, and in- 
 numerable other things. Things of this sort we have passed 
 over, so that the chief points in this matter, having been briefly 
 set forth, might be the most readily understood. Nor has any- 
 thing been here said or adduced to the reproach of anyone. Only 
 those things have been recounted, whereof we thought that it 
 was necessary to speak, so that it might be understood that, in 
 doctrine and ceremonies, nothing has been received on our part, 
 against Scripture or the Church Catholic, since it is manifest 
 that we have taken most diligent care that no new and ungodly 
 doctrine should creep into our churches. 
 
 The above articles we desire to present in accordance with the 
 edict of Your Irnperial Majesty, so that our Confession should 
 therein be exhibited, and a summary of the doctrine of our 
 teachers might be discerned. If anything further be desired, we 
 are ready, God willing, to present ampler information according 
 to the Scriptures. 
 
 John, Duke of Saxony, Elector. 
 
 George, Margrave of Brandenburg. 
 
 Ernest, Duke of Liineburg. 
 
 Philip, Landgrave of Hesse. 
 
 John Frederick, Duke of Saxony. 
 
 Francis, Duke of Liineburg. 
 
 Wolegang, Prince of Anhalt. 
 
 Senate and Magistracy of Nuremburg. 
 
 Senate of Reutlingen. 
 
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 
 
 0035519835 
 
 : r-* 
 
 BRITTI P DO NOT 
 PHOTOCOPY 
 
 • CM 
 
 ON 2: