Section Eight of Chapter Thirteen.

Of the narrower committee of the Fourteen and its acts ordered with the emperor's approval.

A. From the first longer conversation, which began on August 16, 1630 and lasted until the 21st.

1039: The concern of D. Joh. Eck, drawn up by order of the Cardinal of Mainz and Duke George of Saxony before the beginning of the discussion, about the articles of the Augsburg Confession, in which they agree, which, on the other hand, are disputed, and how the latter are to be compared.

This script is found in Latin in Cölestin, torn. Ill, x>. 36; German by Chyträus, p. 346.

The first article, of the one divine being and three persons, is in agreement with the Christian church.

The other article, that there is original sin, agrees with the church. But as for the explanation of what original sin is, he does not agree with the church. The middle way would be to say that the inherent evil desire was sin before baptism, and after baptism it was a consequence or punishment of original sin, and not sin in itself.

In the third article, of Christ JEsu, one is equal.

The fourth article, in which he says that we cannot be saved by our own efforts, agrees with the church. But in this he disagrees, that he assigns righteousness to faith, and excludes our merit altogether. The middle way to unity would be that they ascribe righteousness to faith, which is active through love, which St. Paul teaches to the Galatians in the 5th verse. But they should omit this word SOLA; for the one word SOLA is the one word SOLA.

Those who are deceived are deceived into thinking that faith alone, without the grace of God and good works, makes them righteous.

They would agree with us about merit if they declared that the works are not merited by their nature and by themselves, but only by the mercy of God, by the grace of God, which assists us, precedes us, and works with us. Thus, the Lord gives His saints wages for their work.

The fifth article agrees with us that the Holy Spirit is given through the Word and Sacraments, ordained as means for this. But faith and the merit of works are to be held as stated above in the fourth article.

The sixth article, that faith with love brings good works, agrees with the church. Faith is to be held as reported above.

The seventh article does not agree, because they say that the Christian church is an assembly of the pious alone, since there are both the wicked and the pious in it. It could be compared if they said that the Christian church is an assembly of the saints, just as we also call the Christian church holy because of the holiness of faith, sacraments, graces and gifts. For from the noblest thing has a name, they themselves allow that ministers of the church may be who are not pious.

The eighth article, of the priests who are not pious, concurs.

Likewise the ninth.

The tenth article agrees with us as far as the real presence of the body and blood of Christ is concerned; only that it should not be interpreted as meaning that the laity should receive both.

The eleventh article compares itself with the church as far as absolution is concerned, but does not compare itself as far as confession is concerned, of which in the other part, in the fourth article.

The twelfth article, that those who have sinned after baptism may repent again, agrees with the church. But as far as the pieces of repentance are concerned, it does not agree. But it could be compared in this way, because they put repentance and sorrow for the first part, but we put faith for both parts, and here they put faith for a part of repentance; we say that faith is not a part of repentance, but that faith precedes it, as the ground of repentance. Therefore it is more a quarrel about words than about the matter itself. And because they allow confession, they should set the same with the church for the whole piece of repentance. To this we add the sufficiency

thuung for the third piece of repentance. But they confess that the fruits of good works should follow. This is more a quarrel about words than about the matter itself.

The thirteenth article agrees with the church.

The fourteenth article agrees with the church as far as the words are concerned. But in fact they hold it differently, because they do not appoint pastors and preachers according to common rights or order of the ordinaries bishops, which would be a legitimate profession.

The fifteenth article agrees in the most noble point. The human statutes are dealt with below in the last article.

The sixteenth article, of secular authority, agrees with us.

The seventeenth article, of Christ's future, agrees with us.

The eighteenth article, of free will, is the same.

The nineteenth article, of cause of sin, agrees with the church.

The twentieth article, on faith and good works, excuses only the preachers, so it is not to be respected, except that it is taught, as stated in the fourth article.

The one and twentieth article, of the service of the saints, does not agree with us. For here are three parts, the honor of the saints, invocation of the saints, and intercession of the saints, which they do for us. The Lutherans give in to the honor, the other two parts they deny. The intercession of the saints is admitted by the Sacramentarians. 1)

There is no agreement here, but they confess with the Church that since a living person can call upon the living, a dying person upon a mortal, a sinner upon a sinner, a poor person upon a poor person for intercession, why should he not be able to call upon an immortal, righteous, pure from sins, rich in graces, goodness and mercy, and who eagerly takes care of us in complete love.

The other part, from the abuses.

The first article does not agree with our teaching. But it should be compared in this way. Since communion under both forms is not contrary to the faith, and it has been held this way in many churches from time immemorial, communion under both forms could be allowed freely, as it is permitted to the Bohemians in the Concilio of Basel, but with three conditionibus attached.

1) Here the text seems to us to be corrupted.

First of all, that one would not let the small children communicate.

On the other hand, if one were to conclude that both forms were not necessary.

Third, that under one form no less than under both is received by those who communicate in the Christian church. But whether it is useful that communion should be tolerated until the future concilium, that may be judged by those with more understanding.

The other article argues with the Christian church. For such a marriage, if a priest is free in the priesthood, can never exist by right. It could be compared, because from the time of the Apostles until the Cyricium, almost four hundred years ago, married people were required to be priests. But whether this is useful now, I doubt. As for the priests who now take wives, a settlement could be made if they were not tolerated otherwise than common fornicators until the future Concilium, since they no longer preach or serve in the church, nor would they be allowed in secular offices.

The third article, of the Mass, is not in agreement with the Christian Church. But it could be compared that in the Lord's Supper there would not be a bloody sacrifice, as there was on the altar of the cross; if only they did not deny that just as Christ's body is figuratively sacrificed in the Old Testament, and truly sacrificed on the cross in suffering, so it is sacrificed in secret in the mass. This secret sacrifice is a memorial of the sacrifice made on the cross. But one should not abolish the private masses for this reason.

The fourth article, of confession, does not agree with us; but could be compared according to its adopted saying from the 18th Psalm [19:13.]: "Who can know how often he feeleth?" For even the church connects no one to tell the sin, which he himself does not know, nor understand. Therefore, they should agree to confess the sin that one understands, so they will be in agreement with the Christian church.

The fifth article is judged from the seventh.

The sixth article, on monastic vows, is not the same as the church, nor can it be compared. For although vowing, or making vows, is free, it is necessary by God's commandment to pay the vow, by divine right. Now those who consent to this article are guilty of all vow-breaking that occurs; nor could the whole general church permit this article.

The seventh article does not agree with the church, because it takes from it the rule and the power to make statutes for the subjects, so that they may come to eternal life. Which authority has always been in the church, as can be seen from St. Paul's statutes and commandments, and from the decrees in the first Concilio of the Apostles, and subsequent holy Conciliis. This article would also abolish church discipline, and disrupt all good order, and strengthen all disobedience and willfulness. But this article could be compared to tolerating or alleviating some church statutes, but that no carnal liberty would arise from it.

In sum, these are articles that can hardly be tolerated and accepted by the church:

From the Holy Service.

Of the Communion under both forms.

From the priestly marriage.

From the monastic vows.

From the victim in the measuring.

Of human statutes.

These six articles I consider to be the most burdensome; but in other articles, if two princes and two scholars on both sides came together, agreement could easily be reached.

1040 Philipp Melanchthon's and the other theologians' concerns, in which it is advised to make every effort for peace.

Aug. 15, 1530.

German in Spalatin's Annalen, p. 229; in Chyträus, p. 350 and in the 6orx". Lei. vol. II, 281; Latin in Cölestin, tom. Ill, p. 31.

We humbly consider that the princes are obliged to diligently seek and try all means and ways that do not contradict God's word, to make peace, to prevent their own harm and corruption of country and people.

2 Thus, it is not justifiable before God to persist in unnecessary division. Since God has commanded nothing higher than to keep peace.

3. also see what has happened in this division, how the mob has become wicked, what errors, sects, and cults arise daily, and to worry that God will graciously prevent, where there is war, that more sects and errors will break in, so that the church will be torn apart by irrecoverable errors, and the secular government destroyed by war, both of which will be the result of the war.

The people of the world and their spiritual and temporal regiment have fallen to the ground and will never be raised up again until the end of the world.

(4) Now it behooves the princes in particular to prevent in every way such an outrageous rebellion and disruption of the regiment; as Isaiah says, "Let the princes consider the matters of the princes, and let not the established regiment fall.

5 Because of the division, there is no discipline in schools and churches. Everyone shies away from teaching their children, and not unreasonably. For no one wants to put his child in danger, into which those who have studied must come, as long as this disunity stands.

(6) Such things cannot be disciplined in the churches. What is not tolerated in one place is suffered in another. And it is not possible to establish obedience.

Therefore, we humbly ask that the princes work for God's sake and for their own benefit so that peace may be made. And although it is to be feared that our adversary is too hard, and will not give way in any matter, yet our consciences are safer, and our glory before the world greater, if the lack of us has not been.

8 In such an action, it is necessary that we also give in to the opposite and, as much as can be done with God and conscience, escape. For without this there is no action. Therefore it is necessary to consider in what one can give way, even which parts cannot suffer any action.

9. and these are the following pieces, from which one cannot depart in any way, because we want to deny God and His gospel.

First, that the doctrine of the articles of faith, of good works, and of Christian liberty, as hitherto taught in our country, may be freely maintained and preached according to our confession and confessed creed.

(11) Secondly, that after the institution of Christ our Lord, both forms of the sacrament may be administered and given.

Thirdly, in no way can it be permitted that the Missa privatä, the angular masses, as they have been held by the opposite party until now, be allowed and held henceforth as a sacrifice to obtain grace and forgiveness of sins for the living and the dead before God, in order to diminish the death of Christ.

Fourth, the marital state shall and must be left free to all men who are not specially endowed by God with chastity, whether they are priests or other clergymen.

14 We believe that it is not necessary to report on monasteries. For if the marriage is free,

and the sacrificial measure have fallen, the answer to this question has already been given that it is not possible to rebuild the monasteries with God as a blasphemy, as has been the case up to now.

(15) On the other hand, the princes may generally offer to yield to the opposite in those things in which one can yield with God and a good conscience.

16. namely: that in common public and unpleasant ceremonies in churches one compares harmlessly; as, with the catching in churches and public form of the mass 2c. But that for the betterment of the people German songs are not forbidden.

017 For there must be order in the church, for the children's sake, and for the sake of the simple people; and it is not good that any man should make any particular thing.

18 Secondly, the bishops may be given their authority over the priests in the church government, as with ordinances 2c., if they do not follow our doctrine, and do not bind the priests with ungodly oaths and burdens.

19 For the order that the bishops are set over the priests as superattendents has undoubtedly had many honest causes. For the priests must have superintendents. In this way the secular princes of the church government will not wait, nor is it possible for them. In addition, it costs them much, whereas the bishops have their goods for the purpose of carrying out such office.

20 Neither is it fitting for us to break this order, that bishops are over priests, who have been in the church from the beginning, without great and urgent cause. For though the pope is an antichrist, yet we may be under him as the Jews were under Pharaoh in Egypt 2c., and afterward under Caipha 2c., if yet right doctrine be left us free.

21 Thirdly, the bishops may be granted their jurisdiction in matrimonial matters; item, the ban for the punishment of public sins, and not in matters belonging to secular courts.

But the fact that the princes complain that many secular matters were brought to the bishops' court may have been the princes' fault, negligentia principum auxit potentiam Episcoporum. Where also the princes punished public vices with seriousness, the officials would not get much money 2c.

(23) Nor is it necessary to dispute how far the obedientia and jurisdictio should extend. For this may be spoken of in dealings, if God would have mercy that it should come to that.

(24) From the difference of food, fasting and the like, it is to be sought that it be left free, but where it would not go, it may be considered further.

25 Christ punished the Pharisees, because they consented to them concerning small things, and let the great ones go, saying, They cowardly flies, and swallow a camel.

(26) Now outward peace is much better and higher than outward liberty. If one were to prevent the gospel from coming to others, it would also be burdensome. But of this we may speak further. Of monastery estates and other church estates, where such is thought of, it is due to offer what Imperial Majesty has granted to the church. Majesty 2c. will order for the good of the church to follow the same 2c.

1041: List of persons appointed to the Select Committee from both sides.

From Müller's History, lib. Ill, 29, x>. 742. Compare Spalatin's Annals, p. 153 and Förstemann's Urkundenbuch, vol. II, p. 220.

I. On the papist side.

1. to princes.

Christoph, Bishop of Augsburg.

Duke Henry of Brunswick, but after his departure Duke George of Saxony.

2. to lawyers.

Bernhard Hagen, Chancellor of Cologne. Hieronymus Vehus, chancellor of Baden.

3. to clergymen.

D. Johann Eck, Ordinarius at Ingolstadt.

D. Conrad Wimpina, Ordinarius at Frankfurt.

D. Johann Cochläus, provost of St. Severi in Erfurt.

II. on the protesting side.

1. to princes.

Duke Johann Friedrich, son of the Elector of Saxony.

Margrave George of Brandenburg.

2. to lawyers.

D. Gregorius Brück, Chancellor of the Church of Saxony.

D. Sebastian Heller, Chancellor of Brandenburg.

3. to clergymen.

Philipp Melanchthon, professor at Wittenberg.

Erhard Schnepf, Hessian preacher.

M. Johann Brentius, preacher at Hall in Swabia.

1042 Spalatin, who attended this act as notary, recorded the minutes of the first session of the committee.

This and the next number belong together. Here we have the preliminaries, there the report on the action itself. From Müller's History, op. Ill, eap. 29; compare the papist report No. 1063; likewise Förstemann's Urkundenbuch, vol. ll, p. 220 and Spalatin's Annalen, p. 154.

1. lecture by the chancellor of Baden on the papist part.

This was done in an unobjectionable way, asking 1) to proceed without quarreling; 2) to compare with the one who had made a complaint in the council, but if one or the other complaint had been lost, to indicate sufficient causes; 3) if some things were thought to be abuses, to think of ways to stop them; and finally 4) to keep all actions secret until the end.

2. answer of the Chancellor of the Church of Saxony, on behalf of the Protestants.

The Electors, Princes and Estates would undoubtedly know how they, the Protestants, had hitherto sought not to enter into the matter in any other way than amicably; but that a settlement would subsequently be requested, their Electoral and Princely Graces would know how they had complained that they did not want the Confutation to be communicated to them. They complained that the confutation would not be communicated to them; in which case, and since they had not seen such a document, it was not possible for them to settle. But because they noted that Imperial Majesty's opinion and order was that they should not be informed. They had indeed attracted quite a few in their confession, and had already discontinued the same in their principalities out of distress to their consciences, but they did not want to be without sufficient reason to accomplish this, and in doing so to prove themselves Christian in everything; they were also requested not to let the action reach any further than their relatives.

3. other lecture by the chancellor of Baden.

Their princes and lords thanked them for their offer to act in a friendly manner (as they also offered to do) and not to let the things get further than to the relatives. Now one could resort to the action itself, but as far as it is not contrary to the faith and the Christian common church

against. Why the Confutation had not been communicated, however, had already been reported earlier, and they again left it at that, as they also considered that the communication would only be a hindrance to the matter. It was also known that in the confession that had been handed over, several abuses had been reported, which were to be changed, but meanwhile there were two distinctions in this confession, namely 21 articles as a confession of faith, and 7 or 8 articles of abuses. Their Princely Grace considered that one must first know how the confession of faith, as the most important, is constituted: so one wanted to deal with the same first, whereupon the other 7 or 8 articles could also be carried out, since they wanted to help faithfully for the improvement, where it is possible.

4. other answer from the chancellor of churia.

If the settlement cannot be made without a confutation, the confession and the confutation should be made and considered from article to article.

5. third lecture by the chancellor of Baden.

They would be inclined to take up the matter, but they were certain that it would only lead to disputation and bickering if the confutation were to be considered along with the confession; rather, it would be more advisable to consider only the confession from article to article, and to deliberate on each one in particular, whether it could be compared, but since there were conflicting opinions, to let it reach Imperial Majesty. Majesty.

6. third answer of the chancellor of chur.

To avoid the disputation, one would put up with this way and would also be obliged to follow it willingly.

1043 Spalatin's news of what was discussed at the first meeting.

See the previous number. We give the text of this number according to Förstemann from Spalatin's handwriting.

As the Confession is made to read from article to article.

I. From GOD.

The first article has not had a challenge.

II. from the original sin.

Regarding the other article, D. Eck says that the main article is in accordance with the Christian Church, but in the definition they have a shortcoming, and that is that he calls concupiscence an original sin, that it remains a sin before and after baptism, because one speaks of it as St. Augustine speaks, so it would be more1 ) a battle of words, than that they are far from each other. That the words: Sine fiducia et timore [etc.]. Mr. Melanchthon has offered to speak peacefully; he has two challenges: 1) of the words "without fear and trust", 2) of the Fomes. He did not want to speak of it, as in the school, because they call it carentium rectitudinis originalis, which he called "without fear and confidence", D. Eck said to it, it was a new form to speak, otherwise one was already concordirt of the article, only that one had not used the common words, it was otherwise equal to their opinion. On the other hand, D. Eck also confessed that the material remains peccati, and thus one is compared to the article.

III Of the Person of Christ.

Of the third article, of Christ, both parts and parties have also been united.

IV. From the justification.

V. Of the Word and the Sacraments.

VI Of good works.

Regarding the fourth, fifth and sixth articles, D. Eck says that it should be explained, because the main article is not inappropriate to the Christian faith. He also says that faith, which works through love, justifies and makes righteous, De meritis, or of the merits he also considers it a fighting word. Thus Christ said, If ye do all that ye ought, say, We are unprofitable servants. St. Paul adds Romans 8: "We do not believe that the sufferings of this world are worthy of the future glory that will be revealed to us. Item Solomon and Peter: Love covers the multitude of sins. Ecclesiastes 9: Man does not know whether he is in grace or in disgrace. Besides this, from the apostles' stories, the warrior Cornelius was also attracted with his good works. They call it merita, that the most gracious Father wants to reward the works, and the meritum is nothing but gratia Dei. Saying that no work is meritorious in itself, but the grace of God is to be considered.

1) Förstemann: only.

Then Doctor Wimpina says: If our works are done by our will without divine grace, they are unmeritorious, otherwise they would be meritorious for the sake of Christ's communion with the Church, because he has ever said: Si vis ingredi vitam, serva mandata, that is, if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.

In response, Philippus Melanchthon said: You know how the disputation de merito and de congruo would have been aroused; likewise also in 1) the repentance of satisfaction, and that nothing at all would have been said about faith in repentance, the word meritum would have been bypassed.

Philip Melanchthon also said that he believes that they can suffer the definition of faith, namely, when the heart concludes that God has forgiven its sin for the sake of Christ, as the ancients and Thomas Aquinas interpreted it.

Since it now comes to this proposition and speech that sola fides justificire, that is, that faith alone and heartfelt trust in God's grace for Christ's sake makes one pious and righteous before God, then D. Eck of Ingolstadt said: first, that one could not suffer such speech, for it causes trouble, and crude, wicked, insolent people; second, he said that no old holy doctor, teacher and father had ever spoken in this way; third, he said that faith alone does not make one righteous, but love, and more love than faith, and he also pointed out the following sayings: St. Paul to the Ephesians says: "I am a saint. Paul says to the Ephesians that love is a 2) bond of perfection; item, to the Corinthians, that faith without love is nothing; item, also to the Corinthians, that love is the greatest. That is why D. Eck finally also said: One should send the soles 3) to the cobbler for a while. Eck was allowed to speak so brazenly before the above-mentioned four princes, as given commissioners and commanders, regardless of the fact that the above-mentioned speech, that faith alone makes one righteous and pious before God, is not only carried out according to the meaning and understanding of St. Paul in Romans, Corinthians, and Romans. Paul to Romans, Galatians and Ephesians, but also that only many old holy great fathers, doctors and teachers have spoken in such a way, both Greek and Latin; and especially Greek Eusebius, Basil, Athanasius, Origen; Latin Hilarius, Am-

1) Thus in Spalatin's Annals. Förstemann offers: "da auch der" 2c.

2i "band" put by us after Col. 3,14. instead of "covenant" by Förstemann.

3) "Solen", a mockery of so^a üds, by faith alone.

brosius, Jerome, Augustine, Bernard, also St. Thomas Aquinas, Order of Preachers.

Doctor Eck also said that they spoke de merito or of merit, not as if merit were like a painted man, but as of a convenience and superfluous grace of God.

The Lord Philip says that this form was used for three reasons: 1) that St. Paul uses it in this way; 2) if one puts caritatem or otherwise, one points to us and not to God's grace; 3) so it is understandable and clear, because every Christian feels the faith.

Docter Eckius says: the three causes would not be sufficient, 1) that this form is not in Paulo nor in the whole Scripture; 2) so caritas is God's grace, and not our work; 3) so one is not more understandable than the other.

Doctor Eck also thinks that it is spoken de operibus legis judaicae and of ceremoniis, the sola can also make no unity.

Doctor Eck also says that for forgiveness one must first have God's grace and faith and divine love.

Mr. 4) Phil, said: Forgiveness of sins is obtained when first the heart is frightened, and then faith and God's love are found, which comfort can also be felt.

Doctor Eck says: sin is a condemnation of God, therefore sin must be forgiven by love, fides is praesuppositum justificationis, and not justitia.

Brentius says that the word 8ola is not to be rejected, because the word 8o1a was also used by Ambrose and Hilarius, and was drawn from Paulo; it is also not only de operibus legis judaicae, the word sola stands alone against the merita.

Doctor Eck has based it on the fact that it was spoken de operibus legis judaicae, because the Jews, if they had been converted to the Christian faith, would have taken it for granted that they nevertheless had to keep Mosi's ceremonial law.

Philip Melanchthon drew on the words of Paul Ephesians: Fide salvati estis, that is, you have been saved by faith.

D. Eck says that they confessed that the forgiveness of sins is per gratiam et fidem gratum facientem formaliter, et per verbum et sacramenta instrumentaliter. One should put the article thus.

Cochläus talked a lot, but little to the,

Matter of business.

4) In the old edition: "D". In this case it is to be resolved by domiuus, not by doctor.

VII. and VIII. About the Christian Church and Evil Priests.

D. Eck says: he hopes that there will be no dispute about this article, because the church is beautiful and yet black, as de virginibus unb de piscibus. He considers it useful for comparison, that not the word sanctorum, but the word sanctam stands. d. Eck also says that he considers it that we are not unequal in fundamento and in ground.

IX. From the baptism.

The ninth article, of baptism, has had no contestation.

X. Of the Lord's Supper.

The tenth, de eucharistia, of the reverend sacrament of the true body and blood of Christ, has also had no lack, for alone to add the word realiter, or substantialiter, or in German "essential."

XI. Of the Confession.

About the eleventh article, about confession, D. Eck says that in the main he is unanimous with the Church, the sin that one does not know, one must not confess.

XII. Of repentance.

Of the twelfth article, of repentance, O. Eck says that the main article is also not unequal to the Christian church, and is right, considering it also only a battle of words. In the first, they are unanimous; in the second, the inequality is that faith is included, that faith is a part; in the third, of satisfaction or correction, for they are called satisfactionem die Besserung. Then Philip said what caused him to insert the word faith, for it is the way of poenitentiae and repentance that one first becomes frightened of sins, and then that one again acquires faith and hearty confidence in God's grace and mercy, as happened with David.

D. Eck also said that one is not displeased in re. Much has been said about the word satisfactio or satisfaction.

Philip said he was talking de perpetua poenitentia.

Wednesday after Assumtionis [August 17 morning, the action is further taken, especially of the parts of the penance.

Furthermore, since one wanted to resort to action, the theologians of the opposite on our

They do not want to suffer a notary, but let themselves be heard, where they wanted to have a theologian as notary, they wanted to use Faber as their notary. So I went away from Spalatinus in God's name. God grant that otherwise something fruitful may be accomplished in the action, amen.

1044 Declaration of the Protestants, in which articles they have united.

Aug. 18, 1530.

This document is found in the Wittenberg edition (1569), vol. IX, p. 4465; in the Jena edition (1566), vol. V, p. 103 d; in the Altenburg edition, vol. V, p. 230 and in the Leipzig edition, vol. XX, p. 218. Also in Müller, p. 745; in Chyträus, sheet 263 and in Förstemann's Urkundenbuch, vol. II, p. 230 from Spalatin's manuscript in the Ansbachische Acten. in the determination of time we have followed Förstemann.

The first article is the same. That in the other Latin article it says that man is born by nature without the fear of God and without faith in God, is to be understood not only that children so young cannot have this effect, but that they are also grown by natural powers unable to have the fear of God and faith, and so are born without such powers and gifts, is a lack of the righteousness that we should bring from Adam.

In German articles, this point is clearly stated so that it cannot be disputed, namely, that we are not able to fear and believe in God by nature; the ancients are also understood by this.

Of natural lusts we hold that the sin nature remains, but the guilt is taken away by baptism.

In the third article one is the same.

Declaration of the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Articles, 1) we confess that forgiveness of sins is by grace, through which we have a gracious God, and by faith is done in us, and by God's Word and Sacrament, as by instrument.

In the seventh article, one is the same.

In the eighth article, of the Church, we confess that in the Church in this life there are many wicked and sinners.

1) Instead of the preceding words, Spalatin had written: "In the fourth article we confess" 2c. Similarly, "In the fifth, sixth, and seventh articles we are equal." Melanchthon crossed out the words we underlined and put in the margin instead: "Declaration of the 4th, 5th, and 6th articles."

In the 9th 10th and 11th articles, one is the same.

In the 12th article, of repentance, we do not refuse to put three parts of repentance, as namely contritio, repentance, which is fright when one recognizes sin.

Confession, but it is to be seen as absolution and believed that sin is forgiven for the sake of Christ.

The third part is satisfactio, good fruit of repentance. But sin is not forgiven by the merit of satisfaction. So we hold at the same time; but we do not agree whether satisfaction is necessary for the forgiveness of penance.

In the 13th article, one is the same.

In the 14th article, one is also equal to the one in words; but as much of the same declaration is concerned, it is kept under the title of spiritual power.

The 15th article has been saved to the article of episcopal authority and monastic vows.

In the 16th 17th 18th 19th article, you are the same.

In the 20th article, as far as the 1) preachers and the same excuse are concerned, one leaves in its value, after one does not burden oneself in this negotiation of the same. However, as far as faith is concerned, the above-mentioned fourth article and the same declaration are left unchanged. But as far as good works are concerned, it is the same that one must and should work good works, and that works done by faith and grace are pleasing to God. But whether the same works are meritorious, and how they are meritorious, and whether and how one should hope in them, have not been compared. It is also used for other purposes.

In the 21st article, two articles are compared, namely that all the saints and angels in heaven pray to God for us, also the use of the church, which remembers the saints, and asks God to promote the saints' prayers, is kept Christian and good; but concerning the invocation of the saints, one is united in that there is no expressed commandment in the Holy Scriptures about anyone being commanded to invoke the saints. But in that the saints may well be invoked according to the traditional usage of common churches of Christian opinion, in this one is so ambivalent that the sovereigns and princes hold with their relatives that such a thing is a doubtful and sorrowful thing, from many 2) because of the abuses, and that there is no expressed Scripture about it.

1) Förstemann: "the".

2) That is because of the quantity.

1045. Proposal made by the Protestants at the request of the papists concerning some external ceremonies.

From the uuetor npolo^. lutue. in Müller, p. 754; in Brück's Geschichte des Reichstags zu Augsburg, p. 95 and in Förstemann's Urkundenbuch, vol. II, p. 249 from the Markgraflich brandenburgischen Acten.

Yesterday we heard your and the others' statements and discussed them, and we considered the matter most diligently, but we can think of no other means or way, after further discussion, than to leave us the Communio sub utraque specie, and our clergy the marriage, even at the masses as they are held here, until further action in a common, free, Christian Concilio. In order that Christian unity may nevertheless be preserved in these articles, and that the church may remain in orderly government, to which we are highly inclined, we are requested, and thereafter, as far as the other articles are concerned, to refrain from the bishops' authority, from differences in food, and from ordinary church ceremonies, or at a later time and place, with the Ordinariis locorum, so that they receive due obedience from our clergy, and their due jurisdiction is not prevented, and, as far as possible and Christian, equality in churches in doctrine and ceremonies is kept.

1046 The so-called non-exclusive, intangible, Christian means proposed by the papists and handed over on August 19, 1530.

In the Wittenberg edition (1569), vol. IX, p. 443; in the Jena edition (1566), vol. V, p. 99 b (wrong 92 b); in the Altenburg, vol. V, p. 226; in the Leipzig, vol. XX, p. 214; in Chyträus according to the German edition, p. 386, and according to the Latin, p. 257; in Müller, p. 755; in Spalatin's Annals, p. 170; and from the Margravial Brandenburg acts in Förstemann's Urkundenbuch, vol. II, p. 250.

The first part of the book is an introduction to the history of the church and its ecclesiastical authority, as well as to the traditional statutes, customs, ceremonies, and episcopal authority of the church.

That in fasting, celebrations, confessions, prayers, processions, ceremonies, different times, foods and other such traditional customs, administration of the sacraments, and also with

The bishop's authority and sovereignty is held by princes, rulers and their relatives, as is customary in the common church and has been in use among them from time immemorial. But what about it for abuses or complaints attracted, that reported churl and princes compare themselves in that with common estates, the same with common estates, and they help to consult with them, and as usually decided, will also comply with this.

Also, the Electors, Princes, and their relatives shall be at liberty and not included therein, if they have any special differences, 1) disagreements or defects with archbishops, bishops, or prelates, of the same jurisdiction or otherwise, which they shall otherwise settle amicably or legally with each other.

The administration and reception of the sacrament under both forms.

That by permission of papal holiness or their legate, with the knowledge and approval of imperial majesty, as the supreme advocate of the church, it may be granted that only in the places and parishes, and the subjects of the same parish, as it has now been customary for some years, the sacrament of the communion of the body and blood of Christ, and yet with preceding confession, as was the custom of old, may be administered or given to the desirees in both forms; But with the following measure, namely, that at paschal times, when this sacrament is administered, it should also be taught and preached in them, not by divine commandment, that both forms must be received, that the whole Christ also be and be received under either, as well as both forms.

Item, that anyone who wishes to receive the sacrament under the one form of bread is not denied this, but is informed of it according to the traditional old custom of the church; and that this permission is not to last any longer than until the next Concilii of final decision.

That also by ecclesiastical and secular authorities it is seriously threatened that the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ is not destroyed by 2) or

1) In the old editions: "sphen" (If) - offence, disagreement. Compare: "spännig", St. Louis edition, Vol. Ill, 115, ?33.

2) "Verrören" put by us instead of: "verehren" in the old edition. Both, the Wittenberg and the Jena edition read: "verrören", which will probably be interpreted by spilling. In Spalatin's Annals, p. 172:

otherwise no dishonor is done, and where it is done dangerously or unseemly 3) that this is seriously punished by ecclesiastical or secular authorities.

For this reason, the form of wine for the sick is not kept in dishes, nor is it carried to anyone, but if someone wants to communicate under both forms, it is consecrated and distributed in the church or in the homes of the sick under the office of the masses. And for the sake of honoring the sacrament, it is considered good that when both forms are distributed among a crowd, that it be received and enjoyed through a tube.

Concerning the office of the fairs.

That the common and special private monks be kept in ordinary dress, on the altars with the inclusion of the great canon, as has been in use and practice in common Christian churches of the German nation and their territories from time immemorial.

And after in the small and large canon of the Mass there was more a dispute or disagreement in words than in the right understanding of the words hostia, oblatio, sacrificium or sacrifice, that such words should be drawn in Christian right understanding, namely, as Christ sacrificed in the paschal lamb, in the Old Testament figuraliter and typice, that is, meaningful way, and afterwards the same Christ offered Himself on the trunk of the cross, a true, living sacrifice to God the Father for the sin of men, so now the sacrificium or sacrifice of the masses is a mysteriale or in mysteriis Ot repraesentati- vum, that is, a sacramental and memorial sacrifice, practiced and used daily in the Church, in memory and commemoration of the passion and death of Christ.

From stated 4) married priests.

When, due to the impediment of their vows of priestly status, to which they had willingly surrendered, and the statutes of the Church, they could not accept permanent marriage, it was decided that, in order to spare the poor seduced wives, to feed innocent children, to avoid all kinds of trouble, and to avoid other possible

vereeren". Förstemann: "verrorn". In the Weimar copy: "Vermehrung", which however is corrigirt in "verrören".

3) Thus the Wittenbergers and the Jenaers. Förstemann: "sinseliger", which he explains by: "more muthwilliger".

4) "stated" alleged.

Causes, the priests, who now sit in the specified matrimonial cohabitation, thus, without confirmation and approval of their conduct, would be tolerated until the future Council, only in the places where it has been their alleged use for some time. But in such a way and measure that no one marries before the decision of the Council, and those who do so are deprived of their priestly office or benefices and expelled from the country, or otherwise punished externally. But whoever wishes to renounce his marriage state and abstain from the caelibatu should be allowed to do so and not be denied it, and he should remain in his beneficio and officio. That also in the places where married priests are, and especially where they are in the churches, diligence is taken to obtain others, as beneficial as this may always be, who are and remain in the caelibatu and unmarried, and the married ones are suspended from officio and beneficio; unless by papal sanctity power or its legate tolerance is obtained in the ministerio of their officii and beneficii.

In this regard, it is also considered necessary to completely abolish the con- cubinarios, who thus sit in many places annoyingly, and to no longer tolerate them.

That the ordinaries would not give any tolerance to this; and whether it would not be good that at a future council, if necessary, it would be proposed that the conjugates be taken to the priestly state and ordained, as was the custom in the first church some hundred years ago.

Of oen monasteries and monastic vows.

The following means are intended, namely, that all and every monastery, male and female, still undestroyed, remain with them, and in singing, reading, and other their services, in dress of their rules, also in visitation and obedience of their prelates, as happened before this division, remain quiet, and where lack of prelates or provincials, that they be made by ordinary election, as before old age. Also, no one who wants to join them in the rules and orders, or who wants to come out of this division and return to it, shall be ordered or restrained to do so; that they shall also be protected and handled from violence and violence which they might encounter to their persons or goods, brs to the end of future Concilii.

And what religious come out of the monasteries without proper admission, that the same return to the monasteries, or if they do not do so

Otherwise they would not be tolerated anywhere in the country (they would have permission from the ecclesiastical authorities who have the power to do this), and the prelates should not be prevented from acting against them in an orderly manner.

However, considering the opportunity and many of the now expired religious, that punishment will not be taken against them with any other than the imposition of a penitence.

Those, however, who would henceforth come from the monasteries without proper permission, shall be punished according to ecclesiastical and secular rights, and the punishment of the prelates and ordinaries shall not be prevented.

Which monasteries, however, are completely closed, and there is no one left in them, even if they are not occupied after the request of their order's superiors, that the same will be tolerated until the future council; but that their monastic dues and income not be collected for the own benefit of each local superior, but that the dues be deposited and preserved by special persons, who would be appointed for this purpose in each place by the prelates of the Order together with the bishops, and until the future decision of the Council as to how and what is to be done with them. As soon as a monastery is occupied, however, its fees and income shall be entered and handed over to it as before.

And after in this amicable negotiation some articles have been set for a future concilium, it is necessary that Imperial Majesty and other estates of the empire be concerned. Majesty and other estates of the empire be concerned, on account of this and other excellent and necessary causes, to reform the church in the head and members, conducive to time, place and place, as the imperial majesty, with papal sanctity, has decreed. Maj. and Papal Holiness Legates, to proclaim and hold a Univerfalconcilium in the German Nation.

1047: The Protestants have submitted on August 20 an unconditional and uncontroversial response to the means proposed yesterday.

This immediately follows the previous number at the locations indicated there.

Of the Most Reverend Sacrament.

Let it be known that the reverend Sacrament of the true Body and Blood of Christ, according to our confession, cannot be performed in our principalities without prior confession.

mers and areas, as before, shall be handed and taken.

But that it is desired that one should teach that it is not wrong to receive only one form, one knows in what way we have given account of it.

Moreover, before receiving the reverend sacrament, the people must be informed that they know that it is right to receive both forms.

However, it is important that the pastors and preachers keep such measures that are conducive to peace, until further action in a concilio.

Thus also it is confessed that the whole body of Christ is under the form of bread; nevertheless, since the holy sacrament is thus instituted with both forms, and the words of Christ indicate the same more clearly, this use of receiving both forms is according to the institution of Christ.

Also, in our principalities and territories, no one has been prevented from seeking the sacrament of his liking, where he has to know it.

It should also be established that the reverend sacrament be held in honor; as has been done up to now, even, without speaking of glory, it should be imposed and tolerated unwillingly otherwise; so also the form of wine has not been held nor carried in vessels with us up to now.

From the fair.

Furthermore, the masses in our principalities and territories have hitherto been held in ordinary church clothes, and shall also be held alfo for this purpose.

And since the masses, by virtue of our confession, are held honestly in our principalities and territories with their substantials, even with ordinary ceremonies after the institution of Christ, it is with God's help that they shall continue to be held with due reverence.

From the clerical marital status.

As far as the priestly marriage is concerned, we have shown in our confession many well-founded reasons why we consider our and other clergymen's marriage to be Christian and right.

We have also had to allow the clergy marriage all the more because we have seen and experienced the manifold, great and mean abuse and sinful immorality of the clergy before. Because from the way

and in many other places it is still evident that few priests have the high gift of God of chastity, and that such priests, who should sit in an unrighteous, licentious life, are not acceptable to us: Let it be considered, how in this part of ours, after the death of the present ordained priests, not to accept again other ordained priests, nor as many pastors and preachers, skilled and learned, as are necessary for the order of our churches in our lands and territories, who have the gift of chastity, because your beloved and you yourselves indicate in your sent means that they have considered that the priests concubinarii, who sit in a lewd life, should be completely abolished and no tolerance should be given to them by the ordinaries henceforth. And your beloved and yourselves consider whether it would not be good, therefore, that at a future council it be proposed that the conjugati be admitted to the priestly state, in moderation, as was the custom in the first church some hundred years ago.

From monastic vows.

About monastic vows 1) your beloved and you know what we have indicated on our part in our confession; therefore, we do not want to complain about it to anyone. But how the monks and nuns, who still remain in monasteries in our principalities and territories, should and will keep themselves among themselves for the sake of their going out or remaining in them, or not, will be left to their own responsibility to God until further consideration and consideration in a common free Christian council, nor will they be given any measure in this.

However, as far as the monasteries are concerned, they are not included in this act, but all and every monastery, male and female, shall be left in peace in their character and dress, even in the ceremonies, as they are and have been until now in every place.

For this purpose, 2) as much as possible, the understanding should be exercised, so that no violence, in whatever way it may be, is exercised or carried out against reported persons.

But concerning the single monasteries, that such monasteries, which are now single without monks and nuns, shall henceforth remain unchanged and undiminished in the secular patrons' and advocates' order.

1) Förstemann: "Vom Klosterwesen.

2) "should" is missing in Förstemann.

The monasteries shall remain in existence, and the persons who have come and gone from them shall receive from the income, and it shall be given to them for their needs, and also for the maintenance of preachers, pastors, schools, and first of all their places, where the churches may have been occupied by the monasteries, and then the surplus is to be settled until a concilio, and further Christian consideration and consultation, how and in what form such monasteries and estates are to be ordered for God's glory and benevolent things in lands and places, in which, or where they are situated; Then, too, the favors, benefits and annuities shall be duly and unambiguously determined.

Of [the] bishops' violence.

One is also inclined in all this to help maintain episcopal rule and authority; but with it unapproved the public abuses, that the bishops do not have diligence, that one preaches rightly, that the sacraments are administered and acted seriously and Christianly, that capable people are ordained, that the priests lead a chaste life, that one abuses the ban (Pann) in many things 2c. These and similar abuses are not to be approved herewith.

And it should be ensured that the bishops receive their due obedience, namely that our pastors and preachers are presented to the ordinaries of each place.

If a priest commits a criminal offense, the Ordinary, by virtue of episcopal authority, shall punish him without hindrance.

Item, the bishops shall not be prevented from their ecclesiastical jurisdiction in matters belonging to ecclesiastical courts. For the fact that some matters have been brought before ecclesiastical courts that do not belong there, as common debt cases 2c., is understood, the other estates will also have considered this in abuses.

One should also keep to the promotion of common peace, up to much touched common, Christian, free Concilio, in which like the other estates.

Item, also the bishops shall not be prevented from exercising the excommunication and banishment, as punishment of the cases, belonging to the ecclesiastical jurisdiction, as is due according to the Holy Scripture.

From the ceremonies.

Also, for the sake of love, the following common ceremonies are to be kept and handled safely, so that equality in them may be kept in churches, conducive to peace and unity.

However, we do not want anyone's conscience to be troubled by this, as if such ceremonies had to be held for necessary church services, but that [they] are good orders to be kept for the sake of peace and love.

Namely, no meat should be eaten publicly for a certain period of time:

In the four soft fasts, 1)

All Friday and Saturday,

Christmas Eve,

Pentecost weekend,

On the evening of St. John the Baptist, On All Hallows' Eve.

From fasting.

For the sake of fasting in our lands and territories, it is considered what a great burden it has been for the poor common and working people to keep such fasts for 40 days in a row, for the sake of food and otherwise, so that it is known how often it has been talked about and also considered by many that the fasts should be divided into other times of the year. Therefore one should consider the poverty in this. Nevertheless, this part should be kept as much as possible in conformity with other churches, and ceremonies and singing, gospels and epistles should be sung, read, and preached in all ways, as in other churches, and no meat should be allowed to be sold publicly.

From the holidays.

Also, ordinary celebrations should be held, as has been done until now, so that the people may remain in the habit of hearing God's word and the sermon and receiving the holy sacraments, each according to his conscience's need, and especially these holidays should be kept:

All Sunday,

Christmas Day,

St. Stephen's,

St. John Apostle and Evangelist,

The Lord's Circumcision,

Epiphania,

The Charwoche to keep for the sake of the Passion, Easter Day together the Monday and Tuesday, Ascension of Christ,

Pentecost together with Monday and Tuesday, The noblest feasts of pure virgins and

Mother of God, Mary,

All Apostles,

St. Michel,

All Saints.

1) Quatember.

On such holidays, ordinary chanting, officia and lectiones, taken from the Scriptures, should also be held.

Likewise, the litany in the week of the cross to exhort the people to prayer should be held.

From confession.

Nor should confession be abandoned, considering the great consolation that absolution brings. So, too, if confession were to be dropped so completely that no one would know what the high and salutary power of the keys was. And although instruction should be given for the consolation of consciences, so that it may be known how necessary it is that even those sins which have not been told be forgiven, it should also be commanded, as has been done hitherto, that people be accustomed, as much as possible, to present the cases in which they are in particular need of counsel and consolation.

In addition to all this, it is nevertheless considered of great necessity that the Imperial Majesty, our most gracious Lord, should think of a conducive universal council in the German nation. Majesty, our most gracious Lord, to hold a conducive universal council in the German nation, it is graciously thought to reform the church at the head and members. And the princes and others who have been appointed to this committee want to promote this declaration of ours to the imperial majesty, also to the churons and princes, in a friendly and submissive manner, so they are requested to do and act with the estates and their relatives in this regard.

1048 The papists demand that the Protestants explain themselves more clearly on some points about their proposed means.

Numbers 1048 to 1053 inel. are found in Müller's Historie, Ild. Ill, eap. 29, x. 767 f. from the unnamed author's uxot. mstu., p. 111.

It is not really clear from this how it is meant for the sake of confession, whether this part is to be kept the same as the confession of other churches or not, so that no one should be communicated, unless he had first confessed, as is customary from time immemorial, with the recounting of all his sins, and had himself absolved; item, whether it should also be permitted in this part to receive the sacrament in one or both forms, and from those who were in church offices, or who had to do it before (by this one meant the mendicants in the cities).

Furthermore, how they would like to see that in this part it be granted and decreed to the preachers and teachers to teach and preach in such a way that those who received the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ only in one form would not do wrong, because in their opinion this would serve Christian unity, and subsequently their actions with the other princes, sovereigns and estates could be all the more elevated. They could not really understand from the counter-proposals whether private masses, as well as canons, large and small, should be allowed on this part or not. They could not really understand from the counter-proposals whether or not private masses, as well as canons large and small, should be permitted in this part, as they indicate in their proposals, that after the departure of the present ordained clergy, no more ordained priests should be accepted until a general council.

1049th Declaration of the Evangelicals.

See the previous number.

As far as confession is concerned, there would be a special point to be read at the end in the compositions handed over to them, which would indicate their opinion clearly enough, in accordance with divine Scripture, and they would leave it at that, along with what concerned private masses, both canons, and the marriage of the clergy, because their princely graces and their associates would have considered the proposals handed over for the other part to the effect that they wanted to declare at once "what they thought" that this part could be left out with conscience. Their Princely Graces and their associates had considered the proposals of the other part that they wanted to declare at once "what they thought", that this part could be left with conscience. If they had now decided that they could further indulge with God and conscience, they would not have failed to indicate this at once in their composition means, all of which they did not want to hold back to the end, so that the opposing party might consider it an unhelpful delay to act on further means or indulgence.

1050: The Papal Part's Further Complaints.

See No. 1048.

They understood that the decrees of the Lutheran part did not want to slacken anything, since the Bohemians in the Concilio of Basel had conceded that the use of the sacrament in a single church was not allowed.

The fact that the form is not unjust, but that this part of the opinion is to be interpreted by His Imperial Majesty and all Christian potentates of the whole world. Majesty and all Christian potentates of the whole world, especially princes, princes and estates of the empire and their own deceased ancestors, as well as all of Christendom, that they were doing and had done wrong in receiving the sacrament in one form; but whether this would be conducive to peace and unity, the deputies of this part should consider for themselves.

1051 Response of the Lutheran part to the persistent complaints of the papists.

See No. 1048.

As they would not have refrained from moving things again with the highest and utmost diligence. Now they would not have been less inclined than anyone from the opposite party to help promote that, as much as God and conscience would always want to happen, which would be conducive to Christian peace and unity; but as they considered the matters for and for themselves, they could not have imagined that they could offer themselves further, or propose anything closer, than what they had already done in their handed-over means of composition. Therefore, they have asked the opposing party not to blame them in this case, but to take the matter up with the Electors, Princes and Estates of their part, and then further with the Imperial Majesty. Majesty in the way they have been presented in their compositions, and also to help to promote that a general, common, Christian concilium may be announced.

1052 The Protestants' Written Opinion on the Use of the Lord's Supper under One Form. August 21, 1530.

This document can be found in Brück's Geschichte, p. 99 and in Förstemann, Urkundenbuch, vol. II, p. 273 after a copy in the Margravial Brandenburg Acts p. 770. The time is given there.

Yesterday we informed your beloved and the rest of you that the opinion of this part is not to condemn the Christian believing ancestors and deceased, or all other country and nation people, because they have received and received the reverend sacrament of the body and blood of Christ in one form alone; we still insist on this. For we have informed your loved ones and you by means of a note of this

It is said that the institution of Christ concerns both priests and laity, but it is ceremoniale praeceptum, dispensabile in quibusdam casibus1 ) necessitatis. Therefore, it is considered so, and there is no doubt that many living and deceased Christians, who have received the Sacrament in this way only in one form, or who receive it again, are not to be condemned for this reason, just as we do not condemn them for this reason. We therefore point this out to your loved ones and others, so that we may not be interpreted in the way your loved ones and others would have understood it.

1053. Another attempt by the papists to have Holy Communion. August 21, 1530.

This document is also found in Brück's Geschichte, p. 100 and in Förstemann's Urkundenbuch, Vol. II, p. 274, except for the locations indicated in No. 1048. According to the latter, the time determination.

The opposite proposal.

Further after held consideration is proposed by the other part this means:

That those on our side here between decision next Concilii should preach and teach that the use of both or one form is not from divine commandment. Therefore no one should judge those who receive under one form to be doing wrong, moreover, that under either form the whole Christ, true God and man, is his body and blood; the same again, if and when the Communion is thus left to us under both forms, that on the other hand it is also preached not to judge us that those do wrong who receive the Sacrament with us under both forms, because the use of one or both forms is not of divine commandment, and thus left to us to use until future Concilio. Item, that we also do not deny the sacrament to anyone who wants to receive it in one form, but let it be administered by our parish priests.

1054 Philipp Melanchthon's first essay on the means of composition, in which it is explained why the Protestants cannot enter into anything.

In Cölestin, tom. Ill, p. 47 and in Oorp. L "k., vol. II, 304.

Translated from Latin.

1) easibus is missing in Förstemann.

If the Imperial Majesty will say that she accepts the proposed means, one must first of all ask for a copy of the submitted report in order to know how the opponents have brought the matter to light.

If the emperor wanted to take out some proposals or words from the means of unification, this should not be allowed.

If they should ask whether the emperor sins when he lets himself be served only the One Form, the answer is that we do not condemn the church. The whole church was, as it were, bound and imprisoned under this statute of the forbidden use of the chalice. Is the church therefore innocent in itself, since it was deceived in this? But the prohibition was most unjust.

From the fair.

Why will you not agree with us that private masses may be held?

Answer: Private masses, as they say, are done in the opinion that they are applied to others ex opere operato in order to earn grace with them. Therefore, this opinion is ungodly.

1) Because if the opus operatum is to earn something for someone, righteousness comes from the merit of works and not from faith, which is fundamentally false.

2) The suffering of Christ is a sufficient sacrifice, as the Scriptures testify: by one sacrifice he has perfected for eternity those who are sanctified. Therefore, no other sacrifice is needed for daily sin.

3) No sacrifice of dedication is necessary, because no dedication takes place without faith; therefore, no dedication takes place through a merely external work.

But that no application takes place without the Holy Spirit is proven by the following:

"The letter kills, the spirit makes alive."

"How shall they believe, of whom they have heard nothing?"

"From preaching you have received the spirit of faith."

"He has raised up among us the word of reconciliation."

Therefore, although the mass would be a dedicatory sacrifice, it would have no power ex opere operato, because the letter kills.

Likewise Christ says, "Do these things in remembrance of me"; but to remember is as much as to believe. Item, those who do not remember it, it is of no use to them. So the mass is of no use to the dead.

He also commands that one should preach. What is the point of preaching to the dead?

The canon holds the application in itself, therefore it is not to be suffered. If they do not want to understand it about the sacrifice, they must be asked whether there is a difference between the communion of the laity and the clergy.

1055 Melanchthon's other essay on the fourteen articles left uncompared in the committee. Approximately 20 Sept. 1530.

From the author's own copy in the archives at Weimar, printed in Müller's Historie, lib. Ill, eux. 29, p. 798; in Oorp. kek., vol. II, 298 and in Förstemann's Urkundenbuch, vol. II, p. 463. The latter moves this document to September (shortly before the 21st) 1530. Compare no. 1091. Bretschneider assumes August 21.

The articles, which have been compared in the committee and which concern the doctrine, shall be combined, but the other articles, which have not been compared, shall also be combined, namely these are:

1) That faith justifies us in the sight of God, and not works, nor for our previous or subsequent works or merit, but for Christ's sake, if we believe that for Christ's sake God is gracious to us.

2) That one owes to do good works, although one does not thereby earn grace and righteousness before God, but faith obtains grace, not for the sake of our works.

3) That in the confession it is not necessary to tell the sins by name.

4) That although repentance must and should be in repentance, yet sins are not forgiven for the sake of newness, but by faith, if one believes the absolution or the gospel that our sins are forgiven for Christ's sake; therefore faith must come to repentance, which comforts the conscience, and believes that sins are forgiven for Christ's sake.

5) That it is not necessary to impose special satisfaction in penance for the remission of penance.

6) That the holy sacraments do not justify without faith, ex opere operato.

7) That for true unity of the Church and of the faith, there is no need for equality of human statutes, but for equality in articles of faith and in the use of the sacraments.

8) That worship services, instituted by men, without God's command and God's word, so that

1400 Erl. 5t, 188, Sect. 8: Of the Select Committee. No. 1055 ff. W. XVI, 1692-1694. 1401

grace are contrary to the gospel and obscure the merit of Christ.

9) That monastic vows and monastic life, instituted to earn grace, are contrary to the Gospel.

10) That human statutes, which may be kept without sin, and are conducive to good order in the church, should be kept for love's sake, to avoid vexation. However, it should be known that such works are not necessary services, nor do bishops have the right to burden consciences with such traditions; therefore, it is not a sin to refrain from such traditions out of annoyance.

11) Calling upon the saints is an uncertain and dangerous thing, and obscures the ministry of Christ, whom Scripture holds up to us as the Mediator and Reconciler.

12) That those who forbid both forms are acting against Christ's appointment and the Scriptures.

13) That those who forbid marriage are doing contrary to God's commandment, which says that to prevent fornication each man shall have his wife.

14) That the Mass is not a work that merits grace ex opere operato, or applied to others, but that the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ is instituted to offer us grace, which we receive by faith, not ex opere operato.

And such articles the Elector of Saxony with his relatives again considers to be right and Christian, and herein also all articles shall be common and unconditional, which follow in right consequence from these; the like what more articles are disputed, but are not specified in the submitted Confession expresso, 1) all of which shall be applied to the Concilium, so that in the meantime, because of them, no part shall burden the other by force.

Luther's letter to Lazarus Spengler, in which he mentions the Landgrave's departure. August 24, 1530.

This letter is printed from the original in Wolfenbüttel in the Leipzig Supplement, p. 63; in De Wette, vol. IV, p. 140 and in the Erlangen edition, vol. 54, p. 188.

1) Here our text offers Brück's correction. He crossed out the words: "Item ob etlich mehr Artikel streitig wären, so doch der überreichten Confessio nicht entgegen sein", and substituted the words of the text.

To the honorable!, careful! Mr. Lazaro Spengler, the city of Nuremberg Syndico, my favorable dear gentleman and friend.

Grace and peace in Christ. Respectable, careful, dear Lord and friend! Here I send you the sermon from the schools, together with the other sexters on the previous ones. I have no more copies, otherwise I would have sent you one or three; even so I have run out of them. I do not know how to write you more, because we are sitting here in the desert, and we need to hear from you about new newspapers. Nevertheless, we have heard of the new committee in Augsburg after the Landgrave's departure, and it is wonderful to see. May God continue to have mercy, amen. Herewith I bless you in the grace of God. And greetings to all dear lords and friends. Christ will lead his own cause. Ex eremo, the Bar- tholomaei [Aug. 24, 1530.

Martinus Luther.

1057 Melanchthon's letter to Luther, in which he reports to him what has happened so far in the actions of the committee. August 22, 1530.

This letter can be found in Latin in Melanchthon's epist., üb. I, x>. 9; in Chyträus according to the German edition, p. 400, and according to the Latin, p. 269; in Cölestin, torn. Ill, x>. 49 and in Eorp. RiT, vol. II, 299.

Yesterday we ended the discussion or rather the bickering before the negotiators. Initially, the negotiators were Duke Heinrich of Brunswick, the Bishop of Augsburg, Eck, and Cochläus; then Duke Georg took Heinrich's place. For the Duke of Brunswick had to ride to the Landgrave in Hesse, before whom they feared that he would accept warriors.

2 As for the doctrine, it is thus: Eck cavils at the word sola when we say that man is justified by faith alone. But he did not condemn the doctrine itself; -but said that the inexperienced were vexed. For I forced him to confess that righteousness is rightly appropriated by us to faith. But he nevertheless desired that we should write in such a way that man might be justified by grace and faith. This I have

but the fool does not understand the word grace.

The other dispute was about the remission of punishment and satisfaction. The third was about the merit of good works. In these two pieces nothing is compared. Although it is small, which he attributed to the merit, so we have not accepted the same.

After that we came to the disputation of both forms. Here he undertook with great labor to prove that it was not a commandment to take both forms; he considered it a middle thing, one takes one or both forms, and if we taught this, he would gladly give us both forms. I could not accept this, and yet I excused those who had hitherto received only one form out of error. For they cried out that we condemned the whole church. What do you think? Christ's order applies to the laity as well as to the priests. Therefore, since we must use the Sacrament, let consciences keep the whole Sacrament. If this is your opinion, write it to me clearly.

There is no discussion of the mass, vows and priestly marriage. Only a number of means have been proposed, which we have not accepted.

I cannot know where it still wants to go. For although peace is necessary to our enemies, it seems to me that some do not consider what great danger there will be if the matter turns into war. We have proposed some very reasonable means. We restore obedience and jurisdiction to the bishops and promise to restore the common ceremonies. What we will accomplish with this, I do not know. Ask Christ to preserve us. August 22.

Luther's response to the above letter. Aug. 26, 1530.

This letter is found handwritten in the Oock. cksv. d., toi. 114; from it in Buddeus, p. 195; in the Latin collection of letters of Flacius; in Cölestin, vol. Ill, bl. 50 b and in De Wette, vol. IV, p. 145. German in the Wittenberg (1569), vol. IX, p. 432d; in the Jenaer (1566), vol. V, p. 121; in the Altenburger, vol. V, p. 248 and in the Leipziger, vol. XX, p. 191. We have translated according to De Wette.

Newly translated from the Latin.

Grace and peace in Christ! It should surprise me, if this in such a way hin

my dear Philip, that those people could suffer those negotiators, and yet intend to act kindly from the matter. I beg you, isn't it all deceit and trickery there? You have now the Campegius, you have the Salzburger, you have clearly the hooded monks who crossed the Rhine at Speier. 1) For what have I ever hoped for less, and what do I desire even less, than that a doctrinal union should be negotiated? as if we could indeed overthrow the pope, or as if, as long as the papacy remains unharmed, our doctrine could be unharmed. He certainly gives covenant and contract so that he remains pope; he will allow and permit if we do 2c. But thanks be to God that you have accepted nothing of yours.

You write that Eck was forced by you to confess that we are justified by faith, but God would have wanted you to force him not to lie. Namely, Eck confesses that righteousness comes from faith, but in doing so, he defends all the abominations of the papacy, kills, persecutes, condemns those who confess this doctrine of faith, and does not even repent of it, but continues. The whole party of the adversaries does the same. And with these people (if it please Christ) you seek conditions of union and labor in vain, until by some cause they find an apparent cause (plausum) with which to press us down.

In what you write about both forms, you have done right. For so I hold with thee, that it is not a mean thing, but a commandment, that we should take both forms, if we would take the sacrament. For it is not in our discretion to establish or tolerate anything in the Church of God or in the divine service that cannot be defended by the word of God, and I am not a little displeased by this word that is contrary to God: a middle thing, namely, with the same

1) The 8p66trum lVlonueüorum Fpirsusium, sung in elegiac verse by Georg Sabinus, can be read in Ooswslin., tom. Ill, lol. 30. the meaning of the apparition should be:

l^tlsru Ovrinurios disoordia IlsMS,

VroHUS euouüutis impirr dsllu xurunt. (De bet.)

With this word I could easily make all laws and orders of God mean things. For if one allows a middle thing in the word of God, in what way will one be able to prevent that everything does not become a middle thing? They may cry out and shout that the whole church is condemned by us; we say that the church is imprisoned against its will, oppressed by the tyranny of one figure, and for that reason to be excused, as the whole synagogue in Babylon was excused, that in its ecclesiastical customs and sacraments it did not keep the law of Moses as in Jerusalem. For because of this they did not cease to be God's people, because they did not keep the customs commanded them, being captives and prevented by force. But Eck wants him and his people to be praised as the Church. On the other hand, we say that not the whole church is condemned by us, but that the whole word of God (which is more than the church) is rejected by them by doing violence to the sacrament.

That the bishops have been restored to obedience and jurisdiction, and the common ceremonies, as you write, "yet beware, and give no more than ye have," lest we be forced anew into a more difficult and dangerous war to defend the gospel. I know that you always exclude the gospel in these treaties, but I fear that they will accuse us of being faithless and fickle people if we do not keep what they want. For they will accept our concessions far, farther, farthest, but give theirs scarce, scarcer, scarcest.

In sum, I dislike the discussion about doctrinal unification, since it is completely impossible, unless the pope wants his papacy to be abolished. It was enough that we gave an account of our faith and asked for peace; why do we hope to convert them to the truth? We have come to hear whether they approve of ours or not, and leave them free to remain as they are. And we ask whether they reject it or recognize it as right. If they reject it, what is the use of making an agreement with the enemies?

Do they want to strive for harmony? If they know it to be right, what need is there to retain the old abuses? But since it is certain that ours will be condemned by them, because they do not repent and strive to keep theirs, why do we not see that whatever they do is a vain pretense and a lie? For it cannot be said that these things of theirs flow from the Holy Spirit, since with them there is nothing of repentance, nothing of faith, nothing of godliness. But the Lord, who began in you, will accomplish his work; to him I commend you with all my heart. August 26, 1530.

Martin Luther.

Luther's letter to Justus Jonas, same content. August 26, 1530.

This letter is handwritten in the Ooä. cksn. d., lol. 125 and in Aurifaber, vol. Ill, p. 92. Printed in Buddeus, p. 198; in 6oo1o8lin., tom. Ill, col. 57; in Schütze, vol. II, p. 166 and in De Wette, vol. IV, p. 147. According to the latter we have translated.

Newly translated from the Latin.

Grace and peace! About our cause I have seen and read the testimonies of yours. But what I write to Philip, the same I write to you, that for Christ's sake and for my sake, if I belong to Christ in anything, you will condescend to believe with all ours that Campegius is the one great and noblest devil. It cannot be said in words how I am excited by the proposals made by the other party, namely since the devils ridicule and mock our cross in such a way. This is the envelope of Campegius and the pope, that our cause should first be attacked by force and threats; if this way would not succeed, then it should be contested by intrigues and tricks. You have experienced the violence and the threats, and endured the frightening future of the emperor; now you suffer the treacheries and in truth these hooded monks who have crossed the Rhine at Speier; namely, the arrival of these brings these associations in doctrine

1060 Luther's letter to Spalatin. August 26, 1530.

This letter is found handwritten in Ooü. .len. d., lol. 225 d and in Aurifaber, vol. Ill, p. 86. Printed in Buddeus, p. 197; in Coslestin., iow. Ill, lol.59 and in De Wette, vol. I V, p. 144. According to the latter we have translated.

Newly translated from the Latin.

To his dearest brother in the Lord, M. Georg Spalatin, the disciple of Christ 2c.

Grace and peace in the Lord! I have a matter, my dear Spalatin, in which I call upon your service and your conscientiousness, namely, that you take care that this letter of our prince addressed to me is credibly^ provided with the prince's seal and returned to me. For although it was enough that it was signed with the handwriting of the dear Prince, it gave me pleasure to accuse the Chancellor of negligence, since he sent the Prince's letter without a seal. For I remember that I too once wrote to the Prince without my name's signature, and since I had been so negligent, I was also reprimanded. But now I am taking fine revenge with this unsealed letter; a sweet revenge! After my trust in your conscientiousness, I expect that this will be taken care of.

1) dona ückk is translated by "in secret" in the old edition.

I hear that you have begun a strange work, admittedly not gladly, namely to unite the pope and Luther. But the pope will not want it, and Luther forbids it; see to it that you do not spend your effort in vain. If now, since both are unwilling to do so, you will have settled the matter, then I will immediately follow your example and reconcile Christ and Belial. But nevertheless I know that you are not driven to this futile work by your own free will, but by chance, or rather by the hooded ghosts of Speier. Christ, who has been your strength up to now, will now also be your wisdom, so that these Italian intrigues can do nothing against you. For the evil advice will be worst for the one who gave it. Greetings M. Eisleben, D. Brenz, Schnepf and all those who are ours. The grace of God be with you, Amen. From the desert, August 26, 1530.

Your Martin Luther.

1061. D. Martin Luther's Concerns about Several Articles in Dispute. End of August 1530.

This concern is found in German in the Wittenberg edition (1569), vol. IX, p.3936.; in the Jena edition (1566), vol. V, p. 1116; in the Altenburg edition, vol. V, p. 238; in the Leipzig edition, vol. XX, p. 165; in the Erlangen edition, vol. 65, p. 46; in Spalatin's Annals, p. 270 and in Chyträus, p. 135. Latin in Cölestin, vol. Ill, p. 376 and in Chyträus, p. 273. The time determination is according to De Wette.

First of all, where our adversary intends neither to let up nor to give way, but to continue straightway, and to condemn us, as has hitherto been done in all things, nor has it ever appeared as if they would accept the great offering, as we have often done to them, we do not see how any action is possible to be taken. For we cannot act on it, that all their things should remain whole, and ours be damned; which hitherto has happened too much, without any action.

On the other hand.

But because the Imperial Majesty wants to know what we want to let up, it is necessary to indicate from piece to piece what we can or cannot do.

From the articles concerning doctrine re.

We cannot deviate from these articles, for even our opponents have not shown any error therein, as can be clearly heard from their confutation and in the dealings that followed; they will also undoubtedly be considered Christian and right by all other nations. For they are not only well founded in the Scriptures, but are also powerfully proved by the Holy Fathers' writings. They are also so well and so mildly regulated that no Christian can be offended by them. However, if Imperial Majesty If, however, the Imperial Majesty requests some explanations, such as de sola fide, de satisfactionibus, de meritis, etc., then our part is at all times obliged to do the same.

From the articles concerning the abuses.

First, to receive both forms of the sacrament. We cannot deviate from this article, because it is a divine order, which Christ Himself ordered, and it is not fitting for any man to change or alter God's order, Gal. 3:15.It has been used from the beginning in the whole of Christendom for many hundreds of years, and is still a sign in the Greek churches to this day, and will and must remain in the world at least in some places, ne excidat verbum Dei, Rom. 9, 6. Also, our counterpart himself confesses that it is so right, according to their handed over rotel 2c.

(2) But that they desire us to teach that it is not wrong to give and take the same form, we cannot do, for reasons indicated above. Neither has the law proved, either by holy scripture or by the sayings of the fathers, that such a thing may or should be done.

(3) Further, that they desire that we should also give the same form to those who desire it, we cannot do as they require without distinction, as if both were right. In our visitation we have reported sufficiently that the weak may be given the same form, but we do not approve of it as right.

(4) But that they say, whether we will condemn all Christendom, which after all hath used one form as right, say

we: First of all, one must consider God's word, command and order more than the work, deeds or omissions of Christianity. For God cannot lie or err in His word, but Christianity can err and err in its doings and omissions. Thus, Christianity is not a rule and measure over God's word, but God's word is a rule and measure over Christianity. And Christianity is not made by God's word, but God's word makes Christianity; for it is born of God's word, and is multiplied and preserved, as St. Peter says in 1 Peter 1:23: "Ye are born, not of corruptible seed, but of the word of God, which abideth for ever." And in case one should leave or deny one thing, one would have to deny Christianity before God's Word, since Christianity as a creature, created by God's Word, is inferior and inferior to God's Word, through which, as a Creator, it was created.

(5) Secondly, Christianity is not condemned by this. For just as the holy people of God were excused before God in the past for not keeping some of God's commandments and ceremonies, namely, because they were imprisoned in Babylon or elsewhere and were prevented from doing so, because unavoidable necessity and compulsion did not permit this, even Moses himself says Deut. 12:8.Moses himself says in Deut. 12:8 that they should not do in the land of Canaan as they did in the wilderness, nor had they been circumcised for forty years in the wilderness (Jos. 5:7). God will therefore excuse the Christians who used the same form until now, because they had to do it out of necessity and need, since such abuse was forced upon them without their will by the spiritual tyrants, so that they did not know or could not do better. Therefore, it is not the fault of Christianity, but of the tyrants and false teachers, who have imprisoned and oppressed Christianity with such sacrilege and abuse, and have established it and introduced it by force without the consent or knowledge of Christianity.

6 Third, Christianity is not condemned because it still has some defects or abuses, or (as St. Paul says Eph. 5:27) "wrinkles and spots. It

1410 Erl. 65, 49-51. cap. 13. of the Imperial Diet at Augsburg in 1530. w. XVI, 1703-1706. 1411

It is far another thing to have sin or error, and another thing to be damned. Christianity cannot be without sin and error, but it is not condemned for that. St. Paul, one of the highest and holiest members, confesses in Rom. 7, 23 that he is a captive servant of sins, and yet wants to be un-condemned, Rom. 8, 1, when he says: there is nothing condemnable about those who are in Christ.

7 Christ himself taught his disciples to pray in the Lord's Prayer: "Forgive us our trespasses. And says Matth. 6, 12-14. to the same: "So your heavenly Father will not forgive you your trespasses, if you do not forgive the trespasses of your brothers.

(8) From which words it clearly follows that the apostles have such sins that they would be condemned if they were not forgiven. And what would it be necessary for the apostles and the whole Christianity to pray for forgiveness of sins, if they did not have such sins that needed forgiveness, and condemned without forgiveness? There does not have to be a saint on earth who can live so holy for a moment that he would not be allowed to pray the Lord's Prayer; otherwise the Lord's Prayer would be wrong for a saint, or at least for such a moment.

(9) It is true that Christianity is holy and cannot err (as the article says: "I believe in a holy Christian church"), but it is true that as far as the spirit is concerned, it is completely holy in Christ and not in itself; but as far as it is still in the flesh, it has sin and can fall short and be deceived. But for the Spirit's sake she is forgiven, and her sins are forgiven, because she believes in Christ and confesses her sins (even the unconscious ones), Ps. 19:13: "Who notices all her faults?" So St. Paul himself teaches Rom. 7,8.10. that our (that is, the Christians') body is dead because of sin, but the spirit lives because of righteousness; freely confesses that all Christians are sinners and dead according to the body, and yet live according to the spirit in Christ.

(10) So all Christendom erred in the beginning at Jerusalem, when they were eager to put it to the Gentiles to be circumcised, and commanded to keep the law of Moses, or they could not be saved.

which, however, strives directly against the main article on which Christianity stands, namely, that we must be saved through Christ and his grace alone, without law and circumcision, as St. Paul there barely obtained with effort. What wonder, then, if afterwards, since Christianity was not so high and rich in spirit, it also sometimes erred and failed, and yet remained holy through the forgiveness of sins, as well as those.

(11) But such errors and mistakes of Christianity, after they are revealed, are not to be approved, nor defended as articles of faith; for that would be contrary to the Holy Spirit, who reveals such things, and henceforth would no longer be a Christian or vain sin, but a hardened and devilish delusion.

From the Spiritual Marriage

We cannot agree to any way that marriage is forbidden to anyone, which God Himself created and commanded, and the doctrine that forbids this is called the doctrine of the devil, 1 Tim. 4:1-3.

From private show.

We cannot allow them to be restored, or to suffer them to be publicly held in the daytime, as such masses, hitherto held, are public abuse and idolatry. For they hold it thus, that it makes pious both the one who holds it and the one for whom it is held, as an opus operatum et applicatum, which nevertheless strives clearly against the main article of faith in Christ. So they themselves cannot deny that for this reason such masses are founded and sold all over the world, and to this day they seek nothing else with them but the belly and mammon; which all would have remained, if the mass had not become a work.

From Canon.

(1) Then we can suffer neither small nor great canon, for both canons make the measure of such works, in express words, to make us godly, and also to be sacrificed for others, as is now said above; which then is openly contrary to the doctrine of faith, and blasphemes the passion of Christ, even so.

1412 Erl. 65, 51-54, Sect. 8, of the Select Committee. No. 1061, W. LVI, 1708-1709. 1413

as if Christ had not sufficiently redeemed us through his blood, and we had to first seek and purchase it through works and masses.

2 But that they want to palliate the Canon with glosses, and interpret the word sacrificium, sacrifice, as a sacrifice to memory, may not help them. For if the mass is to be an opus operatum et applicatum, as they claim, then the gloss is in vain, even wrong for that. But if the Glossa is to be right, the Mass must not be an opus operatum, and so either the Canon overturns the Glossa, or the Glossa the Canonem. For the Glossa and the Canon may not both exist at the same time, because the Canon clearly asks that God should reconcile such 1) sacrifice (as they say) of the memory, and all of us for whom it happens.

3 About this, it is public and certain that the Canon is not the Holy Scripture, but everyone must confess that [it] is a new thing that has arisen long after, and it is uncertain who the master is, nor are they the same everywhere. For St. Ambrose's Canon, which the Archbishopric of Milan holds, is very different from the Roman Canon. Thus the Greeks also have other canons than we do, and they are not the same among themselves.

4 Because there is no holy scripture here, and the canons are nowhere all the same, from which one must recognize that it is human and not divine order; why then should one be so strict about it, as if it were the one eternal word of God, because men who act apart from and without holy scripture can well err and miss. And whoever wishes to read the canon will find a number of saints who lived long after the time of the apostles; and as many of them as are mentioned therein are told so that God may be gracious to us through their merit and intercession. What honor the canon does not give Christ, that he should be our mediator and intercessor, to whom it is primarily due, but must allow himself to be sacrificed, and besides this the saints suffer our intercessors and mediators in his stead. And the priest may wonderfully pray for Christ that God will be gracious to His Son Christ through such sacrifices, which is an unpleasant abomination.

1) Thus Spalatin; in the other editions: such.

From the unfinished monasteries

We will gladly consent that the persons who are in them remain, and be provided with food and protection, as has been done from time immemorial; but that one should handle and protect their masses and other ungodly beings, that is contrary to the above-mentioned articles. For if they were allowed to keep their rules and visit their parishes, it would follow that the masses and canons would be confirmed, and they would have to help prevent those who wanted to leave, and allow them to proceed against those who did so. 2) And if anyone appealed to the authorities, they would be punished. And if someone appealed to the authorities for advice and help to get out, the ways would be closed to him.

From the disposed monasteries.

Where the Emperor's Majesty would command. Majesty would command that the persons be reinstated and administered according to their rules 2c., we will certainly permit that they be reinstated and maintained in monasteries. However, we cannot agree to administer their rules and masses (as mentioned above), because this would result in the same thing that has been said about the monasteries that have not been discharged.

Wherever His Imperial Majesty requires it, or wishes to appoint and protect them himself, we must let His Majesty do so. If His Majesty should immediately command that persons be appointed, or if he should wish to appoint and protect them himself, we must let His Majesty do and accomplish this, but we cannot consent to it; His Majesty is sovereign, and may accomplish it on his own conscience; in such matters, however, our conscience shall not be equally burdened with his.

From Jurisdiction.

It is a vain thing that one deals with jurisdiction. For if they do not want to suffer us, and do not want to let up on anything, but rather condemn us straight away, then we cannot expect any jurisdiction from them, except from the Master Hansen. It is true that if they wanted to suffer our doctrine and no longer pursue it, we would not harm their jurisdiction, dignity, or whatever they call it. For we certainly do not desire to be bishops or cardinals, but only good Christians, who should be poor, Matth. 5, 3. and Luc. 4, 18.

2) Thus Spalatin. Wittenberg, Jena and Erlangen: "prediciren".

1414 Erl. 54,188-19". Cap. 13: From the Imperial Diet in Augsburg in 1530. W. XVI, 1709-1711. 1415

From the matrimonial matters.

Always away with these things to bishops, officials, executioners, and whoever wants them. However, it is to be assumed that they will not want to accept one piece without the other.

Of meat dishes and celebrations.

What is 1) we cannot suffer that the consciences are burdened with it, just as St. Paul also declares such, and yet it is to be assumed that they do not accept it in any other way than by burdening the conscience. However, if it is considered good that the imperial majesty should be informed that the latter should establish an order in this matter, but without entangling the conscience, we may well suffer this, especially since they themselves no longer keep the fasts, according to 2) the Canonum.

1062 Luther's letter to Prince John stating that the means proposed by the adversary could not be accepted. August 26, 1530.

The original of this letter is in the Weimar Community Archives. Printed from it in Cyprian's Supplements to his Hist. of the A. C., p. 105; in Förstemann's Urkundenbuch, vol. II, p. 302 and in De Wette, vol. VI, p. 118. Further, in the Wittenberg edition (1569), vol. IX, p. 424k; in the Jena edition (1566), vol. V, p. 122; in the Altenburger, vol. V, p. 249; in the Erlanger, vol. 54, p. 188; in De Wette, vol. IV, p. 140; in Chyträus, p. 281 k (not 164k) and Latin in the Latin edition, p. 292; in 6o6l68tiu., tom. Ill, lol. 52 and in Buddeus, p. 187. We have improved the old edition according to Förstemann.

Grace and peace in Christ, Most Serene Highborn Prince, Most Gracious Lord! I have received E. C. F. G.'s writing, together with the two copies of both parts of the committee. And since E. C. F. G. has requested my objection to it, I hereby inform you of the same. And first of all (as our part also did), that part's proposed condition or means is not to be suffered at all, and I am almost surprised that such a thing has been proposed.

1) Thus Spalatin. In the other editions: that.

2) Thus Spalatin. Wittenberg and Jena: "aussatzung.

turn. But on the Our Part article, this is my good opinion:

That the adversaries desire us to teach that one form of the sacrament is also right, and should not be commanded, but rather indifferent, and free to use both forms 2c., E. C. F. G. well know that one of our main things is that one should neither teach nor do anything, unless certainly grasped with God's word, so that we do not (as Paul says) run uncertainly and do wrong. For it is therefore a trouble enough, if we walk in the certain word, that we abide. So it is certain that one form of the sacrament is a purely human finding, and not at all confirmed with God's word, but the contradiction, namely both forms are confirmed with the clear word of God. Therefore we cannot agree nor teach that one form is right. For Christ says Matth. 15, 9: They serve me in vain with the doctrine of men 2c. Without what else is there to make indifferent Christ's word, which he so earnestly commanded: "Do this in remembrance of me" 2c.

(2) Neither do they themselves believe that it is indifferent, for they have burned, driven out, and persecuted many things about it, and condemned it for great heresy. Therefore, not only for God's sake and ours, but also for theirs, we must not allow it to be indifferent. For in so doing we would have to reproach them as murderers and evildoers who had condemned and persecuted an indifferent thing for heresy. Since they themselves do not believe that it is indifferent, we can much less teach it, unless they recant and bring back all those whom they have persecuted for it.

3 And it is fine that they complain: They cannot keep the people, where we do not teach that they are also right. Such wise cause I like to hear. Just as if God had to teach his word that they should keep their people and remain tyrants.

4 The same is to be said of the angle measurements. For they are also the feet of men, arising without the word of God, without what else is the abuse within. But that they pretend, they do not want to force that we should raise them up, but that we do not resist. We do not resist them, but that

1416 Erl. 5t, 190-192, Sect. 8: Of the Select Committee. No. 1062. w. xvi. 1711-1713. 1417

we should approve it, we cannot do that. For where one admits some of the works of men, one must also admit the others. Therefore this is the next way; if we admit the angle mass, we may quickly abandon the whole gospel, and accept the vain works of men. For there is no reason why one and not all works of men should be accepted; and he who has forbidden and condemned them all has also forbidden and condemned one.

(5) That they argue that the princely office does not seek to prevent this, we know very well that the princely office and the preaching office are not the same, and that a prince does not have to do this. But now it is asked whether a prince, as a Christian, will grant this; and the question is not whether he acts here as a prince. It is a different one, whether a prince should preach, or whether he wants to consent to preaching. It is not the prince, but the Scripture that is to prevent the corner mass. If a prince wants to follow the Scriptures or not, that is up to him; no one forces him to do so on earth.

(6) About the canon, whether it is to be suffered, with quite a gloss? Yes, if it were up to a good interpreter in this matter, I would have glossed the faith of the Turks long ago, and brought all unbelievers to the Christian faith. It is well known how they sold the masses as a sacrificium and opus; now they want to gloss it. But summa, it is also a little human feeling that one cannot stand in God's matters, and it is dangerous and annoying. And since they abstain from these things, and hold with us that the mass is not a sacrificium, what need is there that they should retain the vexatious word, if it is, after all, without necessity, and dangerous to it? Now, one should not go on a journey without necessity, for that is forbidden, and is called tempting God. St. Augustine says: Teneat sententiam, corrigat linguam; and speaks of the word Fatum; says, he who understands Fatum pro decreto Dei, understands it right. But he does not want to suffer the word, and says: Corrigat linguam. Do we still want to erect dark and uncertain words, and may hardly remain with the bright clear words?

7 It is of no use to leave the word sacrificium in the canon, for the canon is not a canon of sacrificium.

without which the mass is so clearly declared to be a true sacrifice that no one can interpret or understand it otherwise than that the mass is a sacrifice. For in other words, it says that God would have such a sacrifice of the sacrament brought up by his angel's hand before his divine altar; which cannot be interpreted to mean that it is a memorial of Christ's suffering, for this must be done through the sermon. And in short, the Canon of the Mass1) asks that God would allow such a sacrifice to please him, and yet it is the body and blood of His dear Son, as if a man had to deny Christ to God. This is blasphemous and shameful, and the Canon is not to be suffered.

(8) Finally, we will suffer and give way to all that is in our power. But what is not in our power, we pray that they will not desire it from us. But what is the word of God is not in our power. And what is established for worship without the word of God is also not in our power to accept. Therefore, we cannot accept the fasts and celebrations that are obtained, unless they are set by worldly authorities as a worldly order. For that is called everything worldly, which one decorates with ceremonies, as clothes, offerings, fasts, celebrations, since God has subjected such to reason and commanded that it may freely act with it, Gen. 2. For it is an earthly thing, and a being on earth, which is all under reason by the word: Dominamini terrae. Because the worldly authority of such reason is the highest work, it can create and command in it.

9 I will now humbly answer E. C. F. G. in haste to these questions. Orders hereby the same in God's grace, Amen. On Friday after Bartholomew s26. Augusts Anno 1530.

E. C. F. G.

subservient

Martinus Luther.

1) Luther seems to have deleted the word "Meß" again. (Förstemann.)

B. Of the report made to the Emperor on this action by the Roman magistrates, August 22, and what was said against it by the

The opposite has been remembered.

1063 Report of the papists on the amicable action between their and the protested

the Estates Committee, held in religious matters at Augsburg, Anno 1530.

This account is found in Chyträus according to the German edition, p. 357, and according to the Latin, p. 239; in Oo6l68tiuu8, tow. Ill, toi. 42; in Müller's Hift., 11b. Ill, 6Lp. 29, p. 775; and in Cochläus, äo aati8 6t seriptis l^utb. aä anii. 1530., x. 198.

The action began on August 16 at two o'clock after noon, when first of all the Imperial Estates Committee reminded the protesters of five things.

For now, that the action be taken without bickering and disputation, with friendly conversation on both sides.

On the other hand, that everything be done in an unrestrained and unassailable manner, and that everything be brought to the imperial estates, and subsequently through them to the Roman imperial majesty.

Third, that nothing contrary to the Christian Catholic faith or common peace be done therein.

Fourthly, that the opposite will behave obediently according to the Roman imperial majesty's answer, 1) as in accordance with the holy scripture and church.

Fifth, that the acts of such deliberations are not disclosed to anyone except those concerned.

In these five articles, the other part's deputies have approved, 2) although they complained somewhat about Imperial Majesty's answer that they were not handed over. Maj.'s answer that they were not handed over to them, which nevertheless, as often as it is necessary, is not denied to them. After this receipt, the articles of the handed over Confession were acted upon differently and properly that evening.

The first article, of the Trinity of Persons, and Unity of the Divine Being.

In this article one is united, and on both sides of the Manichaeans, Valentinians, Arians, Simonians, Mahometists, Samosatians old and new errors and heresies are cheaply condemned.

1) This "answer" is to be understood as the confutation.

2) This is untrue; see the following number.

The other, from the original sin.

In the other article, about original sin, they agree with us and condemn the Pelagians and others as Zwinglians and Anabaptists who deny original sin. But they did not agree with us in the description of what original sin is. In the end, the Lutherans compared themselves with our opinion and said that original sin is a lack of original righteousness, which sins are taken away in baptism, but the tinder and evil desire remain in man even after baptism.

The third article, of two natures in Christo.

In this article one is equal, by virtue of the Symboli Apostolorum.

The fourth, of faith.

Since they spoke of saving faith, we did not want to allow that faith alone makes us righteous and saved, because even the apostle St. James did not allow this. For this reason we have agreed that we should be taught that we are justified by faith. But not by faith alone, for this is nowhere found in divine holy Scripture, but rather the contradiction. For this reason we have compared that the word sola is not needed, but that justification or forgiveness of sins is done by grace (per gratiam gratum facientem) and through faith in us, and through the Word and Sacraments as instruments.

The 5th article, of the holy office of preaching; [Gospel] and Sacraments.

The Anabaptists who despise the outwardly preached word are also condemned.

6. of good works.

Here one agrees that one must do good works as God commands. But this explanation is made so that one does not say that faith alone makes one righteous, as stated above in the 4th article.

7. from the Christian church.

They are also at one with us in this matter, and unanimously confess that in the church here on earth there are not only saints but also sinners among them.

8. of the office of the wicked in the church.

They agree with us that even the ungodly and unbelievers can administer the sacraments, and they condemn the Donatists and the like who pretend that the service of unbelievers should not be used in the church.

9. from the baptism.

The Anabaptists, who forbid infant baptism, are also the same here, and they reject it outright, pretending that even without baptism the little children will be saved.

10. of the reverend sacrament of the altar

They agree with us that the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ is truly present in the reverend sacrament of the altar. And for a clearer explanation it is added that the body of Christ is truly and essentially present.

11. from the confession.

This article is moved to the 4th article, below from Abuses.

12. of the pieces of repentance.

After a long disputation, they finally agreed with us on this form: We do not refuse to set three parts of repentance, namely repentance and horror of our conscience over committed sin; secondly, confession, but in this part one must primarily look to absolution and believe in it. For no sin is forgiven unless we believe that sin is forgiven us only because of the merit of Christ's suffering. The third part of repentance is satisfactio, namely, worthy fruits of repentance. We also agree that sin is not forgiven for the sake of satisfaction, as far as guilt is concerned. But we do not yet agree whether satisfaction is necessary for the forgiveness of sins, as far as punishment is concerned. But here they condemn the Anabaptists and Novatians.

13. the use of the sacraments

It is agreed that the sacraments are instituted not only to be marks of Christians among other people, but rather to be emblems and testimonies of the divine will toward us.

14. of the church regiment.

This article has been moved to the seventh of the following articles of abuses.

15. from the church ceremonies.

This article is moved to the 5th, 6th and 7th subsequent articles of abuses.

16. from secular authorities.

Here one is equal, and condemns cheaply the Anabaptists, who forbid the Christians worldly offices and violence.

17. from the last judgment.

Here one is equal and condemns the Anabaptists who believe that the punishment and torment of the damned will cease and come to an end.

18. of the free will of man.

Here it is agreed that man has free will, but without God's help he cannot attain justification.

19 From causes of sin.

Here it is the same that the cause of sin is the free will of the wicked, as devils and ungodly.

20. of faith and good works.

Here we agree that good works must be done, and that they are necessary, and since they are done out of faith, they are pleasing to God, and that God will reward them according to His promise. But whether our good works are meritorious, and how far we can trust in them, cannot be compared.

21. from the Holy Services.

In the 21st article, two points are compared, namely, that all the saints and angels in heaven pray to God for us. Secondly, to keep holy and solemn the commemoration and feast of the saints, on which we pray to God that the saints' intercession may be of service to us.

But as far as the invocation of the saints is concerned, they still do not agree with us. They say that they do not forbid it, but since the Scriptures do not explicitly mention the invocation of the saints, they do not want to invoke the saints, firstly because the Scriptures do not command it, and secondly because they think that great and dangerous abuses will result from it.

Short excerpt of the first part of the Fürsten Bekenntniß.

The first part of the Protestant Confession contains one and twenty articles, in fifteen of which they are in complete agreement with us, but in the others they are partly in agreement. For three articles of it are moved below to the abuses, namely the 11th, 14th and 15th. One is also in part ambivalent in three articles, namely in the 12th, 20th and 21st.

In these articles, one is the same.

Article. ) 20.

The other part of the confession, from Miß-

The Code of Conduct contains 7 articles.

On the 18th day of August, there was much discussion in various ways about how to deal with the seven remaining articles in dispute. It was finally unanimously agreed that all the points should be dealt with properly, but not each one in particular, as was done in the previous articles, but all of them at the same time. The Catholics would have preferred to act on the last articles first, because they feared that the action of both would soon be spread among the people. However, since the Lutherans opposed this, the Catholics proposed in writings a moderation, but without limitation and without intervention, when all this was to be brought to the attention of the common estates of the empire and then to the Roman imperial majesty. For this reason, one began to deal with both forms of the sacrament as follows:

The middle way, which the Catholics proposed on the 19th day of Augusti.

That, by permission of Papal Holiness or their legate, with the knowledge and approval of the Roman Emperor's Majesty, as the supreme advocate of the

Church, the administration and reception of the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ under both forms is permitted to the Lutherans, but with the following measure:

First, that their pastors alone distribute the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ in both forms to their parishioners and to all those who desire it in the places where it has been customary for several years.

On the other hand, that this be done with preceding confession, as was customary in ancient times.

Thirdly, that at Easter, and when the sacrament is otherwise held, it is also taught among them that the reception of the sacrament in both forms is not expressly commanded by God.

Fourth, that they teach that the whole Christ is present and is received both under one form and under both.

Fifthly, that they teach in their sermons that those who receive the sacrament of all things under one form of bread do not sin.

Sixth, that they inevitably hand or let hand to their subjects who desire it under one form alone.

The seventh is that the wine for the sick should not be kept in dishes, nor should it be carried to anyone in the streets, but if someone wants to communicate in both forms, it should be consecrated and distributed in the church or in the homes of the sick under the office of the mass.

Lutheran's response the 20th of August.

They are satisfied that the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of the Lord be received with prior confession. They also want parish priests and preachers to speak peacefully about this until further decisions are made at the next Concilii.

They also confess that the whole Christ is present under the form of bread. They deny that one of them is forbidden to receive the sacrament under one form. They also deny that the form of wine is kept with them in dishes or carried to the sick. Finally, they want to keep the reverend sacrament honestly with them, as before.

Since the Catholics further requested an explanation of some obscure words, the Lutherans, after this action, Aug. 21, in their answer thus declared that from every communicant, before receiving the sacrament, confession should be made of the most noble sins, which are

1) to ask for help and consolation.

For the other, they declare themselves to believe that the whole Christ, true God and man, is certainly present under both forms, or under either one.

Thirdly, they have also declared in a held discourse that they do not condemn those who took the sacrament in a crazy time under one form or received it still today.

They believe that those who communicate under one form do not do wrong. But they do not want to allow their own to preach this. And so much has been said about both forms between seven members of the council on both sides.

From this it is evident that there has been no great dispute or disagreement between the parties. For in this alone they disagree with us, that although they believe with us that those who need one figure do not sin, yet they will not permit their own to say so publicly in sermons.

And although they confess that the whole Christ is truly present under one form, they still dispute that the Lord Christ commanded not only the priests but also the laity to receive both forms. Christ says, "Drink from it, all of you." But we have answered from the Gospel of St. Marci, "And they all drank of it." This clearly indicates that this was spoken to the twelve disciples who were sitting at the table with Christ; therefore, if they were not stiff-necked, Christian unity could easily be achieved.

The other article.

Of Spiritual Marriage.

For the sake of peace, the Catholics have given these means in writing: Although such priests, because of their vows and priestly ordination, which they accepted of their own free will, cannot enter into a lawful marriage, that nevertheless, in order to spare the seduced images of women, the nourishment of innocent children, the avoidance of all kinds of trouble and other movable causes, the priests who are now in essential marriage, thus without confirmation and approval of their undertaking, would be tolerated until the future Concilio, but in such a manner and measure as follows: First, that they be tolerated only in the places of worship, as has been customary for some time.

1) This is untrue; compare No. 1049, also the following number, in which other forgeries are also corrected.

Secondly, that no one marries before the decision of the Council, and whoever does so is deprived of his priestly office and benefices and expelled from the country or otherwise punished.

Thirdly, whoever wishes to abstain from a marriage and remain in the celibate state shall be permitted to do so and shall not be denied it, and shall remain in his office and benesicio after he has received absolution.

Fourthly, that also in the places where the reverend priests are, and especially where they are in the churches, diligence is taken to get others, as beneficial as this may always be, who are and remain reverend, and to promote them to the ministry.

Fifthly, that the spouses be deprived of their office and benefice, unless they obtain from Papal Holiness or their legate tolerance to remain with their Ofsicio and Benesicio.

It is also intended that the priestly concubinage should be completely abolished, and that it should no longer be tolerated by the ordinaries.

Lastly, it is also considered that in the Council it should be proposed whether it would not be useful to allow henceforth that husbands be taken and ordained to the priestly state, as was the custom in the first Church some hundred years ago.

The answer of the opposite, handed over in writing.

First of all, they referred us to their written confession, in which they showed reasons enough, as they believe, why the priestly marriage is to be considered Christian and right.

On the other hand, they have pointed out the manifold and great annoyances of the celibate priests who live in public fornication, which they have allowed their priests to avoid.

Third, they say that the gift of chastity is given to a few, for which reason, after the death of the married priests, they want to accept others who are married.

Fourthly, they have confirmed their opinion from what we have recently added about the concubinate and future concilio. No further action was taken on this matter between the deputies of both sides, because there was more dispute and disagreement here than there was about both forms of the sacrament. For this reason, these matters were left hanging and referred to the Imperial Estates and the Roman Emperor. Maj. Of the arguments, however, which they put forward in their confession, the following is written in Maj. Maj. Imperial Majesty's reply. To be sure, the manifold aversions arising from the priestly con-

cubinate, they reproach us unreasonably, since we have previously granted the abolition of the same without it. But as for the gift of chastity, they are of too little faith, because they do not believe that God will also give it to those who ask Him for it, since Christ says: "Whatever you ask the Father in My name, it shall be done for you. Item: "Believe, and you shall receive."

The third article.

From the fair.

The Catholics have requested that the common and private masses on the customary feasts be held in ordinary dress, on the altars, with the inclusion of both the major and minor canons, as before, in the common Christian church of the German nation and its territories, as has been in use and practice from time immemorial. And lest a quarrel arise over the words hostia, oblatio, sacrificium, or sacrifice, they have indicated a clear distinction between three things, namely, that Christ was figuratively sacrificed in the paschal lamb in the Old Testament, and that later the same Christ suffered on the trunk of the cross, offering Himself to God the Father a true sacrifice for the sin of men; but now, in the sacrifice of the Mass, it is offered mysterially and repraesentatively, that is, sacramentally and commemoratively, in the Church every day, in memory and remembrance of Christ's suffering and death, once accomplished on the Cross.

Accordingly, the Mass is not a sacrifice, but a sacramental and memorial sacrifice.

The answer of the opposite, handed over in writing.

They want the masses on the usual feasts to be held in customary church clothes, and because in their principalities and lands (as they report) the mass has hitherto been held honestly with all the essentials and customary ceremonies, after the institution of Christ, they henceforth want it to be held with due reverence.

However, since the Catholics asked for further explanation of the major and minor Canon and the private masses, they did not answer in writing. But in the conversation, when they were asked why they do not want to accept the holy Canon, they put forward three main reasons:

First, that we make a mortal sin of omitting the Canonem at Mass.

On the other hand, because he confirms the sacrifice of the Mass.

Third, that the saints are called therein.

This is again recently and catholically answered:

First of all, whether it is truly a mortal sin fei to sleep the Canonem, yet it is not written in the Canone.

For another, that in the mass a sacramental and memorial sacrifice fei, they can not deny even themselves.

Thirdly, the saints are not invoked in the canon, but only their memory is kept; however, they have admitted above with us that the memory of the saints should be kept in the church. Therefore, there is no great disagreement about this article; nevertheless, they both stubbornly reject the Canonem and Privatmefse, even though they have no legitimate reason to do so.

The fourth article.

From confession.

The Catholics have not presented anything about confession in their writings. This is because it has been mentioned twice before, namely in the 12th article, in the parts of repentance.

Item, afterwards at the Communion under both forms.

However, the opposite party remembers them especially in the writings they present to the Catholics, with more explanation than is written in the Confession. For this reason, we have added three points:

First of all, confession should not be abandoned, considering the great comfort that absolution brings.

Secondly, that from this one may consider how high and salutary the power of the keys is.

Thirdly, that the people may be accustomed to confess their sins, besides being informed that even sins not confessed will nevertheless be forgiven.

For this reason, it is unnecessary to deal further with these matters between the parties.

The fifth article.

Of human statutes.

The Catholics in general have requested that fasting, holidays, confession, prayer, procession, church ceremonies, differences in food and times, and other such customs that have been customary up to now, and the distribution of the sacraments, be kept by the Elector of Saxony and his kinsmen as has been customary in the Catholic Church from time immemorial. On this

The opponent replied in writing to two articles in particular: first about ceremonies, then about holidays.

For this reason, they say at the outset that the common ceremonies are to be held for the sake of love, so that equality in churches, conducive to peace and unity, may be maintained. However, that no one's conscience be troubled by this, and that such ceremonies not be held for necessary church services, but that everything be done properly for the sake of love and peace.

Secondly, they want no meat to be eaten in public at the following times: during the soft fast, every Friday and Saturday, on Christmas Eve, on Pentecost Eve, on St. John the Baptist's Eve, and on all Christmas Eve.

Third, they complain that the forty-day fast is too long, which they would rather have distributed to other times of the year. Nevertheless, in their part, also during this time, one should, as much as possible, conform to other churches with ceremonies, church songs, gospels and epistles, as sung, read and preached in other churches; they also do not want to allow any meat to be sold publicly to their own.

As for the feast days, first of all, they want the ordinary feasts to be kept solemn, so that the people may remain in the habit of hearing God's word and receiving the sacraments, each according to his conscience's need.

Secondly, that especially these following feast days be kept holy and solemn.

All Sunday.

Christmas Day.

St. Stephen's.

St. John, Apostle and Evangelist.

The Lord's Circumcision.

Epiphany, the holy three kings.

The Charwoche, because of the Passion of the Lord.

Easter Day, together with Monday and Tuesday.

The noblest feasts of the pure virgins

Mary's.

Ascension of Christ.

Feast of All Apostles.

The Holy Pentecosts, together with Monday and Tuesday.

Thirdly, on such holidays one should keep and use ordinary chants, officia and lectiones, taken from divine holy scripture.

Fourthly, one should sing and keep the litany in the week of the cross, so that the people may be provoked to prayer.

The sixth article.

From monastic vows.

First of all, the Catholics have requested that all monasteries that have not yet been devastated be left in their lands and territories, with their old worship and order.

Secondly, that they be allowed visitation, due obedience, and free election of prelates, peaceably, without hindrance.

Thirdly, that no one be forbidden or discouraged to enter the monasteries, either anew, or, having run away from them, to return to them.

Fourthly, that the monks may travel with their bodies and goods safely and unharmed in the country for the sake of their business, until the decision of the future Concilii.

Fifth, that those who have escaped without lawful permission shall return to the monastery, and shall not be tolerated anywhere in their territories unless they have obtained permission from the clergy and their overlords.

Sixthly, that their prelates shall not be hindered in ordinary legal proceedings against them, but in view of the quantity no other punishments shall be inflicted on them than only an imposed penance. However, those who subsequently leave the monastery without proper admission and permission shall be punished according to the content and the power of their statutes and canons, and their prelates shall be unhindered in the execution of these punishments.

Seventhly, that the unoccupied monasteries be again filled with monks and nuns, but where these could not be had, the properties and annual income shall be enjoined by decree of the next prelate of the places unchanged and undiminished, and shall be retained until the future Concilio. And the monastery properties shall not be used for the own benefit of the secular authorities, but as soon as they are reoccupied with monks and nuns, all use and pensions shall be given to them again, as before.

On the other hand, the answer from the monks.

First of all, they refer to their transferred con

fession.

On the other hand, they want to leave the monks and nuns who are still in monasteries in their principalities and territories free to go out of them or to stay in them.

Thirdly, they want the monastic people to remain quiet in their ordinary nature, dress and ceremonies.

Fourthly, they also want, as much as possible to

The government shall prevent any use of force by such persons and shall ensure that they are not overburdened or subjected to violence.

Fifthly, they want that the rent and goods of the monasteries that have been disposed of shall remain in the order and power of the secular authorities, so that the persons, preachers, parishes and schools that have been evacuated may be maintained from them until the future concilio.

The seventh article.

From church violence.

The Catholics here have generally requested that episcopal power and jurisdiction in their lands and territories remain inviolable to the bishops. However, as far as public abuses and complaints are concerned, the princes want to keep in line with the other "imperial estates" and consult with them about them, and accept what is decided in the common council. If, however, they have a claim against the archbishops, bishops or prelates on account of jurisdiction or other causes, they shall not be prejudiced by this act.

The opposite answer.

First of all, they permit that episcopal rule and authority be maintained with the bishops; but they do not approve of public abuses, that the bishops are negligent in the preaching of the divine word, in the administration of the holy sacraments, in the ordination of priests and supervision of their lives, and abuse of the ban.

On the other hand, they want to ensure that the bishops receive and maintain their due obedience; namely, that the parish priests and preachers are presented to the ordinaries in each place, and that the bishop is permitted to punish the priests who have committed criminal excess.

Thirdly, that the bishops shall retain their ecclesiastical jurisdiction in matters belonging to the ecclesiastical court. However, they shall refrain from common trespasses that do not belong to the ecclesiastical court, and the other estates shall remember this in abuses, which they are determined to maintain evenly until the future Concilio.

Fourth, that the episcopal excommunication, in matters belonging to the ecclesiastical jurisdiction, shall not be prevented, provided it is exercised in accordance with the Holy Scriptures.

All this, as it was done, was handed over to the princes and princes and the Holy Roman Empire on the 22nd day of the month of August by the decreed Catholics, and publicly read out.

1064 Remembrance and report of the previous, the papist committee, relation, how this is corrected by the protesting committee.

At Chyträus, Cölestin and Müller at the locations indicated at the previous number.

In some places of the objected relation, the whole disputations have not been told, which complains us highly and manifold, and obscures the whole trade somewhat.

In the entrance, they state that we also consent (as is desired) to Roman Imperial Majesty the King of Bavaria. Majesty. Answer, as being in conformity with the Holy Scriptures. For the sake of this article, we have publicly complained that we are not in compliance with Imperial Majesty. Majesty. We have publicly complained that we cannot conform to the Roman Emperor's answer, because we have not seen the same answer.

In the fourth article, on justification by faith, they state that it is thus compared that we are justified by faith, but not by faith alone, since this is nowhere to be found in holy Scripture, but rather the contradiction. Since we have openly contradicted, and have drawn on the sayings of Rom. 3: "without works". And to Eph. 2: "It is a gift of God, and not of works." Furthermore, after a long disputation, our opponents have conceded that the forgiveness of sins does not come through works or merit, either preceding or following. They also said that it is obtained by faith; and moreover, that it is by grace, through which we have a gracious God, per gratiam gratum facientem; they also added the sacraments.

Since they yield to this, we have said that by the word sola we exclude not grace and sacraments, but works alone. And where they would allow that forgiveness of sins comes about through faith, not for our own sake or for the sake of works and merit, we do not want to make a quarrel about the word sola. This addition has also been made to our article, that we confess that the forgiveness of sins takes place by grace, which makes us pleasing in the sight of God, and through faith in us, and through Word and Sacrament, as an instrument.

The princes of both parts can easily remember that things are getting out of hand.

Concerning the invocation of the saints, the handwriting of the Chancellor of Baden shows that both parts agree that there is no explicit command and commandment of invocation of the saints in divine holy scripture.

In the other part, about the abuses, they say that we have allowed that everyone who wants to receive the Sacrament of the Lord must confess the most noble sins he has committed. But we have never made it necessary to tell the sins. What we have admitted for the sake of confession, however, is to be seen from handed over writings.

After that, from both forms of the sacrament it is not mentioned how and in which form we have excused those who used one form. And in such brevity it is spitefully stated that we do not want to teach that those who receive the sacrament under one form do not sin.

Whoever reads this, then, may think that we approve of the One Form, and yet, either out of hatred or for other unacceptable reasons, do not want to confess it in public sermons.

We, on the other hand, have both explained to ourselves in words and writings how we have excused those who have suffered hardships of one kind or another, which can be many and varied.

With this, however, we have not approved the prohibition of the other form. Nor do we complain about teaching in this way that we excuse the church, and yet do not approve the prohibition of one form. Thus ours have always written and taught that they have excused the church, so that they do not weigh down the consciences of the blessed.

Of the celibate state of the priests.

Here the words are spitefully put: "About the gift of chastity, they are too small-minded that they do not believe that chastity can be given by God to anyone who asks for it. We, however, do not deny that God can give this gift of chastity, but have thus answered that God has presented this means and medicine which those who cannot abstain should use. For Christ himself testifies that this gift does not happen to everyone. Therefore, the one who does not have the gift of chastity, and yet does not need God's order, is tempted by God. God can preserve life without food, but in the meantime He wants us to enjoy food. Therefore, it appears publicly here that this matter has not been presented honestly and impartially.

From private show.

Concerning the private masses, one has never acted of causes why one does not approve them. Therefore, it is also unkind of them that we reject the private mass and canon without substantial reasons. We, however, have many and highly important reasons why we cannot and will not approve the private mass and a part of the Canon. However, in the confession handed over and before the committee, we have sufficiently explained that we keep the mass with high reverence, and we will keep the essential parts that belong to the Consecration. The other usual ceremonies and church dress are also used. But there is a common mass, in which some of the people, who have been heard beforehand, are given the sacrament in a Christian manner. But we reject the private mass, which is held in such a way that it earns others forgiveness of sins ex opere operato, because it is obvious that such an application is contrary to the righteousness of faith. For if the Mass, applied to this opinion, merits forgiveness of sins ex opere operato, it follows that righteousness comes not from faith but from works. Item, if now only in the mass the sacrifice for sin takes place, to what end then did the death of Christ serve, or is not the suffering and death of Christ sufficient for the payment of our sin? But we read in the epistle to the Hebrews, "With One Sacrifice He hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified." Therefore, no sacrifice that atones for sins is to be sought outside of this. Item, Christ says, "This do in remembrance of me." For this reason the sacrament is instituted, so that we may remember the benefits given to us in the New Testament, namely, the forgiveness of sins. But how can such a sacrament be useful to the dead, since the memory of Christ cannot be awakened in them by the priests? These and other considerable reasons move us not to approve the application of the Mass.

Moreover, we see how great abuses are involved. A large number of people say mass for the sake of the belly alone, even though St. Paul terribly condemns all those who abuse this sacrament. For this reason, the bishops should provide counsel for such great abuses.

And because a part of the canon contains this application of the sacrament, which publicly disputes the righteousness of faith, it is dangerous to read that part of the canon.

6. from the conversation that is morden in the geengerten committee of six from August to the end of this month by both parties.

1065: Presentation of the papal part at the meeting.

From Brück's History, p. 106, by Müller, lilr. Ill, eup. 130, p. 801, with Förstemann, Urkundenbuch, vol. II, p. 292 from the Margravial Brandenburg Acts, pp. 236-240, somewhat more detailed. We have subsequently improved this document. The same is a lecture of the chancellor of Baden.

It would be known that on their 1) part we would have been considered as separated from the church; they would like to act with the others of this part on the ways, so that such would be averted, but this could not happen otherwise, because if we were united on both sides of the doctrine, although until a concilio difference in ritibus ecclesiasticis and church customs would be kept. For if one would not confess [one part from the other], 2) that both parts would be taught rightly, then veritas fidei would fall; if one would agree on the doctrine that nnitus tiäol exists, then it should be spoken and concluded immediately with the legate, who would have authority from the pope, from a certain time and place of a concilii.

But now would be

I. For the sake of Communion

still three pieces, in which unequal faith would remain.

1) One, that it would be known in this part that the one form was not unjust; but this was still lacking, that one wanted to allow or agree that in this part it should also be taught and preached that the one form was not unjust. This would cause great concern to many, because this part would know what had been done with the Bohemians in the Concilio at Basel because of this.

2) The other point is that in this part it is not allowed to administer the Sacrament in one form. Therefore, since the administration of one form would not be wrong according to doctrine and teaching, 3) it should not be dangerous in our parishes.

1) "their" set by us according to Förstemann instead of: "unserm" in the old edition.

2) Inserted by us after Förstemann, for easier understanding.

3) "wrong" put by us instead of: "right" in the old edition.

The first step is to make it possible for the pastors and ministers to reach out in one or both of these forms to those who desire it.

3) The third point would also depend on the doctrine, for the sake of the honorableness of the Sacrament, that both sides agree not to administer the Sacrament in any place but in the church. 4) For the sake of the sick, they should be carried into the church and communicated there. However, for the sake of the sick, they should be carried into the church and communicated there; but if, because of their weakness, they had to be reported in the house, the sacrament should be brought to them, or mass should be said in the house on a portal 5) before them, and those communicated and massed who had not eaten or drunk, so that the sacrament would not be dishonored.

II. Because of the fair.

Regarding the masses, they noted that we were equal in that they should be held with honest ceremonies, but for the sake of unity of the church, it would be good and necessary that the masses, both public and private masses, as in other places, be held with inclusion of the large and small canons, because they considered that one would have no complaint on this part of the small canon, but that we would have complaint on the large canon, in what concerns oblationem pro Ecclesia, sacrificium, etc.. But they had made a good declaration in the previous committee 6) that in it, in their opinion, we would also have no complaint, but as far as the application of the Mass is concerned, that such would be referred to a concilium on both sides.

III. because of the clergy marriage

In this part, it could be considered that although the revered priests in our countries, territories, and cities were in the form of a marital status, they would still give us to consider whether they should be considered for marriage; for although it would be against Scripture to forbid marriage, it would not be against it that a priest voluntarily let himself into the priesthood, renounced the marital status, and vowed chastity. For it would be true that chastity could not be commanded, but it could well be granted without a commandment; so no one would have prevented him from accepting his priesthood, if he could not keep chastity, that he would have reserved for him the right to take a wife, but each would have kept silent, and let himself be called and accepted into the ministry according to the order of the church.

4) Supplemented by us according to Förstemann.

5) "Portatel" - Tragaltar.

6) In the Committee of Fourteen.

It is also a bad thing that our priests say that they do not have the grace of chastity; one worries that they strive little for it, because they want to feast, enjoy themselves, live well and go to dances, be in good spirits, as one can see; they do not castigate themselves and do not throw themselves into thorns, 1) they also do not have trouble with studying, and nevertheless do not have to have the opinion.

If it were true that they were also men, and not angels, it would not be so pure that one, even if he were a priest, would not have an infirmity; but it would say that the church had to punish public sins, as in other infirmities; but what was secret would not be judged. And they wanted to indicate this to this part, because it was said that one would not be guilty of having such priests who led a sinful, lewd life.

If it had been said that there were as many priests in this part of the world as it was necessary not to have the grace of chastity, it would also have to be considered against which priest wanted to say that he had the gift of abstinence, if he knew that the married state would be free for him. One would have to consider how abhorrent it would be for the greater part of Christendom and the estates, which would not have accepted such priests, nor would they have allowed them. If we were to follow the Scriptures, St. Paul would say: "A bishop shall be the husband of one wife;" and it would be more advisable to accept an heir than to admit those who entered the priesthood without marriage and then took wives. They therefore wanted to have this indicated that it should be done in the proper way, so that this discrepancy could be remedied by a concilium, because [it is not to be expected] 2) that His Majesty and the other estates should approve, confirm, approve or ratify [married priests]. They consider such priestly marriages impossible to raise. For Her Majesty and the Estates considered without any doubt that the same could not have validly contracted our priests, and that they would have to forfeit their services, income and office for a time. 3) Therefore, because Imperial Majesty Majesty would not approve the revered priests, or consider ratification of the right for nothing, whether this would be a way and could be obtained from Imperial Majesty. Majesty, that the above-mentioned ordained priests

1) Förstemann misleading: "thurn" f- Thurms.

2) For the sake of comprehension, inserted after Förstemann.

3) In Förstemann more precisely: "suspkQki are ab oKcüo et niinistsrio".

The priests who are married in the places where they are now, for the sake of peace, may be tolerated until a concilium; but in such a way that those who wish to return from the supposed marriage and regrade may do so unhindered by authorities under whom they are, and remain with their ministries and fiefs. And secondly, that the priests, who are still in the single state, without marriage, should remain unpardoned until a concilium. And thirdly, that the authorities should make an effort to get unchaste priests for the vacated parishes, who would keep themselves in chastity without annoyance.

IV. Because of the monasteries.

For the sake of the destroyed and undestroyed monasteries and monastic persons, they have indicated that the undestroyed ones should remain undisturbed in the essence in which they still are, until a concilium, but that they should be left unhindered in their worship and not be prevented from it, as happens in some places 5). And if they do not wear their monastic habit, they should continue to wear it.

Because there were also religious who were expelled or went out and asked to be allowed back in, without further punishment than a penance, because the burdens of conscience were to be considered in it.

But with the monasteries that had been removed, they considered this to be a convenient means that these monasteries, because they considered it reasonable that they should not be used for any other service than the lands in which they were located, nor [to be alienated,] 6) should be placed in the hands of the Emperor. Majesty's hands and concerns, as it should be for the sake of these things until a concilium 2c. 7)

1066 The Protestants' oral declaration at the Papists' request.

This explanation is found in Brück's Geschichte, p. 109 and from it in Müller, p. 806. That it happened orally, we see from Heller's message in Förstemann, Urkundenbuch, Vol. II, p. 298.

4) "Lehen" is set by us instead of "Beneficio" in Förstemann and "Lehren" in the old edition.

5) In Förstemann: "wie Sannt Clären vnnd Katharinen closter zu Nurmberg gesche".

6) Supplemented according to Förstemann.

7) At the end, Förstemann notes that the chancellor handed over a note about the bishops' power and the church ceremonies. In addition, the note that this note is no longer found in the acts.

They had diligently considered the other proposals and concerns, but find that all the means and indications they had made extended in principle and effect to proposals that had initially been made by their part in the previous committee of the Fourteen. Now they would have heard sufficiently at that time why such proposals from this part could not be approved or permitted in such a way and in such a different way as their inconceivable counter-proposals would entail. And because they heard in the next end of the touched committee of the fourteen, that in this part, for the sake of love and peace, up to a general, free, Christian concilium was offered in the utmost, and salva fide et doctrina furthermore they did not know how to offer it, they would therefore have provided themselves with more virtuous proposals, after this committee and such further discussion had not been initiated by this, but by their part, as Electors, Princes and Estates, and had been applied to the Elector of Saxony. For since they had intended to persist in the same opinion, they could well have spared themselves and the deputies this part of the effort, for only that the words in their proposals would have been changed, it would have been in substance the same opinion as before.

I. About the Communion.

And that one should have confessed on this part, as if one had confessed that the communion in one form was also not wrong, and only lacked in that, that we did not want to have the same preached, one would not confess, also would not want to be spoken by them, and wanted to have this stated in the notes and answer, which were handed over in the committee of the fourteen, which written handing over would also have happened for this reason, so that the opinion of this part would not be reversed; Therefore one could not teach nor preach, as if the reception of one form was also right.

Therefore, even outside of emergencies, it could not be permitted in our churches to have the Sacrament administered in one or both forms, as each would desire. Nor would any priest in office, with weight on his conscience, teach and hold that Christ instituted the Sacrament in both forms for laymen and priests, and that each one, according to such divine order and commandment, is thus bound to receive it, and yet, outside of emergencies, contrary to doctrine, he should be allowed to receive it without

The Sacrament may be administered in one or both of these forms.

It would be easy for everyone to understand how a frightening and annoying separation this would give, if such repugnant use were to be kept in the churches of this part, but one would have let it be heard in touched counterproposals, since one out of freedom desired the sacrament only in one form, that one would not prevent him from receiving it thus, where he could get it.

II. from the fair.

Concerning the keeping of the public common and angular masses, the reported committee of fourteen heard why they could not be allowed in this part, especially the angular masses, because it would be considered an opus operaturn by them, nor could they have any other sense with it. For if it were not considered a meritorious work by the sacristan, which would be a merit for him, he would not be allowed to celebrate such private masses, because the sacrament would be served to him in both forms, as he enjoyed it in the private mass, if he desired it, which would also be safer for him according to the constitution 1); Therefore, if a priest wanted to say Mass for himself, he would have to consider something more, namely, that he did not say such Mass solely for the sake of remembrance, as instituted by God, but that he wanted to perform a meritorious work to wash away his sins, but that would be contrary to the institution of Christ, also blasphemous and annoying, and therefore not to be permitted in the lands and territories of this part, as a public blasphemy. If he then also wanted to allow such his special private and angular measure to be a sacrifice for others, living and dead, that would be even more burdensome and unmistakable, after the sacrament is instituted, that the living recipients do it in remembrance of the Lord, and not that it should come to the non-receiving living or dead for merit or remission of sins. And such admission of the same private-angle fairs would work evil and sin, if they were to be established in this part of the land and territory, so that the people might be deprived of the highest treasure of divine gifts and Christian liberty, namely, that men through faith in Christ, and his suffering, death, and resurrection, might be made free from the evil of the Lord.

1) "Institution" put by us instead of "Instruction" in the old edition.

1) his merit, even without works of the law; and secondly, that he would again be withdrawn from receiving the sacrament in both forms after the institution of Christ. And not only would those sin before God and His Holy Spirit who kept the private masses against the known truth, but also those who suffered them as a public blasphemy, unabated and unpunished. And do nothing that the dispute should be postponed for the sake of application until further decision of a concilii, for that such private masses are not dedicated in God's word, but contrary to it, could not be put into doubt by this part. Therefore, if they were admitted, and if the disputation were suspended for the sake of application, it would still have the weight on it, as indicated above. For it would be a matter, as the jurists said: A protestation, or condition, which is contrary to the work and the fact, helps the Protestant nothing, works also nothing. Therefore, if the same angular masses were allowed on this part, and if it were protested that the application was not granted, but that it should be suspended until a concilium, then the act would be contrary to the protestation, and would not safeguard this part's conscience, since the same masses would have no effect or meaning on the popes themselves outside the application in question. And for this reason it is further added that since the private masses have fallen by the doctrine of the true divine institution of the sacrament in this part's lands, territories, and cities, that it should be left there until a concilium, and for this part's part such unnecessary, seductive, and careless private masses should be suspended until the said concilium; In addition, it would be known, and would not fail to be known, that the priests who were in this part of the lands and territories would hold such private masses more, for which reason it would also be a quite unnecessary disputation and delaying of affairs to argue about the admission of such private masses. And in the same way as the canon, great and small; for as much as the canon contains, on which the public and common masses have substance, would be used in the public common masses, which would be held with some Christian and good ceremonies in this part, namely the words of institution, the other would not be de substantia, as the gloss itself testifies in decrees. Therefore, let us

1) In the old edition, "an" - without. - The immediately following "his" is of the people's merit.

The other part also does not make necessary that which is not established by God's command, and therefore would not be necessary. And the more one insists on the acceptance of the Canon, the less one could do it on this part, as St. Paul did not want to have Timothy circumcised, because it was a necessary thing and wanted to insist on it, even though he had Titum circumcised out of love and for the sake of weakness. And even if it was said that it should be done for the sake of peace and more unity, it would still be quite annoying to the Christian doctrine and institution of the sacrament, as far as the application and the Canonem mysticum are concerned, and, for the sake of conscience, it would be painful and burdensome to establish, therefore it would be considered that the other part would be more obligated to be patient with this part until a concilium, rather than to accept the Canon with difficulty and uncertain conscience, as it was proposed. In addition, the Christian congregations in this part's principalities, lands, and territories would have no lack of private masses because they would fall and public masses would be held in contrast; therefore, the three deputies of this part could not consider what it would take for these masses, together with the omission of the canons, to be thoroughly performed until a concilium.

III. from the priest marriage.

As far as the marriage of priests is concerned, there is no denying that some priests, before they were ordained as priests, might have accepted the laws of the popes and bishops to keep chastity, which happened to them before the time, when they did not yet recognize the truth and freedom against such and such human statutes, whether the popes, bishops and prelates have done right and well or not in entangling the priests with laws and vows of the celibacy and to remain without marriage, since they themselves keep chastity least of all, of which in this part of the Confession, under the titles of Priestly Marriage, item, of the Bishops' Authority, there would have been a sufficient indication; and not only would we know that the popes and bishops did not have the power nor the right, according to divine Scripture, to deprive the priests of marriage, but also that a man, by vows, since he does not receive from God the grace of chastity, cannot commit himself to chastity.

2) "before" set by us instead of: "by" in the old edition.

would like to bind. If in the case of the pagans, and in their rights, the vows and obligations had the dimensions, since there was not such danger to consciences and souls, as in this case, that the pacts and vows, so disgraceful, and therefore much more sin or impossibility, were not respected, why should not rather in this case such disgrace, sin and impossibility be considered, and, disregarding such vows, the priests be allowed to marry? Thus it would also be a bad thing for priests to accept the priesthood on such vows as their prelates demanded of them, for, as indicated before, even if the priests acted imprudently in that, against their conscience, they took such vows at the time they were ordained priests, the time they were ordained priests, the popes and bishops had done much more wrong and evil, that they had charged the poor priests with the same impossible and shameful vows, against the words of Christ, that chastity was not given to all, item St. Paul, that it would be better to marry. Paul, that it is better to marry than to burn, and that everyone should have a wife for the sake of fornication, to avoid the same, and especially because they themselves found in the large parts of the priesthood how evil such vows and entangled chastity would have been in the whole world, even now in broad daylight: and yet the popes, bishops and prelates did not want to escape their constitutions, to praise God, and the poor burdened consciences of the priests [for comfort], but God's order would have to give way to their human impossible law. And for this reason, little responsibility would be required for the report that the priests of this part should strive little for chastity, for there would be little to say about their dancing or good life in this part, nor would it have been heard; and if their preachers and priests were dancing in some meetings, and were happy in goodness and honor with other people without trouble, there would be nothing to reproach them for, nor would it be against God. But how the priests of the other part, since they would have had to remain without marriage, practiced all this to fornication and noticeable annoyance, as unfortunately also still happens, and get away from the studio, that they knew nothing, nor could in the Scriptures or taught, that would be in broad daylight. Nor is it desired of them in this part that they should be angels, for they and these would be men; but that one would want to excuse their fornication, which not only takes place, but for the most part is open to the public, that would be terrible. For who would deny it?

that the greater part would not lie in public fornication, adultery, and such fornication; and whether there might still be some who could keep the saying, si non caste, tamen caute, it would nevertheless be burdensome that cause for such secret fornication would be given them by the pope, bishops, and prelates, by forbidding marriage and entangling the vows of chastity, without need and without all Christian motive. And although the church may not judge such secret sins publicly, one would still know what trouble and fear even secret fornication would cause the priests if they had to say their masses. And if they had confessed the same sins and been absolved of them, not only the openly fornicating priests, but also many who had practiced such sins secretly, would not have been found to have a right and true penitence and real remission of the same sins, but as often as they confessed, such vice would have been found again in confession, and public and secret fornicators would have remained one way after another, and would have condemned not only themselves, but also the confessors with it. For since confession is a Christian search for counsel with the priest and confessor, on account of the sins that are incumbent upon men, what Christian counsel might such confessors have given to the confessing priests? For it was enough that the sin was shown to them with the mouth, without the heart, and that absolution was also spoken in the same way with the mouth. The blind man led the blind man, and both would have fallen into the pit and damnation, as was to be feared. The popes, bishops and prelates, because of secret and public fornication, would have felt, known and seen this with themselves and also with other poor common priests, nevertheless, the priests would have been put into such danger of eternal damnation with a much-touched vow, and they would still want to keep them in it, since it could be circumvented according to God's order without any danger and sin. And whether this would be the duty of a kind mother and of the church, of which they wanted to be the heads, could be easily heard by everyone. Yes, if one were to say that the priests of this part, even if they were married, would not all keep their marriages, but by their wifing and adultery would fall into more serious sin than the unmarried priests: this would be contrary to the fact that St. Paul commands without distinction according to God's order that everyone should have his wife in order to avoid fornication. If, then, a married person should be shunned for committing the sin of fornication with another, this would be contrary to God's order.

If fornication had been worse, God's order would have had to be imposed, that it had not been wisely considered, but that it had been better that fornication had been permitted, so that no one could fall into adultery, as into a more serious sin. Thus, by the grace of God, such fornication would still have been little known by priests who were in this part adulterous; If this were the case, it would also be averted, if there were any suspicion or talk that it would not be suffered, and it would nevertheless be safer and more certain today that, according to God's order, the priests would have wives in order to avoid fornication, although one and perhaps another would fall into adultery, because they would fall and lie in fornication and adultery with great multitudes, as would be the case in the other part, and would persist in it. For if the adulterer fell once, twice or more, he would have the remedy of his wife, and could rise again from the snare; but the others would remain and persist in it for ever, which would ever be to be pitied, that for the sake of a useless human law so many men and fine people should be given into damnation. For if God had wanted to establish the priesthood without marriage, as the Scriptures indicate the contradiction, it would certainly have been assumed that He would also have given the grace of chastity to those whom He called to it. But since such a state has not been established by God, the prelates should consider that the priests do not have the power to bind themselves to chastity with vows, as if God were giving them the grace of chastity through such free vows, so that they would be entangled in what God had reserved for them through His special gracious gift against the innate carnal desires. If, however, the abominable vices of fornication and other immorality were not seen among the priesthood in this part, and that God had appointed the priests to be without marriage, one would not want to have unmarried priests gifted with true chastity by God any less than in the other part. But because it would be different, the prince, princes and cities of this part would not want to entangle the priests' consciences.

IV. From monasteries.

As far as the undischarged and discharged monasteries were concerned, it could be concealed that in the above-mentioned counter-proposals of the Committee of Fourteen so much had been indicated, and so much had been offered, that it was not possible to offer anything further; the three members of this committee also wanted to provide themselves with this part of the committee in desperation, if these same proposals

and hereditary offer, according to the taken parting, to His Imperial Majesty. Her Majesty would not be displeased with this article, except for a concilium to be based on it. And if the disposed monasteries are in the hands of Imperial Majesty. Majesty [hands] 1), the necessity requires to hear how it should be held with the administration of the same disposed monasteries, and whether the ceremonies, as fallen in the same monasteries, should also remain unestablished until a concilio or not.

V. Of the bishops' authority and church ceremonies.

And it was noted that, with respect to the other articles, concerning the obedience to the bishops and ceremonies, basically nothing new or better had been proposed by them, as deputies of the other part, than what had been done before in the Committee of Fourteen. For although the stated ways were spoken with different words, it would still be one thing in substance with the previous offer, and not other, better nor new proposals.

And if they could not be heard by other and more convenient means, they considered it a futile delay of their own and other affairs, and thought it best that the six, who had been appointed by princes, theologians and canonists to the previous committee, for the sake of the churl, princes and estates, should report their churl and prince to the committee. They have reported to the committee of this part, by virtue of the parting they have taken with each other, that the matters have also been submitted to the Emperor's Majesty for a common free vote. Majesty to a common free Christian conciliation, by virtue of previous imperial agreements, in the German nation; and if the Elector, Princes and Estates were inclined to talk about how a peaceful arrangement could be made between them and the reported conciliation, the Elector, Princes and the cities of this part would also be found quite inclined to do so.

1067. the papal otherwise crafty

Lecture.

In Brück's Geschichte, p. 118 and in Müller, p. 819. Compare Förstemann's Urkundenbuch, vol. II, p. 301; there it is reported that "Doctor Eck drove out" with this lecture.

1) Added by us after the previous number.

Because they could not compare with each other, they had orders from the Electors, Princes and Estates to tell them, the Lutherans, that they understood that Imperial Majesty was quite inclined to make a concilium. Majesty would be quite inclined to make a concilium, but in such a way that all innovations, such as those in doctrine, church customs, and also other, outside admission of the common church, would be permitted and made in the lands and territories of the princes, princes, and cities of this part, would above all have to be brought back to the previous state, and thus the common church would have to be restituted. For it was considered proper in world affairs to restitute and restore the appalled to its former state, much more would such restitution be due to the common church 2c.

1068 The Protestant's preliminary oral response to this.

In Müller I. o. p. 806.

That the Elector, 1) Princes and cities of this part knew well by the grace of the Almighty that for the sake of unity and peace it was not due to them to break Christian and good orders of the church without the common consent of the same, but since false and seductive doctrines, customs and ceremonies had been introduced into the church by the evil watch and guard of the prelates, as has been clearly indicated and proven in this part of the Articles of Confession, they would know that it is not only due to them, but that they would also be guilty before God and their conscience, at God's word, to permit Christian change therein, without any further unwarranted conclusion, 2) as the holy divine Scriptures, including the rights of the Pope himself, would have it for this part. Thus, as far as the supplementation and restitution in secular and temporal matters of defense 3) were concerned, there would be a separate difference with the matters of religion, as the aforementioned papal rights also showed; thus, it would also be unheard of that such a thing had ever been sought in former times, that a trade or possessory in matters of religion would be allowed.

1) "Der Churfürst" put by us instead of: "die Churfürsten". Edens0 again later. - "Elector, princes and cities" are the Protestants. "Churfürst, Fürsten und Stände" are the Papists. Both are mixed up in the old edition.

2) The opinion will be: without waiting for a decision on this first.

3) "Deprivation cases"-cases that have been deprived.

of faith should be made. Thus, the Elector and Princes, together with the related cities, would not provide at all for this report of theirs, as having been made by order of the Electors, Princes and Estates, 4) about the parting which the Seven of Princes and others of this part had taken with the Seven of their part, and how they had offered at their request to promote the actions of the same committee with the Electors, Princes and Estates for the best. But they wanted to report the answer to their Electoral and Royal Highnesses and their kinsmen, who would order what their graces and their needs wanted to be reported.

1069 The Lutheran part of the final declaration in the Committee of Six, delivered on Sunday after Bartholomew, August 28, 1530.

This document is found in Brück's Geschichte, p.120; in Chyträus, Bl. 273 k; in Müller, p. 821 and from the Margravial Brandenburg Acts in Förstemann's Urkundenbuch, Bd.II, p. 306. According to the latter we have improved our original. Latin at 0o6t68tinu8, tom. Ill, toi. 50 k and at 0k^tra.6U8, p. 281. Also in the collective editions: in the Wittenberg (1569), vol. IX, p. 452; in the Jena (1566), vol. V, p. 109 b; in the Altenburg, vol. V, p. 237 and in the Leipzig, vol. XX, p. 225.

(1) As you gentlemen have allowed, we have presented the action to our most gracious and gracious lords of Saxony, Brandenburg, and the rest of their kinsmen in this matter; thereupon we have been ordered to report the opinion of their kinsmen and their kinsmen in this form.

2. that their graces and they would remember how often they offered themselves, for the sake of peace and unity, to compare themselves in everything that might happen with God and conscience at this Imperial Diet. And because a committee of princes and other scholars of the Holy Scriptures and spiritual laws, fourteen persons, was assembled with the consent of both sides, the princes and other representatives of their part to the reported committee reported to them what means were proposed on both sides of the seven articles and their pending points, and what the representatives of this part gave in reply, and for the sake of peace and unity, until further notice.

4) "happened" put by us instead of: "not provided"; otherwise the "not provided at all" at the end of this sentence would be too much.

The two men offered to promote the unity of the church in a concilio, with the others of their kinsmen, with such an often told opinion that their graces and their associates had moved the matters to the utmost, and thus their graces might have judged with them, that on this part with God and conscience on the indicated means further to yield, and with their graces to raise the matter, they would have wanted to have indicated this as soon as possible to their kinsmen. They would have liked to have indicated this as soon as possible.

3. for this reason they finally admonish and request the princes and the members of the other estates to carry their reported communication and answer to the reported electors, princes and estates, and to promote the same on the basis of their given answer, together with a common Christian concilio.

After many disputations and speeches and rebuttals, the reported princes and their associates of the other estates kindly and willingly offered to submit the matter in such a way, and to apply and reapply all possible and faithful diligence with a statement of their intentions.

5 Nevertheless, and before the princes and their associates of the committee met again on both sides, the estates, which this part did not understand otherwise than that it was meant in a friendly and gracious manner, sent some of their councillors in vigilia Bartholomaei to our most gracious lord, the Elector of Saxony 2c., with the request that the estates receive a report of the said committee's action. Now their Electoral and Princely Grace, together with the other estates, would be inclined to engage in further amicable action, and, as it is noted, by a narrower committee than the previous one would have been 2c., with friendly and official request that the Elector of Saxony would move and not depart; as one knows to remember on both sides.

6. And although the Elector of Saxony wanted to get such an opinion to 1) his fellow relatives, to decide with them on it, and to let the Elector of Mainz know the answer, he offered, on the evening of the aforementioned Vigil of St. Bartholomew, Some of them, with a reason, in which the previous protection was separated from each other, and that one, according to the same parting, wanted to be sure of a reply, the said narrowed committee was dismissed: it is nevertheless, on all kinds of introduced objections and for the sake of goodwill, thus submitted to the Elector of Saxony, and the other

1) "an" is missing in Förstemann.

The following was conceded, however, without prejudice to the previous farewell, that there should never be any shortage felt by related princes and cities.

(7) Since no other means have been prescribed by you than those prescribed for such extended committee, especially for the sake of the most important articles, than those proposed in the previous committee, there would have been no need at all for this extended committee of their chur- and F. G. and their fellow-kin. and their co-relatives, in particular because it was sufficiently understood that these means had previously been considered to the utmost, 2) and it could not be found that they should be heard 3) further than was done in the previous committee.

8 And this is what we have been commanded to report to you by their sovereign and princely kinsmen and their kinsmen, that they are not to be increased, as if the lack of their sovereign and princely kinsmen and their kinsmen were. If, however, you know of other means that would be more suitable for this purpose, we have to hear them from you again, and again have to hear them from their Lord and Prince and their kinsmen. If you know of other means that would be more different for this transaction, we will hear them from you again, and then have them heard from their electors and princes and from their relatives, or, as you have also heard from us, we will talk to you about a decency that, in the meantime, would serve a common, free Christian council for peace and unity.

(9) If you do not have an order for this, or if you do not want to receive another order from princes, rulers and estates in response to this report from us, as our most gracious and gracious lords do not want to do so, we have immediately reported to their sovereign and imperial authorities what you have reported to us by order of the estates of the Council in the event that further proceedings arise, namely that their sovereign and imperial authorities do not know how to promote the same with Imperial Majesty in any other way than that all innovations should first be restored to their previous status. Maj. know no other way to promote it than that all innovations and things should first be restored to their previous state.

(10) Then we show you from the order of our lords that the estates bear knowledge, from which the doctrine embodied in the confession handed over, together with the change of some abuses of the church, is caused. If the beginning and the reason of the same are to be discussed, this can be shown with many of the written books, as well as indications and living documents, on which, however, no proper appointment is made by those whose office this was; in addition, this is shown by Pabst's Hadrian's Book.

2) Förstemann meaningless: "so before ... move".

3) Förstemann: "dorff", probably a misspelling or misprint instead of: doruff.

nus advertisement, which was presented by a legate at the Imperial Diet in Nuremberg. 1)

11 At previous imperial congresses, princes, princes and estates, especially because of the conflicting doctrines and customs, a common, free, Christian concilium, to the extent now indicated, was considered necessary, granted, and the Imperial Majesty our most gracious Lord requested it several times and finally granted it a year ago at Speier. Majesty, our most gracious Lord, has been asked for it several times, and finally, a year ago at Speier, it was graciously granted, and also a farewell was made as to the time in which it should be announced and begun.

Therefore, our most gracious and gracious Lords and their relatives will kindly and diligently provide, the Estates, as those who have taken action in this matter, will promote the same general, free, Christian Concilium to Imperial Majesty, submissively and diligently as it was previously considered good without any such measure or distinction and as it has been approved by Imperial Majesty. Maj. humbly and diligently, as it was previously considered good, granted and requested from Imperial Majesty without any such measure or difference. Majesty, and that a resolution on this matter was passed at the first Imperial Diet at Speier, as every authority is to observe in these matters until a general council is announced.

13 For this purpose, their Major and Major General and the same co-relatives have, for the sake of some change, in accordance with this part of the Confession, and what is directly or consecutively pending, appealed a year ago at Speier to the Roman K. Majesty and to the General Council. Majesty and the General Council in a legal manner; therefore, this was intended to be an official attestation against their appeal to the Church and the Federation and their fellow relatives, which was also unjustified.

14 Thus it would also be a novelty, which has not been heard before in such cases, where the matters have required a concilium due to necessity, that a concilium has been refused until the cause, for which a concilii is needed, has been removed.

(15) Even if the same could have happened here in the past, such important matters would seldom have come to a concilio.

16 For this reason, it is the gracious and obliging intention of their sovereign and imperial sovereigns and their kinsmen to you lords, who want to work diligently with the estates, where their sovereign and imperial sovereigns and the others have the right of inheritance, as their kinsmen sovereigns and their kinsmen.

1) Förstemann remarks: "in the margin is the year: 1524" - This year is wrong; it was in 1522. See Document No. 718 in the 15th volume. Hadrian died on Sept. 24, 1523.

The members of the committee, who have acted on the indicated means in the previous committee, did not want to be acceptable, that they nevertheless wanted to leave it at the previous half of the concilii and, contrary to the interposed appeal, not introduce any change by their chur- and F. G. action, which the Electors, Princes and their kinsmen of this part also want to provide kindly and humbly, and deserve such kindly, also completely humbly.

(17) If often touched estates are inclined to order you or others to speak of the above-mentioned peaceful parting in the middle of a council, so that peace and unity may be maintained and other necessary matters of the realm may be settled, of which there shall be no lack for the sake of their church and F.G. also for the sake of their kinsmen:

18 Our most gracious and gracious Lords have also offered to do so and, with the help of the Almighty, to keep to their confession without further ado, as their Lordships and their relatives hope to answer to God the Almighty and Imperial Majesty. Maj. in all submissiveness.

1070 Melanchthon's Report to Luther on What Happened in the Select Committee. August 25, 1530.

The following three numbers are found in Melanchthon's epistolak, lib. I, p. 10 8^cj.; in Ooklkbtinus, torn. Ill, lol. 56 and 63; in Oorp. Rkt., vol. II, 311,314 and 327; the first and third letters in Chyträus according to the German edition, pp. 424 and 436; according to the Latin, pp. 289 and 291.

Through Cyriacus, who will leave tomorrow, we want to write more. Some questions are sent to you, of which we quarrel with the adversaries. Such arguments put them on the right track, which are not useful for doctrine and true godliness, but only to provoke others against us. And our leniency in such matters only makes the hopeful dullards more defiant. There is no telling how they triumph. If I were present at these things for my own person, not in the prince's name, I would by no means want to suffer this defiance. Now I must tolerate everything because of the common danger to princes and subjects. Our people's minds are either quite weak or courageous at inopportune times. But I hope we do not want to do anything against the Gospel; D. Brück has truly shown himself to be a constant

and pious hero. Bucer writes to you about the Lord's Supper and wants to accept our opinion. He holds that the body of Christ is present in the bread. This is the summa. I had given him propositions, but he sent you his own propositions out of concern. I have not been able to write more. I ask you to answer as soon as possible. Farewell. Date August 25. 1)

1071 Melanchthon's Letter to Luther. August 26, 1530.

From the original in Scheurl's library, this letter is found in Jlgen's journal 1842, II, 186. The variants of the same are given in Burkhardt, p. 184. For the locations, see at the previous number.

Translated from Latin.

To D. Martin Luther, his extremely dear father.

I am sending you the picture of Emperor Charles.

1) In the 6orp. Rki. the list of the persons elected to the Select Committee of Fourteen is attached to this letter, which has already been communicated in No. 1041; thereafter the names of the six in the Select Committee, namely:

1072 Melanchthon's letter to Luther before his reply to the previous letters had arrived. August 29, 1530.

See No. 1070 in 6orp. Rec. vol. II, 327.

1. we have not yet received your concern about the counterpart's requirements, since we are most concerned about it.

The whole matter still stands on these points. They ask us to confess that neither those who administer the sacrament nor those who receive it do wrong. We have excused those who receive it, but of those who administer it we do not agree. The Concilium of Basel allowed the whole Sacrament to the Bohemians on this condition, if they confessed that one form could also be rightly given and taken. They also want to wrest this confession from us. Eck says that he insists on this because otherwise one cannot keep the common man in obedience/if we do not also free the consciences as far as one form of the sacrament is concerned. We would like to hear your concern.

3) As for the application of the masses to others, postpone them to the Concilium, so that they may show that they do not burden us with the ungodly application of the mass.

4 And yet they want us to accept the Canon, but with a convenient and Christian interpretation. I see that they deal deceitfully with us, and could easily consider what I would have to do if I were to confess for my private person alone. But since this is a common thing that affects everyone, I respect that also the voices and discretion of others are not to be rejected.

2) Burkhardt, p. 184 and the 6orp. Rek. dates this letter from August 29. Walch offers: ckis

1073 Luther's Letter to Melanchthon. July 27, 1530.

This letter is here with Walch without time determination and extremely deficient. Walch has brought a piece belonging to it 8ud No. 999 of this volume, which we have omitted there, because we give the letter here completely. Only the piece found here with Walch is found in German (without date) in the Wittenberg edition (1569), vol. IX, p. 434d; in the Jena edition (1566), vol. V, p. 147; in the Altenburg edition, vol. V, p. 277; in the Leipzig edition, vol. XX, p. 192; the Brie divided into two pieces, as with Walch, with Chyträus p. 95 and 171b. Latin without the conclusion at Lu668U8, p. 159 and at Co6l68tiQU8, tom. II, toi. 230. complete in De Wette, vol. IV, p. 102 with the date: "July 20, 1530." Burkhardt, p. 181, reports that the copy in the 606th of the Hamburg library >Voit. O. 14 (114) has as its date toria IV. po8t 4uoobi, that is, July 27, which is no doubt the correct date. Also Köstlin, Martin Luther (3), vol. II, p. 658 ud p. 233, has assumed this date. We translate after De Wette.

Newly translated from the Latin.

I am very sorry that I cannot be with you in body for this exceedingly beautiful confession of Christ. Our Staupitz said: "Whom God wants to blind, he first closes his eyes; too sharp is gladly chipped. Indeed, I do not give anything to this pretext that one could set up the mass for the sake of thanksgiving or gratitude. 1) Hezekiah broke the bronze serpent, not caring that it had been preserved in memory and praise of the work of the Lord. The godly king looked more at the certain abuse and evil occasion than at the doubtful and uncertain fruit of the praise. And since our adversaries have hitherto misused their masses for exceedingly wicked examples, and have not yet repented, they vainly demand that they be permitted to keep them. For their pretense is evident, and without all repentance, therefore also a plain lie, although, as I have written before, they seek nothing right, but seek a complete tyranny of their abomination. First they may restore the doctrine of faith and works, afterwards we can watch in regard to the ceremonies. First, let them restore the church and the ecclesiastics with their proper ministries, and let the statutes

1) Compare Document No. I005I>, which also confirms our assumed time determination.

without danger and trouble in the church.

That the contradictors collect contradictions from my books, 2) they also do that to show the glory of their wisdom. How should these asses be able to judge the contradictions of our teaching, who do not understand any part of the contradictory things? For what else can our doctrine be in the eyes of the ungodly but all contradictions, since it demands and rejects works at the same time, abolishes and restores customs at the same time, honors and punishes the authorities at the same time, asserts and denies sin at the same time? But for what do I carry water into the sea?

Beyond measure, yes, beyond measure, your godliness and innocence is made glorious and certain by this manifest insolence of Satan, that he demands that everything be restored of you, that is, that you deny God, but worship the pope, and confirm all the abominations that he has created through them by such great murder, lies and blasphemies. Here, by each one of us, a thousand bodies should be given for Christ.

Your Martin Luther.

1074 Luther's letter to Melanchthon.

See Appendix, No. 12 - Here Walch brings (with the wrong date: August 26, 1530) an excerpt from the letter that is there completely communicated. Since Walch has given incorrect locations in the table of contents, De Wette, Vol. IV, p. 145, Aum., unnecessarily racks his brains over this letter. It is dated September 15 and can be found in its entirety in De Wette, Vol. IV, p. 164.

1075 Another letter from Luther to Me lanchthon, dated August 28, 1530.

This letter is handwritten in Oo6.36n. d., toi. 114 and in Aurifaber, vol. Ill, p. 79. Printed in LuUÜ6U8, p. 201; in Schütze, vol. II, p. 164 from the Bvrnersche Sammlung in Leipzig, and in De Wette, vol. I V, p. 156. In Walch with the wrong date: Sept. 2. According to De Wette we have translated.

Newly translated from the Latin.

2) In a separate supplement to the Confutation, Joh. Faber compiled the passages from Luther's writings in which he should have contradicted himself (De Wette). See Document No. 997.

Grace and peace in Christ! My dear Philip, I answered these questions the day before yesterday. And what is this, that they presume to demand such obviously ungodly things, since they themselves did not teach so before? And this they invent now for the sake of it, so that we should not see their past ungodly things, but that by this pretence they again establish and fortify the same. In my opinion, you could do nothing more correct than to free yourselves from these coarse tendrils by saying that you want to give to God what is God's and to Caesar what is Caesar's. If, therefore, they can show that it is God's and the emperor's, let it be; if they cannot show it, say: besides God and the emperor there is no one whom you can obey, unless it be the devil, whom even they will not command to obey. What need is there that the matter should be thus divided and divided into questions? They themselves may make it clear what they are submitting, that is, they may show that it is God's or the emperor's. Why do you suffer that they play their game with you with this inconsistent shrewdness, whether you want this or that? They may say themselves whether it is God's word, and immediately they will have obtained that you want to obey the word of God. But you had better consider this, for I am perhaps all too sure of such crude intrigues, knowing that you can commit nothing there but perhaps an offense against our persons, that we are accused of being faithless and fickle people, 1) which, however, would be easily rectified by the steadfastness and truth of the matter?) But I do not want this to happen. Nevertheless, I speak thus, so that, if it should happen, one would not have to despair. For if we have escaped violence, after peace is obtained we shall escape intrigues [and lies], 3) and we shall be

1) Namely, in the case of excessive compliance. Compare Document No. 1058 toward the end.

2) Here we have adopted the reading of Sagittarius and Aurifaber.

3) A comma is to be placed after <Zoto8. This is a much disputed place. Already the old translator has rendered the sense correctly, likewise Förstemann, Urknndenbnch, vol. II, p. 77. What Seidemann in De

will easily make up for our shortcomings, for his mercy reigns over us. Act manly, and let your heart be confident, all you who hope in the Lord. But you hope because you lead his cause; how could this be done without hope? Greet all our people, and you will be well with them. From the desert on the day of St. Augustine [Aug. 28] 1530. Yours, Martin Luther.

1076 Luther's letter to Spalatin. August 28, 1530.

This letter is found handwritten in the 6oä. Isn. d., toi. 69 and in Aurifaber, vol. Ill, p. 79. Printed in 6li^tra6U8, p. 295; in Lrulüsrm, p. 204 and in De Wette, vol. IV, p. 154. According to the latter we have translated.

Grace and peace in the Lord! I have written before about these articles, 4) my dear Spalatin, which you have already sent for the second time; and, as I said, if the devil cannot be a lion, will he be a dragon?) Now you see for yourselves that our cause has to do with deceit, therefore it is not necessary that I write much about these things. For who could not easily beware of known intrigues? They seek that they may rule over faith and conscience, and by this artifice want to draw you away from the word, which I see sufficiently; but I fear nothing, for if they continue with deceit, they will fall into our ambush. For if ye hold this owl, that ye will not or have not conceded anything against the gospel, what are their plots? Truly then I will treat them very nicely, by being with mei-

Wette, Vol. VI, p. 555 f., Note 5, is not correct. Read Document No. 1059 and No. 1076 and you will not doubt the correctness of our translation. Luther goes on and on about the papists attacking first by force, then by intrigue and trickery. Whoever now wants to refer the clolo8 to the evangelical side, as the papists do, betrays a considerable lack of judgment. Whether inencZacüa is original or an interpolation has no influence on the meaning.

4) He may be referring to Concern No. 1061 (De Wette.) 5) That is, if he cannot carry out his intentions by force, he tries to do so by intrigue and deceit.

I would like to make it clear to you by the art of speech that these great defenders of the faith and the gospel have dared to demand something against the gospel from you. And nevertheless, if you also (which you will not do by Christ's grace) have evidently admitted something against the gospel, and if in such a way they had locked this eagle in a sack: 1) then, do not doubt it, Luther will come and gloriously free this eagle. As Christ lives, this will come true. Therefore, since you are already victors over violence, do not be afraid of these water bubbles of intrigue, whatever the outcome may be. Luther is free, Macedonia is perhaps also free, 2) which I would not like to see, so that in this way I can make a stand against the intrigues, and Ishmael 2) against the violence. Be strong and act manly. "There is no need for them to deal with the blind grips."

Furthermore, especially in the article in which it is requested that we should demand from the legate and the pope what they would like to allow us, I ask you to answer in some angle according to the manner of Amsdorf: "That the pope and legate would lick us in the ars. Farewell, my dear Spalatin, and excuse this frivolity, which is the extraordinary indignation I feel about these exceedingly wicked people. From the desert, on the day of St. Augustine s28. Aug.] 1530. Yours, Martin Luther.

D. Duke Henry of Brunswick's dealings with the Protestant estates over religion..

1077 Duke Henry of Brunswick's lecture to the Lutherans.

This and the following document is found in Müller, Ub. Ill, cmx. 31, p. 835 from the unnamed uutor. npoloZ. ILta.6.

1) This refers to a dream of Melanchthon: an eagle had been transformed into a cat by sorcery and locked in a sack. About this Luther came along and commanded that it be let out; and so the cat is freed. (See Seidemann in De Wette, vol. VI, p. 449 f., note 8.)

2) Philip of Hesse.

Dear sirs, it is true, and I am well aware of the matter, that I would not like to help with my person by action and war, so that your sirs, because of the use of the sacrament in both forms, or the one, and private masses, or priests' wives, and things like that, which affect the conscience, should be overdrawn, and blood should be shed; I would also not like to saddle a horse for this; but you know the manner in which your lords have subjected themselves to the monasteries and monastic estates, which they have not restored to the monks until now, on account of which the Imperial Majesty has ordered the monasteries and monastic estates to be restored to the monks. Majesty is daily approached by the monks and clergy, who have been deprived of theirs, for justice with cries and screams, so that Her Majesty has no peace from it. And since this is a just worldly matter, concerning the deprivation 3) of ecclesiastical goods, monasteries and benefices, no one would ever contradict it, since the imperial office of His Majesty would extend to helping those from whom theirs had been taken and withheld to regain it, and in this each one would be obligated out of obedience, and could not in conscience avoid helping His Imperial Majesty, since he would not be able to do so. Majesty in this, he would also have to help, and would be due to him if he were required. If, however, your lords could be guided a little in the proposed means, so that a settlement could be reached, they would undoubtedly find better ways and means with the Imperial Majesty in the matter in question, concerning the monasteries and ecclesiastical properties, through their diligence and that of others who would like to see peace in the Empire, so that, except for a concilium of monks, nuns and the like, no strife or war could be awakened in the Empire. Why, however, Imperial Majesty should be regarded as a laudable person. Majesty as a praiseworthy emperor, whose Majesty so faithfully meant things for peace and unity, did not want to be compliant in such proposals. With such a further appendix, it would not be dangerous to rely on the common crowd or people, as if one hoped to gain their support by rising up in the empire; however, if one wanted to consider it well, one could not take much comfort from the common people, because if it should lead to a revolt among the common people, it would not remain so, but this part of the danger would also have to be taken into account.

3) Deprivation - deprivation.

1078 The Lutheran response to this.

See the previous number.

For this he should have it, if all things were compared Christianly, and the truth established, but the untruth together with the abuses were stopped and reformed, and it would then be about the monasteries or monastery estates, then the things should be helped with the help of God then soon; they would like to say that for the sake of their lords and superiors. But that the princes, rulers and cities of this part, where the monasticism and nunnery together with the angle-measuring attitude partly by the next peasant revolt, and then further by many self-willed turning out, also by Christian appointment, because the same against the divine holy word, after it had attacked and severely trodden their ungodly status and seductive doctrines and customs, to speak, to blaspheme, also to make all kinds of harmful and dangerous division in the said statuses, lands, territories, cities, towns and villages: They could not do this for the sake of conscience, because the comforting doctrine that had been led among them would be contrary to it, as little as their sovereign and princely sovereigns would be in harmony with God and God's will. They also hoped that they would not be able to do this because of their conscience, since the comforting doctrine that had been led among them would be contrary to it. So they also hoped that the Imperial Majesty would do so before the end. Majesty would not request this of the estates of this part before the final decision of a general free council. For since it had often been indicated in the committees beforehand that Her Majesty and the pope were completely determined to call for a council, which was to take place in six months, and after that, for the longest time, in one year, these matters could be left to rest for a short time, based on the requests and proposals that had been made especially in the committee of the fourteen by the seven of this part of such monasteries and monastics and clergy. Thus it should also be considered whether it would be consistent with Christian love, since the same matters had been pending for several years at a general, free, Christian council decision, that the Christian estates of this part should now, against their consciences, re-establish the essence, since in what concerns the monastic life, the monastery life and the clergy, the monastery life and the clergy are not to be considered, and ceremonies, the doctrine would be disputed and not settled, or in the case of refusal, they and theirs would be complained about, since it would still have to be done for a year or a year and a half, and in a concilio, by means of divine word, the division would be settled without such complication, blood, and so on.

or otherwise could be reached for Christian peace. For the reasons now indicated, it was hoped that His Imperial Majesty, as a most gracious Emperor, would not be induced to do so. Majesty, as a most gracious Emperor, would not be moved to do so, nor would he graciously consider it, even if the authorities wanted to pursue the matter against their conscience. It would be easy for everyone to hear what danger, further development, and burden this would cause between their subjects and the monks, nuns, and other clergy who wanted to show themselves against the recognized Christian doctrine with words, improper conduct, and ceremonies. Thus, even in this part, monks and nuns would not confess that the monasteries and estates were theirs, and thus would have been or would be deprived of theirs against God. For since their supposed worship, according to which they directed and wanted to direct all their being, teaching, ceremonies and deeds to meritorious works, was against God and His holy word, even without which this monastic system would not be a divine indication or planting, no one would want to doubt that the same goods, which were meant by founders and donors for the right Christian worship, were no longer divine enjoyment or custom. Let it be said that the property, according to their own rights, is not theirs, but Christ's, and that they should rather refrain from such a search, for the sake of their consciences, than to make use of it, especially for the reasons that St. Augustine gave in the same case, and especially until it is determined in a general, free concilio with the Scriptures, whether their doctrine and monastic system, together with their seductive ceremonies, corner masses, and the like, are divine or not.

And it would nevertheless be an unchristian act and intention on the part of monks and nuns, as well as other clergy, that they should, according to the form and occasion of the matter, and beforehand, because a concilium is to be held so conducive, subject themselves to move Imperial Majesty to arduous proceedings. Majesty to take onerous measures, since it would not be possible for them to persevere with their ungodly ceremonies and worship among the peoples who have been informed of the truth before the final act of the aforementioned council, without daily worry, risk, expense and other danger. For this the aforementioned negotiators should have it, if these matters did not concern God's word, honor and conscience, but were to do with a part of their property, one does not doubt that one would have to rely on this part of Imperial Decree. Majesty. Majesty's displeasure on that account; but in this

To grant something against the conscience would concern the souls, which would have to take precedence over all other things of this world. That even for the sake of other carelessness, of which it has been said, this part should renounce the recognized truth, that would not be due to them either; for, as Christ himself said, trouble would not remain, but woe to the part that would give unjust cause for it; for this part firmly believes that their teaching is the pure gospel and God's word. Therefore, they would also know that they were commanded by God not to depart from it for the sake of any offense; and if they did so, that they were guilty before God, and that it was not otherwise due them in their consciences, and that they wanted to hold to that which was not due them, nor was it founded in Scripture, then they would have given cause to that which he had spoken of; For the pope's rights themselves said that it would be more useful to let trouble arise than that the truth should be omitted because of trouble. Thus, this part of the consolation would not be based on men, but on God, who, through His Word, has commanded His Christians to remain with the truth, regardless of all men's danger, in the face of eternal damnation. For what they were no less concerned about in the next arduous upheaval than someone from other estates would have been easy to find out, so their electors and princes, together with their relatives, would have had to take care of them. Therefore, their electors and princes, together with their relatives, should not deviate from the truth, and should entrust the remaining care to God Almighty.

E. Of the Council of Nuremberg's dissatisfaction with the previous netigion handlings, whereby he has not been able to speak well of Philipp Melanchthon in particular.

1079 The one from Nuremberg has misgivings about the Protestants' so-called unconditional and unassailable response, in which they complain that the Protestants have more than justifiably conceded to the opposite.

In the German edition of Chyträus, p. 442 and in the Latin, p. 297. In Ooklöstinus, tom. Ill, x. 81, in some pieces deviating from Chyträus.

1. an honorable councilor of Nuremberg has the writing and means, 1) so from the Christian estates because of

1) namely Document No. 1047.

The same is now most recently handed over to the papal committee at Augsburg, who have also consulted their theologians, and find that the same writing has been placed in three different ways or articles.

2. first, on the articles that have been agreed upon in the committee, pnd have so far been disputed by the least part; these now rest on himself.

(3) Secondly, concerning the articles which have hitherto been in dispute, and which have not yet been united; it is good, Christian, and reasonable that, for the sake of the same articles, we should still maintain in our part that which has been publicly preached and held to be right and divine, and which is known in the confession handed down in the same form.

4) Thirdly, the articles, for which one is partly doubtful, partly incompatible. As far as these incomparable articles are concerned, or, as the most recent list that has been handed over wants to call them, articles that are still doubtful, the same Scripture has this reputation with them, also with their knowledgeable theologians, and without doubt with other Christian persons as well, that a great deal has been left out, approved, and given into the hands of the papists, which is either harmful to the conscience, not to be preserved in Scripture, or in many ways burdensome and annoying to those who have known Christ and his Gospel up to now. And to indicate the same articles and their complications in one part in one summary:

5. Thus it is not a little inconvenient for the Christian authorities to finally commit themselves and to hand over that they should let all monks and nuns and the same monasteries remain quiet with their old nature and their old ceremonies, as they would have used them up to now; For it will follow in many places that the same monasteries will freely reestablish their old patrocinia, sermons, ungodly masses, brotherhood, funeralia, and what is much of the like, draw the simple people to themselves, seduce them, and cause such inequality with all church customs that among the common man, before with good communes, nothing else but a whole uproar will be to be expected, to say nothing of other mischiefs arising from it.

(6) Secondly, it is not good, and does not serve to cause a little confusion, that the papists should have their hitherto used doctrine admitted and confirmed in the article, as if there were three parts of repentance. For this needs no doubt; the papists hold confessionem to be their auricular confession, and satisfactionem to be satisfaction by works. Now consider each one, if to them

these two pieces should be admitted as necessary two parts of repentance, what they have gained with it, and whether the word of God and the Scriptures can always suffer this. And even if one wanted to gloss over the matter, to interpret it differently than the papists understand it, the common man will never be able to accept it, because the matter has become too clear and understandable.

Third, that no one should be given the sacrament without first hearing oral confession would not only give rise to great scruple and misunderstanding, but would also be dangerous to tie communion strictly to confession and to oblige people to do so. And what would it be otherwise than to force the consciences again to oral confession, to which no man should be compelled by force or necessity, and thus again to erect a papal prison, and to press people to the point that they must be confined to the day of communion, and thus at the pleasure of the parish priests, for a certain time.

Fourthly, the article is quite disgraceful, and also somewhat detrimental, with the fasting, eating meat, and forbidding meat. For in this way people would again be ensnared in keeping the gold fasts 1) and other days, out of compulsion and not out of their own good will, and Christian freedom, under the pretense of preserving peaceful unity and equality, would thus be hung on a nail, over which freedom one should hold no less than over another article of the faith, according to the word of Paul, before one should hold such freedom as a necessary statute, as the papists judge and desire the same in no other form.

(9) Fifthly, there is certainly no scripture from earth that can be found or from which it can be concluded that the deceased saints or the angels in heaven pray to God for us. Nor is there any mediator, intercessor, or high priest before God, as all Scripture indicates, except the one and only Christ; what use is it then, what fruit does it bear, for the Popes to thus yield to and confirm this article, which they have hitherto wanted to preserve as founded in Scripture, of which, however, Scripture gives no testimony? What abuses also with the time from

1) Gold Fasting or Happy Fasting or Soft Fasting are the fasts on the four days of Quatember.

This article would be easily considered by anyone with an understanding.

(10) Sixthly, by this writing the bishops have their spiritual jurisdiction granted and yielded much more than they could ever have suspected, or even had before. And if this few article is to stand, it would be the subtlest, most correct way to suppress and extinguish the gospel in a short time that could ever be devised. For if the ordinaries should be allowed to rule over the priests as before; item, if a priest commits a criminal offense, that the ordinaries have the power to punish him unhindered by episcopal authority; that also all priests, parish priests and preachers should be presented to the ordinaries, as this article indicates in longer content and quite generaliter, also indefinite such episcopal authority: What else will follow from this, which could also assume otherwise, than that the bishops would never allow a Christian, righteous presented pastor; or if they did allow him, they would lie to him every day with this or that self-invented excrement, cite him, kill him among ways, or otherwise act with them in such a way that none could remain; Or, what preacher would allow himself to be put there, so as to preach at a certain danger, and if the authorities would not have to protect him against the bishop, and to wait for all disaster and death and destruction? How could the authorities answer for it against God, in conscience and otherwise against their congregations? If the preachers were tributed, picked, not suffered, or driven away, where would the gospel remain in a short time, and how long would the Christian religion remain?

11 And how could the Papists offer a more subtle check to the Christian estates, than to put all the other articles, which are incomparable, until a future concilio, and to accept this one article of episcopal jurisdiction? For in this way they would have obtained this way, and such a register, that they would soon master the Gospel, and the same preacher and pastor. That they would not then be able to defend themselves against Imperial Majesty, the Empire, or the Bishops. The people of the city are not to be held accountable by right, by grace or by reason to the imperial majesty, to the empire or to the confederate states.

12. and in sum, these complaints and detrimental deficiencies would like to be drawn in more articles, and in more places, from the above-mentioned inventory: and where one can find the an-

If we were to take it, it would actually make us much more angry and anxious; it would confirm a large part of the papal abuses, blaspheme the gospel, accuse the Christian estates of being revocateurs, act too close to the Scriptures in many ways, and cause one mischief to another.

(13) And though for the sake of Christian, temporal peace one should yield, suffer, and tolerate much, yet one should not thereby cause strife of heart and conscience; for it is a harmful peace, and not a good peace, which is sought and maintained with detriment to souls, consciences, and injury to God's honor. So, as Paul says, one should not do evil with knowledge, so that good may come of it. And even if the matter should appear to be one of total discord, one should not act contrary to God, His word or conscience, but should proceed in a just and Christian manner, and command the care of peace or discord to God; otherwise it would be to put the gospel behind the door for the sake of temporal peace or escape from the cross. And should these articles be so accepted, and Luther, as well as other preachers, as can be seen, preach, teach and write against them, as every Christian preacher would not want to avoid such things for the sake of his conscience, and will not remain without doubt, then everyone should consider what unity and peace, which one would have thought to seek and maintain by yielding, would always result from this.

(14) And it actually gives many people great cause for thought that the foremost of the Christian estates have shown themselves to be so brave and courageous in the face of Imperial Majesty's and the imperial estates' serious opposition. Majesty and the imperial estates have shown themselves to be so Christian, brave, and prudent, and also quite steadfast, in the face of serious persuasion, and should now go so far in the amicable negotiation, which alone is the friendliest, and without all seriousness or fear of future danger.

(15) And although this list is presented in such a way that it can be applied to our part in many articles, then here, then there, it would certainly not be understood by the majority, even by most people, because even the Christian states themselves cannot draw such a clear understanding of the Gospel part from it.

16. Moreover, that it is not good in such important high matters, concerning God's honor, order, institution, and the salvation of all men, to be so pusillanimous and unfaithful; but it is

It is necessary to act in such a way that public, disputatious, doubtful reason may not be drawn from it.

17. Now, one or more of these means are used, they are also rejected by the opposite party, or not, but, as a reasonable person will never judge otherwise, they are so completely bare that not a little displeasure, suspicion and annoyance arise from it for the Christian states among friends and enemies, and would actually be a great cause for the Popes to take a noticeable strengthening of all their abuses from it, and first of all to boast of great overcoming; As Cochleus has already publicly written about himself in this city, and has become highly famous for many excellent indulgences on our part.

18) But how to act in this matter now, since the list is out and handed over for the most part, that is doubtful; but according to the state of affairs, this way is considered to be the best: that E. E. Rath's envoy to our most gracious lord, the Elector of Saxony 2c., and Margrave Georgen that they had sent the list by mail to their lords and friends, who wrote to them that not only they, but also their theologians, with whom they had secretly consulted, had all kinds of complaints about some of the means and articles contained therein. Where these had been sent to them before they were handed over to the committee, they wanted to express to their electoral and princely authorities their deficiencies. They would have reported their deficiencies and complaints to their electors and princes out of necessity.

(19) The council also considers the committee's negotiations, disputes, surrenders, and the like to be completely inalienable and unallied, in such a way that without the prior express consent of both parties, they cannot be considered strong, permanent, or compatible, otherwise it would be detrimental, burdensome, and dishonest in many ways for the Christian estates, according to the council's concerns, and also annoying for the opposing party.

20 Because this would be a superior, important, and such a case, in which not only the welfare and salvation of the Christian states but also of many people would be at stake, it would therefore be necessary to consider these matters with great diligence, so that nothing would be accepted, approved, or permitted that would be contrary to human conscience and souls, would also serve to confirm the old abuses, and would be more conducive to further deepening and discord than to Christian harmony:

21 Thus, an honorable council would like to ask their electoral and princely representatives for a ruling. Gn. to graciously submit this transaction and what has occurred between the members of the committee to Doctor Martin Luther, as the one through whom God Almighty would have most recently preached and established His Gospel in the most pious manner, and to submit the matter to him as an understanding theologian, so that this transaction may also concern him most and above all others, as an understanding theologian, whom this trade also concerns to the highest and above others, so that on the part of the Christian estates the more securely would be walked and nothing would be approved and accepted, which would be detrimental and injurious to the word of God, as, without doubt, their churlish and princely sovereigns, as Christian sovereigns, would do. As Christian princes, their sovereigns would be inclined to do without it.

22 For if, behind Doctor Luther, and unknowingly to him, something final and conclusive were to be done and approved in this transaction, which is not strictly founded in Scripture, or at least doubtful, it would be to be feared that said Luther would not remain silent afterwards, but would write and preach against it; other preachers would probably do the same. To what extent this would lead to proliferation, disparity and inconsistency, they, the envoys, have to consider in their chur- and F. G.. And so then an honorable council, their friends, and other Christian estates, on their chur- and F. G., as the foremost and highest estates, have hitherto had their regard in this transaction, they provide themselves entirely that their chur- and F. G. will not take note of this request of a council out of disfavor, but out of mere necessity of conscience, and in the end of this trade, not less than in the beginning and so far, show themselves so Christian and gracious, that the widow would not like to take note of it in any other way than a constant mind of all Christian estates and co-relatives of this trade; that is what a council wanted to deserve.

23. And although it may be burdensome to go back again in the most recent means listed, because they have been handed over to the Widertheil in writing, and may be considered approved by the same, the greatness of the trade, also the burden of conscience, is to be considered here, and by no means to reproach with God's word, and therefore not to advise a council, or other fellow relatives of this part, that they still approve such means at this time; but, if the counterpart from the submitted list ever wants to insist on finally granting it, and that for the sake of the Christian estates to consider it accepted and permitted, that then

On the other hand, the Papists would have their intention purified by the fact that this amicable negotiation of the committee by the deputies would be completely non-aligned and inaccessible to all parts, and would not be within the power of the same deputies; as then the Widertheil itself would be known for and for accepting anything in this without special prior approval of the Imperial Majesty and all other imperial states on both sides as principal approval; that also the proposed means would not be presented to any other opinion and would be presented as means, because as far as in the other articles of the constitution, the proposed means would not be in the power of the deputies. Maj. and all other imperial estates on both sides, as the principal consent; that also the proposed means would not be presented to any other opinion and would be presented as means, as far as in the other articles all, which one still disputes and does not agree on, a fair equality would be found beforehand, and the same would be admitted and accepted by the other part according to the confession handed over by the Christian estates. For without this, this most recent list, as reported, would be inapplicable and not to be considered approved in any part.

1080: Osiander's defense against the articles presented by the Roman Catholics.

This writing is found in Oo6l68tinu8, tom. Ill, toi. Osiander was the first Lutheran preacher in Nuremberg and attended the Diet. He was ordered by the council to write this apologia against the Papal Articles.

Translated into German by Ll. A. Tittel.

First, because the popes also accept the orthodox and Christian articles, against which there is no objection, only in so far as they are confirmed and proved by the testimonies of Scripture or of the fathers and conciliar conclusions, and even often add that the church has accepted and confirmed them, it is easy to see that they are using them to deceive us, as if all the articles were neither valid nor to be accepted if they were not confirmed and accepted by the church's prestige. And of course they are forced to act in this way, since in the disputed articles they have no other recourse than the church's statutes and reputation. Therefore, this article must be refuted and overthrown with sound reasons, which may be done in the following manner:-

2. the church has its origin and origin to thank to the word of God, as John I says: "He has given power to become children of God to those who believe in his name". 1 Cor. 4: "I have begotten you through the gospel in Christ JEsu." Jac. I: "He hath begotten us according to his will by the word of truth, that we should be the firstfruits of his creatures." Thus the church is placed under the Word,

and the word must judge the church, and not the church the word. Christ also compares the word to a net and the church to fish. Now it is not possible for the fish to have power over the net, to know about it or to do anything with it, since they are caught and kept by it.

3 So also Christ says John 5: "You sent to John, and he testified of the truth; but I receive no testimony from man. So our faith must not be based on the testimony of men, but on the word of God. And the church does not bear witness to the word of God, as if its truth and certainty were based on its testimony and thereby revealed, but when it bears witness to God and his word, it confesses and shows that it accepts it, and thus gives others cause to hold such divine testimonies in honor.

4 Christ says, "My sheep hear my voice." So the Christian church does not bind consciences to keep and observe anything in fact, but hears Christ alone, and keeps what he gives, but avoids and flees what he forbids; and what he leaves free, it imposes on no one, but lets it be free, according to the freedom that Christ has made it free. Gal. 5.

5 We also believe in a Catholic Church; therefore, we do not see or know it.

(6) If, therefore, the church were free to raise and choose articles which must necessarily be obeyed and believed, who could know what and where the church would be?

7 Paul also rejects and denies such teachings and commandments of the church Gal. 1: "If an angel from heaven preaches any other gospel to you than the one we preached to you, let him be accursed."

(8) So he says how he and other apostles are to be called and what they are to be regarded as. If then the apostles may not be heard preaching and preaching another gospel, much less may the church itself be heard; although the church does not realize and understand this, but the people who are falsely understood under the appearance and name of the church.

(9) From all this it can be shown that the church does not bind people's consciences to any articles or commandments, and that if it does so, no one is bound by such commandments.

From Original Sin.

10) Secondly, one can clearly see their willfulness, since they also maliciously falsify other articles, and more their evil intentions and

They do not seek to amuse themselves with their own emotions, but to remedy disputes and quarrels, thereby acting contrary to the truth and their own doctrine. For when we say and teach that original sin awakens and causes evil lusts and inclinations, that we have no true fear and faith, they say, on the other hand, that these are real sins, if one does not trust and believe God and His word.

(11) Then they teach and assert that original sin is a defect and deficiency of original righteousness. Original righteousness is nothing else than what is called righteousness in our time, namely, the righteousness of faith, preceded by the fear of the Lord (for "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom"), and followed by the slaying of evil affections or desires. Therefore, the lack of hereditary righteousness is rightly stated and described in these three pieces, namely, that one is without fear and trust of God, has no faith, lives in carnal security, and feels evil desire (or lust). Which they should know from Augustino, who in the 2nd book de peccato, meritis et remissione (of sin, merits and forgiveness) says: "Original righteousness is to obey God and to be without lust (or evil desires). But obeying God is nothing other than fearing God and trusting Him, because God's word either gives or gives away.

(12) It must also be remembered that there is no other difference between original and real sin than when original sin breaks out into action. For Paul calls both sin par excellence, and the difference has sprung only from the pointed questions and disputes of some enthusiasts and heretics. And as in unslaked lime there is a silent and hidden fire, which is revealed by the addition of water and falls into the senses, and yet is the very fire that was in it: so original sin is dead, and so long hidden, until it is revealed by the law, is kindled, and breaks out into action; so that original sin becomes real sin, which is nevertheless one and the same with the former.

(13) The error must also be punished, since they falsely teach that original sin is not only forgiven by baptism, but also completely taken away, since everyone feels the root and tinder (irritation) of it until death. (Rom. 6.)

14 So they do not know what original sin is. For what is left of the sin after baptism, they do not want to understand of original sin.

Thirdly, in the 4th article, their wrong opinion must be countered with the saying Rom. 11:6.

If it is of grace, it is not of works, for then grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is not of grace," for then works would no longer be works. And Eph. 2: "By grace you have been saved through faith, and the same not of yourselves. It is the gift of God, not of works, that no one should boast."

16 The saying 2 Tim. 4 ("Henceforth is to me" 2c.) does nothing to prove the merit of works, as everyone can easily see.

(17) In other sayings, where something is said about merit, it can be said that the words reward and recompense do not refer to any prior merit. For what God does or bestows out of pure grace, we can never earn by works; and if he promises something before the deeds are done, he is bound to keep and perform it, not out of merit, but out of necessity of the promise. Therefore, the Scriptures call it in a fancy way an obligation (or duty); and in this way one must understand all sayings about wages, which God also promises us in the Old Testament because of good works, namely because of the saying: "We are useless servants", which does not allow wages because of merit, but because of obligation and obligation.

18 Similarly, the Old Testament promises the reward of works, with the condition: "If you will keep my commandments, I will be your God, and give you all good things," that is, give the reward. The New Testament says (because the old one no one could keep, nor earn the reward, but all became unfit and lacked the glory): I will forgive sins by grace through Christ and be your God. Which is just as much as: if you believe, not only shall your sins be forgiven you because of the transgression of the law, but also the reward promised in the Old Testament shall be richly bestowed upon you; that is, in the Old Testament it could rightly have been called reward, if only we had rendered due obedience to the law. But in the New Testament it is called a reward because of the promised good. For the very goods are handed over, which were promised to us as wages, but are gifts (or gifts) for us. For we deserve nothing, as the similitude of the vineyard shows, where he who has labored all day in it is punished, or receives a rebuke. This saying has nothing at all to do with the New Testament, but goes to the Old Testament and belongs to it, like all others that deal with hired labor and wages.

019 It must also be remembered that there is a difference between some sayings. For this, "He will give to each according to his works," is distinct from that, if it were said, "He will give to each for or because of works;" for a cloth also is done according to the cubit, or according to the same, but not because of or for the cubit. And even if the reward were so much reward, there is no merit in it.

Fourth, enough has already been said about the 5th and 6th articles. It is only necessary to note this, in my opinion, that in explaining the saying: "We are useless servants," one does not look at the word "useless," but at the debt, or what we have owed; since no reward is due for what is done out of debt and necessity (or compulsion).

(21) But if a reward is still offered, it is a sign of freedom, namely, that if the work 1) is not equal to and in accordance with the reward, one is still free to reject and do away with both, namely, both the reward and the work (that is, not to reward the work as reprehensible).

22 For this is what Christ means when he says: "If you have kept all the commandments of God, you have not paid the debt, because he created you, sustains you, feeds you and protects you. He has already done you more good than you are worth. Your wickedness is so great, and your merits so bad and nothing, that all the good you have already enjoyed is already lost, let alone that he would still owe you more.

Fifthly, in answer to the seventh article, "church" is a common word, by which is signified every assembly and congregation that needs some special doctrine and commandments, and which is taken in Scripture in three ways. First, for the congregation of the wicked, as Ps. 26:5 says, "I hate the congregation of evildoers." Secondly, for the holy, catholic and orthodox church, of which the articles of our Christian faith give notice, which is united, which includes in itself the elect and the pious, both living and dead; for otherwise there would be more churches. It must also be holy, therefore all the ungodly, or those who do not want to repent, are excluded from it. It must also be believed, therefore it cannot be seen or pointed at with fingers. Third, it means an outward and visible cluster or assembly of some Christians and godly people.

1) xi'LkWium meroedi rsspontZsrs is wrong, it must be instead of xraerninrn: oxns. (Walch.)

The first is that of the blessed people, among whom are often mixed many wicked ones; which visible heaps are as many assemblies as there are parish churches and public buildings. This kind of speech is very different from the previous one, and cannot or must not be mixed or confused with it, which is what the popes try to do in every way. For of the former it is said: "I believe a holy" 2c., that is, it must be only one. But of this one it says: many churches, 1 Cor. 14: "As it is fitting in all churches. 2 Cor. 11: "That I may take care of all the churches" (churches). The former must be believed according to the words of the Creed; the latter must be known and seen, as it is written, "If thy brother sin against thee, tell it the church" (congregation). In the latter, all are holy; but in the latter, not in the same way.

(24) The popes would gladly confound and confound the second and third meanings, seeing that the propositions and reasons of proof that the church, having the Holy Spirit, cannot err, 2c. and likewise that apart from her no one can be saved, 2c. are to be understood and interpreted by the other kind of church. But when they say, This is what the church teaches, this is what she has accepted and acknowledged to be true, they also know that this is to be understood from the third kind of church, which can err and be lacking. These same sayings are sometimes understood of the first kind, of which Paul says that they will adhere to the doctrine of devils.

(25) These parables clearly show how the angels gather and build up the other kind of church from the third, and that some wise virgins who are in the third belong to the other.

26 Sixth, that they have said in the 10th article, if it be otherwise, that the body of Christ cannot be without the blood, and the blood without the body, must be utterly rejected and destroyed, because their drivel and poems are wholly and manifestly at variance with the first article of our Christian faith, which teaches and confesses an Almighty God.

Because God is almighty, He can give us the body without blood and the blood without the body, so that Christ may still be alive and the essence of His body and blood may be unharmed.

For the other, they confirm Zwingli's and Carlstadt's error. For if the body and blood of Christ cannot be specially given to us in the Lord's Supper, much less can they be in different places at the same time and at once, for it is more contrary to nature to be in different places at the same time and at once than that his body and blood, each specially, should be given to us.

(29) And though there be no body without blood, yet it doth not follow that they are at liberty and permitted to institute any new thing in the church apart from and contrary to the commandment of Christ, as was said in the first article. For although Christ, when he instituted Holy Communion, well knew how it should be with his body and blood, yet he established and confirmed this sacrament which he instituted. Therefore, one can also say here that the disruption or destruction of this order instituted by God cannot come from faith, and therefore must be sin, Rom. 4, because no one can believe that this is not against God's command.

Seventhly, also in the 11th article, like all other statutes of men, so also the Canon of both sexes 2c. can be easily rejected and refuted, because they have neither proven so far, nor will they be able to prove and demonstrate in the future, that it is founded in Scripture.

Eighthly, enough has already been said and done about the 12th article, and so they must be asked: which part is making a futile effort and spoiling the time?

32 Similarly, in the thirteenth article, we hold of the same points, that we believe what we ought to believe, and that all is but a dispute of words. For they call a sacrament a visible sign of invisible grace. If by sacraments they understand only those signs that communicate and present to the one who uses them what is written in God's Word, then there will be only two sacraments, namely baptism and the Lord's Supper.

(33) But if they also understand other signs, which are only signs, and yet give or present nothing, then the sacraments will be more than a thousand, let alone seven; and even the ancient popes did not count more than six of them, so in this case one can easily answer.

34. in the 14th article one can thus answer the adversaries: that the faithful ministers of the Word and of the Church are not called and chosen by the spiritual or ecclesiastical authorities, but by God Himself, in that Christ says: "Ask the Lord to send laborers into His harvest."

(35) Now if they are called by God, as Paul says, it is good; but if he will have it done by men, as mediators, the power of election is with the church, as it is written, "Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. And do the church authorities not use the

The church shall appoint or confirm pastors and church servants, as far as they have to deal with them because of one part, namely income.

(36) To the twenty-first article we may reply that the Scriptures speak not of dead saints but of living saints, and that the opinions of invoking the dead cannot be proved and demonstrated by any sayings of the Scriptures.

(37) What is objected to Cyprian may be refuted in the same way that Augustine refutes the grammarian Cresconium L. 2. c. 72; and even if it were certain that the saints pray to God for us, it would not follow that they must be invoked. For Paul says that there is only One Mediator; but they, according to their well-known impudence and boldness, teach the opposite, and thus bring many mediators into the way.

Of both shape.

(38) Of the two forms of the sacrament, it must not be conceded that the breaking of bread signifies the Holy Communion. For the story of Eli's sons, who lost the priesthood because of fornication and other shameful lives, means nothing more than this: It will happen that also our priests, because of their shameful life in the celibate state, will be expelled from the church and deposed from office, but others, who live piously and chastely, will be promoted in their place, who, according to Christ's word and institution, will distribute both forms of the sacrament to all pious and Christian souls; and that, on the other hand, the impure priests will be condemned to only one form, to perpetual remembrance of the unholy state outside of marriage. Apart from this, nothing else follows from this erroneous opinion and belief of theirs, if anything is to follow or be concluded from it.

39. it is also not necessary to take up and keep the host (or wafer), since the priest has daily power to consecrate (or bless), as can be seen from decret. de consecratione, dist. 25. relatum.

From the priestly marriage.

40 That they condemn and forbid priestly marriage as unclean is clear, because they have no reasons to excuse and defend their deed; therefore one must oppose them with the chapter: "The Spirit says clearly" 2c., and: "Be fruitful and multiply" 2c. It is a creation, not a commandment, for which reason it penetrates more sharply.

From the fair.

41 The popes have nothing to defend the mass; but in this they are quite ridiculous and tasteless, that they interpret the words "to do" and "to sacrifice" to mean the same thing, and that in all three languages. The sacrifices that are slaughtered are hewn from one another and prepared in a different way before the sacrifice, so the word "to do" may well apply; but therefore to do and to sacrifice is not one as much as the other. But if this were so, it follows that the apostles did not keep the Lord's Supper properly, for it is evident that they did not sacrifice, since Christ says, "This do," and not, "I will do.

Likewise, if Christ distributed one figure at Emmaus, and it is a sacrifice, how can they be so insolent as to forbid in decrees to act only one figure?

From monastic vows.

43 They have not been able to present anything worthwhile about the monastic vows either. The king of Arragon serves as an example that it is not divine right to keep the monastic vows, because otherwise no one could remit or absolve anything from them.

44 Likewise (the word): "Not all grasp this" 2c. (And even if all their grimaces and poems were left in their place, it is more than too well known to all how the monks and nuns have lived and still live, and what vices of unchastity are going on among them.

(45) The spiritual power and jurisdiction consists in preaching, the right administration of the sacraments, binding and loosing, and in the punishment of obvious and reprehensible misdeeds by excommunication; for otherwise they cannot soften any other judicial power from the Scriptures; but such no one will want to take away and withdraw from them.

Finally, since Her Imperial Majesty not only considers this unfounded answer to be something certain and founded in holy scripture, but also refuses to hear others, the most advisable thing seems to be to bring to Her Imperial Majesty's mind most earnestly and diligently that it is not for them to order or command anything in this matter. For it is written: "Pray to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's." To show clearly that the church has its own affairs and business, in which imperial majesty does not rule or speak and command at his own discretion.

1478 Erl. 54, IS3. Cap. 13: The Imperial Diet at Augsburg in 1530, W. XVI, 1786-1788. 1479.

can. And no one will deny that this matter is of such a nature; just as the emperor himself has confessed the same in various letters. And even if he had some power in this matter, which was his by right, he would not have to compel by force, but would have to convict us with God's word; which Philip Melanchthon will be able to explain and elaborate more from the 14th chapter to the Romans, just as we have also, since we were together, often and extensively talked about it, and also at the recent Imperial Diet at Speier acted long and broadly on this matter.

1081 Luther's letter to the city clerk of Nuremberg, Lazarus Spengler. August 28, 1530.

This letter is found in German in the Wittenberg edition (1569), vol. IX, p. 433; in the Jena (1566) vol. V, p. 139; in the Eisleben, vol. II, p. 18; in the Altenburg, vol. V, p. 268; in the Leipziger, vol. XX, p. 183; in the Erlanger, vol. 54, p. 193; in De Wette, vol. IV, p. 158; in Hausdorf, Leben Spenglers, p. 57 and in Chyträus, p. 172 b. Latin in Coolostiuus, tona. Ill, toi. 62 b and in Buddeus, x>. 199.

Grace and peace! Honorable, prudent sir and friend, I have heard from your writing how heartily you are moved that ours in Augsburg have gone a bit too far. But I have already written about it once, and now I am writing again, hoping that it will not be necessary. For even if Christ were to be a little weak, he is not therefore cast from the throne.

I have commanded the matter to God, and I also respect that I have kept it so finely in my hand that no man will forgive me anything in it, nor can I neglect it, as long as Christ and I remain one. For if anything should be left too much (as I do not fail), well, the cause is not lost, but a new war is begun, that our adversaries may be fully persuaded how honestly they have acted. For one will not be able to let up anything except and above the gospel, which part insidiae keep the field. For there are other insidiae in the reservation of the gospel, for the adversaries now and then can reproach us; Hum guiä 68t supientia bomiiiis eoatru Osiim?

[Therefore let your heart be satisfied; we will not yield anything against the gospel. But if ours yield a little against the gospel, the devil shall enter that part; this you shall see. The Augustini [Aug. 28] Anno 1530.

Martinus Luther, D.

Luther's letter to Justus Jonas of Sept. 20, 1530, in which he writes that he is not at all satisfied with the means of composition.

This letter is found handwritten in 6od. den. b., toi. 126 and in Aurifaber, vol. ill, p. 98. According to the Jena manuscript in Buddeus, p. 206; in des Flacius lateinischer Briefsammlung; in Coelestiuus, toin. Ill, col. 88 and in De Wette, vol. IV, p. 169. German in the Wittenberg edition (1569), vol. IX, p. 433b; in.the Jena edition (1566), vol. V, p. 146; in the Altenburg, vol. V, p. 276 and in the Leipzig, vol. XX, p. 195. German in Chyträus, p. 453 and Latin, x. 311.

Newly translated from the Latin.

Grace and peace! From your last letters I have understood, my dear Jonas, that you have not consented to what has been demanded by the adversaries, and have heard this with joy, and expect daily that you will return, whether as cursed [by the papists] or blessed. But behold, in the meantime thunder and lightning have come to me from some of our people, great and many, that you have betrayed things, and for the sake of peace would concede more. On the other hand I say: I know that it has been written by ours that the means (conditiones) proposed by the adversaries have been rejected, and that the matter has been brought anew before the emperor. On this I stand, I believe. But since they so constantly and persistently insisted and cried out that even Luther would be attracted to you, who would allow you all such things, and that more danger threatened the cause from you than from the adversaries, and it was a greater task to restrain you among yourselves than to act against the enemies: so they drove me to these words:

1) Instead of Ollinia in De Wette we have assumed oausain with Flacius and Buddeus.

"If it is so, then the devil has made a pretty separation among ourselves." For I cannot suffer the conditions which you have titled with the very lovely word: "Inexhaustible, indestructible means", even if an angel from heaven urges and commands them. For how do the adversaries deal otherwise than that they do not want to yield to us even a hair's breadth, but that we should not only admit the canon, the masses, the one form, the celibate state, and the hitherto customary jurisdiction, but also confess that they have taught rightly, killed rightly, and done everything rightly, and have hitherto been falsely accused by us. That is, they have justified themselves by our own testimony, but want to condemn us, which is not merely a recantation, but curse ourselves twice and thrice, and bless them. But what shall I longer speak to you of these things? as if you yourselves did not see these exceedingly shameful outrages and the insolence of those people, which is so atrocious that it should not at any time be consigned to oblivion. And what would be the need of so many means if we wanted to do so? Let us give them only the Canon, let us give them only the Anglican Mass: either of these will be enough to deny our current doctrine, and to set up that of those people. Then, if the bishops are given the former jurisdiction, everything is still more fully conceded; of course, while they remain enemies of the Gospel, they will tolerate preachers of the Gospel! But that this should be written by me, I am compelled to do so, as I have said, by the impetuous and vehement letters of ours; it shall only serve as a testimony to me that I have written to you. For you know that I indicated beforehand how far, in my opinion, jurisdiction could be granted to the bishops, and reminded you sufficiently that you should not give more than you had 1) and to the prince himself I answered at that time extensively and in particular; but I tell fairy tales to the deaf. Therefore, my dear Jonas, tell me whether more has happened in the meantime, which I would not like to see.

1) See documents No. 1058 and 1062.

For I do not see what harm can come from what has been done so far since the last letters, since the matter has again been referred back to the emperor. But see to it that you do not do anything that might cause division among ourselves. Peace may be as great in our eyes as it can be, but the author of peace and the arbiter of wars is greater than peace and more to be revered than peace. And it is not for us to suppose future wars; it is for us simply to believe and confess. I am not writing this because I suspect that you will concede something, but the almost frightening vehemence of the letters with which ours have castigated me compels me to fear even where everything is exceedingly certain. Henceforth, I too will not yield a hair's breadth to the adversaries, since I see how these extremely hopeful and evil people play their game with us and mock us, puffed up and secure by our weakness. And I truly know Eck's character, which is not created by art but by nature in such a way that he tends to lead those who act with him away from the point in dispute and the matter at hand until he lures them into some snare against the cause. But enough of this.

I am almost bursting with anger and indignation. But I ask that you stop the action and refrain from dealing with them and return. They have the confession, they have the gospel. If they want to, let them; if they do not want to, let them go to their place. "If there be war, let it be war; we have asked and done enough." The Lord has prepared them for sacrifice, that he may reward them according to their works. But he will save us, his people, even from the destruction of Babylon. Forgive me, I pray thee, my dear Jonas, that I have poured into thy bosom this burden of my heart. But what I write to you, I write to all. May the Lord Jesus bring you back healthy and strong, and may he make you happy, amen. From the desert, September 20, 1530.

Your Martin Luther.

1083: Hieronymus Baumgärtner's letter to Lazarus Spengler. Sept. 13, 1530.

From the original printed in Joh. Friedr. Mayers älksertat. äs lenitats kick!.. LIelnnektkonis, p. 40, from it (without the conclusion) in Salig's Hist. der Augsb. Conf., lib. II, 6Up. 8, p. 321.

To the honorable, wise Lazarus Spengler, town clerk at Nuremberg.

My kind willing service before. Dear Mr. Clerk of the Council! I cannot refrain from telling you in good faith what I consider the action of this Diet to be, as much as it affects faith. God grant that I may not be found a true prophet in this. And first of all, from all the actions that have taken place before, it is not known to you what has happened so far to our part, now through this devil and then through another devil, who disguise themselves in a good form, even at times in the form of angels of light, and transform themselves. Although the devil has never obtained his will, nor has the means proposed by our part ever been publicly accepted, we still find so much that at present the opinion is to bring such means into the parting for granted; and although this does not happen, they have never done any action in vain, but have always wrung something from us, which we have granted to yield. They keep such concessions for themselves, and will use them one day when it is most inconvenient for us. God, however, has decreed by grace that the confession be issued and handed over once, otherwise our theologians would have long since confessed another, as they would gladly do if they were followed, even though they are unequal to each other. Philip has become more childish than a child. Brentius is not only clumsy, but also coarse and rough. Heller 1) is full of fear; and these three have made the pious margrave quite mad and fainthearted, persuading him what they want, although I realize that he would gladly do right. The pious Vogler 2) must have a lot of people talk about him in his absence, as: if he were still here, so many good and peaceful things would not have been done so far. The Elector has no one who understands this trade, except the one Doctor Bridges; however, he has been brought to the point that he now also acts with worries, since he has no support from anyone. For the other Saxon theologians are not allowed to speak publicly against Philip, since he is the one who has the

1) "Heller" is the Margravial Brandenburg Chancellor. 2) Georg Vogler, Chancellor at Onolzbach.

He stretched his head in such a way that he recently said to the chancellor of Lüneburg: "Whoever may say that the next means handed over are not Christian is lying as a villain. To which he was answered: Whoever says the contradiction 3) 2c. And besides, one does not cease to denigrate in many ways those who show themselves Christian and brave in this, as then the Hessians, who have kept themselves quite well and honorably in this, publicly complain before us; worry that it will be kept with us in the same way. In sum, if we do not soon receive a harsh, ungracious farewell from Kais. Majesty, we would not be let go until we were brought into the fish traps, so that we would forfeit God's grace and not attain the emperor's. For the being has so far steadily granted: as often the princes with each other, so one comes to the Churfürst ridden, tells him how he means the thing faithfully and well 2c. He has understood this or that from the emperor, and if one escaped alone in this or that piece 2c., the matter could still be helped. Soon Philip is there, puts articles, glosses the 2c., which is then carried by Heller and Brenzen also into the margrave; if one then requires us to it and we do not let ourselves taste the pre-cooked porridge well, then it is of an unwillingness, and the theologians run around, say, we would not like to suffer peace, as if peace were to be received certainly by our yielding. They only want to hit with the landgrave, whom they really disparage in this. What good must come out of this among ourselves in the end, you, as an experienced man, must assume. For this reason, I cannot think of anything useful again, because I will soon leave. If it now goes out the rough way, as the emperor intends, then it is to be feared that the gospel will be taken from us by force, as we well deserve; and although this is highly burdensome, it is nevertheless easier to answer to God than that we should freely grant arbitrary ways, by which it would be stolen from us with stratagems. Therefore, it is necessary to call upon God diligently to help the matter Himself, for it has truly come upon human reason. Periit lex a prophetis et sapientia a sapientibus. Some Schnepf still has a beak to sing Christianly and constantly, which is why he was often mocked scurrilously by others. Outside of him, we of all the theologians wanted to be one with the devil. I have told you all this

3) To add: namely that they are Christian, he is a villain.

I do not want to leave it undisclosed in a confidential way, as one who would like to see things well, no less than I do. I would like to express my willingness to serve Mr. Hieronymus Ebner, otherwise you will know how to behave towards other persons named herein. God grant us all his peace. Date Augsburg, Tuesday the 13th of September, Anno 1530.

Please, if you have a spare copy of the booklet from the school, send it to me by mail for the money.

Hieronymus Baumgärtner.

1084 Philipp Melanchthon's letter to Luther. Sept. 1, 1530.

This letter is found in Oü^trueus, p. 30ö; in Ooelestinus, torn. Ill, col. 63 and in the 6orp. Rec. vol. II, 335.

Translated from Latin.

To D. Martin Luther, his very dear father,

Three days ago we concluded our discussion. For the means of comparison of the One Form of the Sacrament, of the Canon,

We do not want to accept the private mass or the marriageless state. Now the matter has been brought before the emperor once again, so that I cannot know what will happen. Let us only ask Christ to guide the Emperor's heart to maintain peace, of which we are now in great need, not only we, but all of Germany.

You cannot believe how hateful I am to the Nurembergers, and I do not know what other people are, because of the jurisdiction that has been restored to the bishops. In this way, our people fight only for their rule, not for the Gospel. Baumgärtner wrote to me: I may have been bribed by the Roman pope with so much money, but no better way could have been devised to restore the papal rule than the one we have caused. I have not fahxed or dropped any doctrinal articles at this time. They were only angry about the worldly things, which we do not have the right to take away from the episcopal power. I hope that we will soon know what conclusion the Emperor will come to. Farewell. On the day of Aegidii [Sept. 4, 1530].

Philip.