April 26, 1519.
Translated from Latin.
Carlstadt's theses against D. Johann Eck, which are to be upheld at Leipzig on June 27.
Andreas Carlstadt will defend the following theses against Johann Eck in Leipzig on June 27, 1519.
Since Johann Eck denies that the whole life of the believer is a repentance, or in need of repentance, he is a Jew under Christian skin, exclaiming: If the righteous man is the Son of God, let him come down from the cross, and he does not know that this life is a time (diem) in which one must take care of the cross.
2. in the same way, he makes this false conclusion: the life of the faithful does not express penance, as a sacrament, therefore not penance.
3 In order to extract D. John's knowledge (scientia), this sentence will also be maintained: The whole life of the faithful has the sacramental penance, which I have brought out of circumstances that belong to the conjecture, from Cyprian and Bernard.
4. D. John thinks it is something strange that I have turned from the commanded penance to the penance that suffers scourges and punishments, but he is not surprised at the penitent pro-.
*These theses are found in Latin in Löscher, Reformations-Acta, Vol. Ill, 289, who had two editions of them in his possession, both in quarto: one, as he says, is printed with Italian, or nowadays more common, the other with Gothic or monastic script. Our translation is after Löscher. The Latin title is given in the introduction. Carlstadt's sharp letter to Eck, which preceded these theses, is found in Walch, old edition, Vol. XV, 978.
716 Löscher III, 28S ff. 33. Carlstadt's Theses for the Disputation at Leipzig. W. XVIII, 858-860. 717
phet prepared for scourging and pain, nor about himself that he does not know himself.
5 Since John boldly denies that the righteous repent, he denies what the church confesses. He is also under the ban, since he claims that the righteous who still walk (viae) are not actually sinners. But how will one who is under bondage defend the church?
6. small sins are true sins to be atoned and repented (dolenda).
(7) Every little sin that man does not judge is condemnable, therefore it is not enough that one does not agree with it, but the judgment must also be added that all this is sin (delicta) for the sake of which it is written: Who can tell how often he is wrong? likewise: Show me my faults.
Daily sins, which are neither recognized as real on earth nor forgiven by compensation of what one owes, are mortal sins. I will not be astonished (stupescam) at the trivial objections (stupeum pensum) of the sophists.
(9) John, by setting scholastic doctrines, which have been disputed for four hundred years, against the older truth, has invented a new right of custom and prescription, which was not known in the earlier times, namely, that errors and sins can also be made a rule (praescribi). Therefore beware, you oldest fathers, and you Augustine, that you did not overcome the Donatists with false reasons, but entangled them. Here is the famous (ille) new protector, who defends the church with a new protection, in which there are very learned people, but he is an even more learned defender.
(10) Then also you prophets, apostles, beware, and you Christ the Savior, lest through the unoriginality of your speech we be led to think that we sin in every good work.
II. free will, before the grace poured in by the Holy Spirit, is only able to sin a little. But this earthly believes my
Deceiver not; how could he believe when I spoke of heavenly things?
(12) Yes, our will, which is not governed by the divine will, the more eager it is to act, the faster it approaches godlessness.
13 John with his principle, who belongs to his disputators, 1) can do what is in him, that is, take away the bar and that which hinders grace, that is, soften the stony heart, against Ezekiel and the sentence of Ambrose already mentioned before.
14 Since John does not see how a good work is entirely of God and God's work, he still reads and understands the Scriptures through the cover of Moses.
Finally, everyone can see very well what erudition D. John has in theology, who, I do not know how much lappish work in his Chrysopassus 2) has brought together about the election of grace and yet denies that the passages about the election of grace could refer to the works that are to be crowned.
16 By citing the statement of Bernard: Take away free will and there will remain nothing that can be saved, against me, and thereby wanting to prove that free will is capable of very much, he has read completely wrong (quid pro quo), and shows sufficiently with what kind of judgment he looks through the church teachers. But he makes himself suspicious to all students as a falsifier.
(17) When John says that blessedness is based on the canons in such a way, if someone does what they command out of the capacity of free will, he judges and establishes his own righteousness by pursuing the law of righteousness.
The origin of this so just dispute can be seen in our defense, which we have published Wider D. Johann.
1) Cf. the 38th sentence of Eck in the 2nd row in the paper No. 31.
2) Cf. the notes on the 17th sentence of Eck's 2nd row in the paper No. 31.