Article VI: Of Confession and Satisfaction.
1] Good men
can easily judge that it is of the greatest importance that
the true doctrine concerning the above-mentioned parts, namely
contrition and faith, be preserved. [For the great fraud of
indulgences, etc., and the preposterous doctrines of the sophists
have sufficiently taught us what great vexation and danger arise
therefrom if a foul stroke is here made. How many a godly conscience
under the Papacy sought with great labor the true way, and in
the midst, of such darkness did not find it!] Therefore, we
have always been occupied more with the elucidation of these
topics, and have disputed nothing as yet concerning confession
and satisfaction. 2] For we also retain confession,
especially on account of the absolution, as being the word of
God which, by divine authority, the power of the keys pronounces
upon individuals. 3] Therefore it would be wicked to
remove private absolution from the Church. 4] Neither
do they understand what the remission of sins or the power of
the keys is, if there are any who despise private absolution.
5] But in reference to the enumeration of offenses in
confession, we have said above that we hold that it is not 6]
necessary by divine right. For the objection, made by some,
that a judge ought to investigate a case before he pronounces
upon it, pertains in no way to this subject; because the ministry
of absolution is favor or grace, it is not a legal process,
or law. [For God is the Judge, who has committed to the apostles,
not the office of judges, but the administration of grace, namely,
to acquit those who desire, etc.] Therefore ministers in the
Church have the command to remit sin; they have not the command
to investigate secret 8] sins. And indeed, they absolve
from those that we do not remember; for which reason absolution,
which is the voice of the Gospel remitting sins and consoling
consciences, does not require judicial examination.
9] And it
is ridiculous to transfer hither the saying of Solomon, Prov.
27, 23: Be thou diligent to know the state of thy flocks.
For Solomon says nothing of confession, but gives to the father
of a family a domestic precept, that he should use what is his
own, and abstain from what is another's; and he commands him
to take care of his own property diligently, yet in such a way
that, with his mind occupied with the increase of his resources,
he should not cast away the fear of God, or faith or care in
God's Word. But our adversaries, by a wonderful metamorphosis,
transform passages of Scripture to whatever meaning they please.
[They produce from the Scriptures black and white, as they please,
contrary to the natural meaning of the clear words.] Here to
know signifies with them to hear confessions, the state,
not the outward life, but the secrets of conscience; and the
flocks signify men. [Stable, we think, means a school
within which there are such doctors and orators. But it has
happened aright to those who thus despise the Holy Scriptures
and all fine arts that they make gross mistakes in grammar.]
The interpretation is assuredly neat, and is worthy of these
despisers of the pursuits of eloquence. But if any one desires
by a similitude to transfer a precept from a father of a family
to a pastor of a Church, he ought certainly to interpret "state"
[V. vultus, countenance] as applying to the outward life.
This similitude will be more consistent.
10] But let
us omit such matters as these. At different times in the Psalms
mention is made of confession, as, Ps. 32, 5: I said, I will
confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and Thou forgavest
the iniquity of my sin. Such confession of sin which is
made to God is contrition itself. For when confession is made
to God, it must be made with the heart, not alone with the voice,
as is made on the stage by actors. Therefore, such confession
is contrition, in which, feeling God's wrath, we confess that
God is justly angry, and that He cannot be appeased by our works,
and, nevertheless, we seek for mercy because of God's promise.
11] Such is the following confession, Ps. 51, 4: Against
Thee only have I sinned, that Thou mightest be justified, and
be clear when Thou judgest, i.e., "I confess that I am a
sinner, and have merited eternal wrath, nor can I set my righteousnesses,
my merits, against Thy wrath; accordingly, I declare that Thou
art just when Thou condemnest and punishest us; I declare that
Thou art clear when hypocrites judge Thee to be unjust in punishing
them or in condemning the well-deserving. Yea, our merits cannot
be opposed to Thy judgment; but we shall thus be justified,
namely, if Thou justifiest us, if through Thy mercy Thou accountest
us righteous." 12] Perhaps some one may also cite Jas.
5, 16: Confess your faults one to another. But here the
reference is not to confession that is to be made to the priests,
but, in general, concerning the reconciliation of brethren to
each other. For it commands that the confession be mutual.
13] Again,
our adversaries will condemn many most generally received teachers
if they will contend that in confession an enumeration of offenses
is necessary according to divine Law. For although we approve
of confession, and judge that some examination is of advantage,
in order that men may be the better instructed [young and inexperienced
persons be questioned], yet the matter must be so controlled
that snares are not cast upon consciences, which never will
be tranquil if they think that they cannot obtain the remission
of sins, unless this precise enumeration be made. 14]
That which the adversaries have expressed in the Confutation
is certainly most false, namely, that a full confession is necessary
for salvation. For this is impossible. And what snares they
here cast upon the conscience when they require a full confession!
For when will conscience be sure that the confession is complete?
15] In the Church-writers mention is made of confession,
but they do not speak of this enumeration of secret offenses,
but of the rite of public repentance. For as the fallen or notorious
[those guilty of public crimes] were not received without fixed
satisfactions [without a public ceremony or reproof], they made
confession on this account to the presbyters, in order that
satisfactions might be prescribed to them according to the measure
of their offenses. This entire matter contained nothing similar
to the enumeration concerning which we are disputing. This confession
was made, not because the remission of sins before God could
not occur without it, but because satisfactions could not be
prescribed unless the kind of offense were first known. For
different offenses had different canons.
16] And from
this rite of public repentance there has been left the word
"satisfaction." For the holy Fathers were unwilling to receive
the fallen or the notorious, unless, as far as it was possible,
their repentance had been first examined into and exhibited
publicly. And there seem to have been many causes for this.
For to chastise those who had fallen served as an example, just
as also the gloss upon the decrees admonishes, and it
was improper immediately to admit notorious men to the communion
[without their being tested]. These customs have long since
grown obsolete. Neither is it necessary to restore them, because
they are not necessary for the remission of sins before God.
17] Neither did the Fathers hold this, namely, that men
merit the remission of sins through such customs or such works,
although these spectacles (such outward ceremonies] usually
lead astray the ignorant to think that by these works they merit
the remission of sins before God. But if any one thus holds,
he holds to the faith of a Jew and heathen. For also the heathen
had certain expiations for offenses through which they imagined
18] to be reconciled to God. Now, however, although the
custom has become obsolete, the name satisfaction still
remains, and a trace of the custom also remains of prescribing
in confession certain satisfactions, which they define as works
that are not due. We call them canonical satisfactions.
19] Of these we hold, just as of the enumeration, that
canonical satisfactions (these public ceremonies] are not necessary
by divine Law for the remission of sins; just as those ancient
exhibitions of satisfactions in public repentance were not necessary
by divine Law for the remission of sins. For the belief concerning
faith must be retained, that by faith we obtain remission of
sins for Christ's sake, and not for the sake of our works that
precede or follow [when we are converted or born anew in Christ].
And for this reason we have discussed especially the question
of satisfactions, that by submitting to them the righteousness
of faith be not obscured, or men think that for the sake of
these works they obtain remission of sins. 20] And many
sayings that are current in the schools aid the error, such
as that which they give in the definition of satisfaction, namely,
that it is wrought for the purpose of appeasing the divine displeasure.
21] But, nevertheless,
the adversaries acknowledge that satisfactions are of no profit
for the remission of guilt. Yet they imagine that satisfactions
are of profit in redeeming from the punishments, whether of
purgatory or other punishments. For thus they teach that in
the remission of sins, God [without means, alone] remits the
guilt, and yet, because it belongs to divine justice to punish
sin, that He commutes eternal into temporal punishment. They
add further that a part of this temporal punishment is remitted
by the power of the keys, but that the rest is redeemed by means
of satisfactions. Neither can it be understood of what punishments
a part is remitted by the power of the keys, unless they say
that a part of the punishments of purgatory is remitted, from
which it would follow that satisfactions are only punishments
redeeming from purgatory. And these satisfactions, they say,
avail even though they are rendered by those who have relapsed
into mortal sin, as though indeed the divine displeasure could
be appeased by those who are in mortal sin. 22] This
entire matter is fictitious, and recently fabricated without
the authority of Scripture and the old writers of the Church.
And not even Longobardus speaks in this way of satisfactions.
23] The scholastics saw that there were satisfactions
in the Church; and they did not notice that these exhibitions
had been instituted both for the purpose of example, and for
testing those who desired to be received by the Church. In a
word, they did not see that it was a discipline, and entirely
a secular matter. Accordingly, they superstitiously imagined
that these avail not for discipline before the Church, but for
appeasing God. And just as in other places they frequently,
with great inaptness, have confounded spiritual and civil matters
[the kingdom of Christ, which is spiritual, and the kingdom
of the world, and external discipline], the same happens also
with regard to satisfactions. 24] But the gloss on the
canons at various places testifies that these observances were
instituted for the sake of church discipline [should serve alone
for an example before the Church].
25] Let us
see, moreover, how in the Confutation which they had the presumption
to obtrude upon His Imperial Majesty, they prove these figments
of theirs. They cite many passages from the Scriptures, in order
to impose upon the inexperienced, as though this subject which
was unknown even in the time of Longobard, had authority from
the Scriptures. They bring forward such passages as these: Bring
forth, therefore, fruits meet for repentance, Matt. 3, 8;
Mark 1, 15. Again: Yield your members servants to righteousness,
Rom. 6, 19. Again, Christ preaches repentance, Matt. 4, 17:
Repent. Again, Christ Luke 24, 47, commands the apostles
to preach repentance, and Peter preaches repentance,
Acts 2, 38. Afterward they cite certain passages of the Fathers
and the canons, and conclude that satisfactions in the Church
are not to be abolished contrary to the plain Gospel and the
decrees of the Councils and Fathers [against the decision of
the Holy Church]; nay, even that those who have been absolved
by the priest ought to bring to perfection the repentance that
has been enjoined, following the declaration of Paul, Titus
2, 14: Who gave Himself for us that He might redeem us from
all iniquity, and purify unto Himself a peculiar people,
zealous of good works.
26] May God
put to confusion these godless sophists who so wickedly distort
God's Word to their own most vain dreams! What good man is there
who is not moved by such indignity? "Christ says, Repent,
the apostles preach repentance; therefore eternal punishments
are compensated by the punishments of purgatory; therefore the
keys have the power to remit part of the punishments of purgatory;
therefore satisfactions redeem the punishments of purgatory"!
Who has taught these asses such logic? Yet this is neither logic
nor sophistry, but cunning trickery. Accordingly, they appeal
to the expression repent in such a way that, when the inexperienced
hear such a passage cited against us, they may derive the opinion
that we deny the entire repentance. By these arts they endeavor
to alienate minds and to enkindle hatred, so that the inexperienced
may cry out against us [Crucify! crucify!], that such pestilent
heretics as disapprove of repentance should he removed from
their midst. [Thus they are publicly convicted of being liars
in this matter.]
27] But we
hope that among good men these calumnies [and misrepresentations
of Holy Scripture] may make little headway. And God will not
long endure such impudence and wickedness. [They will certainly
be consumed by the First and Second Commandments.] Neither has
the Pope of Rome consulted well for his own dignity in employing
such patrons, because he has entrusted a matter of the greatest
importance to the judgment of these sophists. For since we include
in the Confession almost the sum of the entire Christian doctrine,
judges should have been appointed to make a declaration concerning
matters so important and so many and various, whose learning
and faith would have been more approved than that of these sophists
who have written this Confutation. 28] It was particularly
becoming for you, O Campegius, in accordance with your wisdom,
to have taken care that in regard to matters of such importance
they should write nothing which either at this time or with
posterity might seem to be able to diminish regard for the Roman
See. If the Roman See judges it right that all nations should
acknowledge her as mistress of the faith, she ought to take
pains that learned and uncorrupt men make investigation concerning
matters of religion. For what will the world judge if at any
time the writing of the adversaries be brought to light? What
will posterity judge concerning these reproachful judicial investigations?
29] You see, O Campegius, that these are the last times,
in which Christ predicted that there would be the greatest danger
to religion. You, therefore, who ought, as it were, to sit on
the watch-tower and control religious matters, should in these
times employ unusual wisdom and diligence. There are many signs
which, unless you heed them, threaten a change to the Roman
state. 30] And you make a mistake if you think that Churches
should be retained only by force and arms. Men ask to be taught
concerning religion. How many do you suppose there are, not
only in Germany, but also in England, in Spain, in France, in
Italy, and finally even in the city of Rome, who, since they
see that controversies have arisen concerning subjects of the
greatest importance, are beginning here and there to doubt,
and to be silently indignant that you refuse to investigate
and judge aright subjects of such weight as these; that you
do not deliver wavering consciences; that you only bid us be
overthrown and annihilated by arms? 31] There are many
good men to whom this doubt is more bitter than death. You do
not consider sufficiently how great a subject religion is, if
you think that good men are in anguish for a slight cause whenever
they begin to doubt concerning any dogma. And this doubt can
have no other effect than to produce the greatest bitterness
of hatred against those who, when they ought to heal consciences,
plant themselves in the way of the explanation of the subject.
32] We do not here say that you ought to fear God's judgment.
For the hierarchs think that they can easily provide against
this, for since they hold the keys, of course they can open
heaven for themselves whenever they wish. We are speaking of
the judgments of men and the silent desires of all nations,
which, indeed, at this time require that these matters be investigated
and decided in such a manner that good minds may be healed and
freed from doubt. For, in accordance with your wisdom, you can
easily decide what will take place if at any time this hatred
against you should break forth. But by this favor you will be
able to bind to yourself all nations, as all sane men regard
it as the highest and most important matter, if you heal doubting
33] consciences. We have said these things not because
we doubt concerning our Confession. For we know that it is true,
godly, and useful to godly consciences. But it is likely that
there are many in many places who waver concerning matters of
no light importance, and yet do not hear such teachers as are
able to heal their consciences.
34] But let
us return to the main point. The Scriptures cited by the adversaries
speak in no way of canonical satisfactions, and of the opinions
of the scholastics, since it is evident that the latter were
only recently born. Therefore it is pure slander when they distort
Scripture to their own opinions. We say that good fruits, good
works in every kind of life, ought to follow repentance, i.e.,
conversion or regeneration [the renewal of the Holy Ghost in
the heart]. Neither can there be true conversion or true contrition
where mortifications of the flesh and good fruits do not follow
[if we do not externally render good works and Christian patience].
True terrors, true griefs of mind, do not allow the body to
indulge in sensual pleasures, and true faith is not ungrateful
to God, neither does it despise God's commandments. 35]
In a word, there is no inner repentance unless it also produces
outwardly mortifications of the flesh. We say also that this
is the meaning of John when he says, Matt. 3, 8: Bring forth,
therefore, fruits meet for repentance. Likewise
of Paul when he says, Rom. 6, 19: Yield your members servants
to righteousness; just as he likewise says elsewhere, Rom.
12, 1: Present your bodies a living sacrifice, etc. And
when Christ says, Matt. 4, 17: Repent, He certainly speaks
of the entire repentance, of the entire newness of life and
its fruits; He does not speak of those hypocritical satisfactions
which, the scholastics imagine, avail for compensating the punishment
of purgatory or other punishments when they are made by those
who are in mortal sin.
36] Many arguments,
likewise, can be collected to show that these passages of Scripture
pertain in no way to scholastic satisfactions. These men imagine
that satisfactions are works that are not due [which we are
not obliged to do); but Scripture, in these passages, requires
works that are due [which we are obliged to do]. For this word
of Christ, 37]Repent, is the word of a commandment.
Likewise the adversaries write that if any one who goes to confession
should refuse to undertake satisfactions, he does not sin, but
will pay these penalties in purgatory. Now the following passages
are, without controversy, precepts pertaining to this life:
Repent; Bring forth fruits meet for repentance; Yield your
members servants to righteousness. Therefore they cannot
be distorted to the satisfactions which it is permitted to refuse.
For to refuse God's commandments is not permitted. [For God's
commands are not thus left to our discretion.] 38] Thirdly,
indulgences remit these satisfactions, as is taught by the Chapter,
De Poenitentiis et Remissione, beginning Quum ex eo,
etc. But indulgences do not free us from the commandments: Repent;
Bring forth fruits meet for repentance. Therefore it is
manifest that these passages of Scripture have been wickedly
distorted to apply to canonical satisfactions. 39] See
further what follows. If the punishments of purgatory are satisfactions,
or satispassions [sufferings sufficient], or if satisfactions
are a redemption of the punishments of purgatory, do the passages
also give commandment that souls be punished in purgatory? [The
above-cited passages of Christ and Paul must also show and prove
that souls enter purgatory and there suffer pain.] Since this
must follow from the opinions of the adversaries, these passages
should be interpreted in a new way [these passages should put
on new coats]: Bring forth fruits meet for repentance; Repent,
i.e., suffer the punishments of purgatory after this
life. 40] But we do not care about refuting in more words
these absurdities of the adversaries. For it is evident that
Scripture speaks of works that are due, of the entire newness,
of life, and not of these observances of works that are not
due, of which the adversaries speak. And yet, by these figments
they defend orders [of monks], the sale of Masses and infinite
observances, namely, as works which, if they do not make satisfaction
for guilt, yet make satisfaction for punishment.
41] Since,
therefore, the passages of Scripture cited do not say that eternal
punishments are to be compensated by works that are not due,
the adversaries are rash in affirming that these satisfactions
are compensated by canonical satisfactions. Nor do the keys
have the command to commute some punishments, and likewise to
remit a part of the punishments. For where are such things [dreams
and lies] read in the Scriptures? Christ speaks of the remission
of sins when He says, Matt. 18, 18: Whatsoever ye shall loose,
etc. [i.e.], sin being forgiven, death eternal is taken
away, and life eternal bestowed. Nor does Whatsoever ye shall
bind speak of the imposing of punishments, but of retaining
the sins of those who are not converted. 42] Moreover,
the declaration of Longobard concerning remitting a part of
the punishments has been taken from the canonical punishments;
a part of these the pastors remitted. Although, therefore, we
hold that repentance ought to bring forth good fruits for the
sake of God's glory and command, and good fruits, true fastings,
true prayers, true alms, etc., have the commands of God, yet
in the Holy Scriptures we nowhere find this, namely, that eternal
punishments are not remitted except on account of the punishment
of purgatory or canonical satisfactions, i.e., on account
of certain works not due, or that the power of the keys has
the command to commute their punishments or to remit a portion.
These things the adversaries were to prove. [This they will
not attempt.]
43] Besides,
the death of Christ is a satisfaction not only for guilt, but
also for eternal death, according to Hos. 13, 14: O death,
I will be thy death. How monstrous, therefore, it is
to say that the satisfaction of Christ redeemed from the guilt,
and our punishments redeem from eternal death; as the expression,
I will be thy death, ought then to be understood, not
concerning Christ, but concerning our works, and, indeed, not
concerning the works commanded by God, but concerning some frigid
observances devised by men! And these are said to abolish death,
44] even when they are wrought in mortal sin. It is incredible
with what grief we recite these absurdities of the adversaries,
which cannot but cause one who considers them to be enraged
against such doctrines of demons, which the devil has spread
in the Church in order to suppress the knowledge of the Law
and Gospel, of repentance and quickening, and the benefits 45]
of Christ. For of the Law they speak thus: "God, condescending
to our weakness, has given to man a measure of those things
to which of necessity he is bound; and this is the observance
of precepts, so that from what is left, i.e., from works
of supererogation, he can render satisfaction with reference
to offenses that have been committed." Here men imagine that
they can observe the Law of God in such a manner as to be able
to do even more than the Law exacts. But Scripture everywhere
exclaims that we are far distant from the perfection which the
Law requires. Yet these men imagine that the Law of God has
been comprised in outward and civil righteousness; they do not
see that it requires true love to God "with the whole heart,"
etc., and condemns the entire concupiscence in the nature. Therefore
no one does as much as the Law requires. Hence their imagination
that we can do more is ridiculous. For although we can perform
outward works not commanded by God's Law [which Paul calls beggarly
ordinances], yet the confidence that satisfaction is rendered
God's Law [yea, that more is done than God demands] is vain
and wicked. 46] And true prayers, true alms, true fastings,
have God's command; and where they have God's command, they
cannot without sin be omitted. But these works, in so far as
they have not been commanded by God's Law, but have a fixed
form derived from human rule, are works of human traditions
of which Christ says, Matt. 15, 9: In vain they do worship
Me with the commandments of men, such as certain fasts appointed
not for restraining the flesh, but that, by this work, honor
may be given to God, as Scotus says, and eternal death be made
up for; likewise, a fixed number of prayers, a fixed measure
of alms when they are tendered in such a way that this measure
is a worship ex opere operato, giving honor to God, and
making up for eternal death. For they ascribe satisfaction to
these ex opere operato, because they teach that they
avail even in those who are 47] in mortal sin. There
are works which depart still farther from God's commands, as
[rosaries and] pilgrimages; and of these there is a great variety:
one makes a journey [to St. Jacob] clad in mail, and another
with bare feet. Christ calls these "vain acts of worship," and
hence they do not serve to appease God's displeasure, as the
adversaries say. And yet they adorn these works with magnificent
titles; they call them works of supererogation; to them the
honor is ascribed of being a price paid instead of eternal death.
48] Thus they are preferred to the works of God's commandments
[the true works expressly mentioned in the Ten Commandments].
In this way the Law of God is obscured in two ways, one, because
satisfaction is thought to be rendered God's Law by means of
outward and civil works, the other, because human traditions
are added, whose works are preferred to the works of the divine
Law.
49] In the
second place, repentance and grace are obscured. For eternal
death is not atoned for by this compensation of works, because
it is idle, and does not in the present life taste of death.
Something else must be, opposed to death when it tries us. For
just as the wrath of God is overcome by faith in Christ, so
death is overcome by faith in, Christ. Just as Paul says, 1
Cor. 15, 57: But thanks be to God which giveth us the victory
through our Lord Jesus Christ. He does not say: "Who giveth
us the victory if we oppose our satisfactions against death."
50] The adversaries treat of idle speculations concerning
the remission of guilt, and do not see how, in the remission
of guilt, the heart is freed by faith in Christ from God's anger
and eternal death. Since, therefore, the death of Christ is
a satisfaction for eternal death, and since the adversaries
themselves confess that these works of satisfactions are works
that are not due, but are works of human traditions, of which
Christ says, Matt. 15, 9, that they are vain acts of worship,
we can safely affirm that canonical satisfactions are not necessary
by divine Law for the remission of guilt, or eternal punishment,
or the punishment of purgatory.
51] But the
adversaries object that vengeance or punishment is necessary
for repentance, because Augustine says that repentance is
vengeance punishing, etc. We grant that vengeance or punishment
is necessary in repentance, yet not as merit or price, as the
adversaries imagine that satisfactions are. But vengeance is
in repentance formally, i.e., because regeneration itself
occurs by a perpetual mortification of the oldness of life.
The saying of Scotus may indeed be very beautiful, that poenitentia
is so called because it is, as it were, poenae tenentia,
holding to punishment. But of what punishment, of what vengeance,
does Augustine speak? Certainly of true punishment, of true
vengeance, namely, of contrition, of true terrors. Nor do we
here exclude the outward mortifications of the body, which 52]
follow true grief of mind. The adversaries make a great mistake
if they imagine that canonical satisfactions [their juggler's
tricks, rosaries, pilgrimages, and such like] are more truly
punishments than are true terrors in the heart. It is most foolish
to distort the name of punishment to these frigid satisfactions,
and not to refer them to those horrible terrors of conscience
of which David says, Ps. 18, 4; 2 Sam. 22, 5: The sorrows
of death compassed me. Who would not rather, clad in mail
and equipped, seek the church of James, the basilica of Peter,
etc., than bear that ineffable violence of grief which exists
even in persons of ordinary lives, if there be true repentance?
53] But they
say that it belongs to God's justice to punish sin. He certainly
punishes it in contrition, when in these terrors He shows His
wrath. Just as David indicates when he prays, Ps. 6, 1: O
Lord, rebuke me not in Thine anger. And Jeremiah,
10, 24: O Lord, correct me, but with judgment;
not in Thine anger, lest Thou bring me to nothing.
Here indeed the most bitter punishments are spoken of. And the
adversaries acknowledge that contrition can be so great that
satisfaction is not required. 54] Contrition is therefore
more truly a punishment than is satisfaction. Besides, saints
are subject to death, and all general afflictions, as 1 Peter
4, 17 says: For the time is come that judgment must begin
at the house of God; and if it first begin at us, what
shall the end be of them that obey not the Gospel of God?
And although these afflictions are for the most part the punishments
of sin, yet in the godly they have a better end, namely, to
exercise them, that they may learn amidst trials to seek God's
aid, to acknowledge the distrust of their own hearts, etc.,
as Paul says of himself, 2 Cor. 1, 9: But we had the sentence
of death in ourselves, that we should not trust in ourselves,
but in God which raiseth the dead. And Isaiah says, 26,
16: They poured out prayer when Thy chastening was upon them,
i.e., afflictions are a discipline 55] by which
God exercises the saints. Likewise afflictions are inflicted
because of present sin, since in the saints they mortify and
extinguish concupiscence, so that they may be renewed by the
Spirit, as Paul says, Rom. 8, 10: The body is dead because
of sin, i.e., it is mortified [more and more every
day] because of present sin which is still left in the flesh.
56] And death itself serves this purpose, namely, to
abolish this flesh of sin, that we may rise absolutely new.
Neither is there now in the death of the believer, since by
faith he has overcome the terrors of death, that sting and sense
of wrath of which Paul speaks 1 Cor. 15, 56: The sting of
death is sin; and the strength of sin is the Law. This strength
of sin, this sense of wrath, is truly a punishment as long as
it is present; without this sense of wrath, 57] death
is not properly a punishment. Moreover, canonical satisfactions
do not belong to these punishments; as the adversaries say that
by the power of the keys a part of the punishments is remitted.
Likewise, according to these very men, the keys remit the satisfactions,
and the punishments on account of which the satisfactions are
made. But it is evident that the common afflictions are not
removed by the power of the keys. And if they wish to be understood
concerning these punishments, why do they add that satisfaction
is to be rendered in purgatory?
58] They oppose
the example of Adam, and also of David, who was punished for
his adultery. From these examples they derive the universal
rule that peculiar temporal punishments in the remission of
sins correspond to individual sins. 59] It has been said
before that saints suffer punishments, which are works of God;
they suffer contrition or terrors, they also suffer other common
afflictions. Thus, for example, some suffer punishments of their
own that have been imposed by God. And these punishments pertain
in no way to the keys, because the keys neither can impose nor
remit them, but God, without the ministry of the keys, imposes
and remits them [as He will].
Neither does the
universal rule follow: Upon David a peculiar punishment was
imposed, therefore, in addition to common afflictions, there
is another punishment of purgatory, in which each degree corresponds
to each sin. 60] Where does Scripture teach that we cannot
be freed from eternal death except by the compensation of certain
punishments in addition to common afflictions? But, on the other
hand, it most frequently teaches that the remission of sins
occurs freely for Christ's sake, that Christ is the Victor of
sin and death. Therefore the merit of satisfaction is not to
be patched upon this. And although afflictions still remain,
yet Scripture interprets these as the mortifications of present
sin [to kill and humble the old Adam], and not as the compensations
of eternal death or as prices for eternal death.
61] Job is
excused that he was not afflicted on account of past evil deeds;
therefore afflictions are not always punishments or signs of
wrath. Yea, terrified consciences are to be taught that other
ends of afflictions are more important [that they should learn
to regard troubles far differently, namely, as signs of grace],
lest they think that they are rejected by God when in afflictions
they see nothing but God's punishment and anger. The other more
important ends are to be considered, namely, that God is
doing His strange work so that He may be able to do His own
work, etc., as Isaiah 28 teaches in a long discourse. 62]
And when the disciples asked concerning the blind man who sinned,
John 9, 2. 3, Christ replies that the cause of his blindness
is not sin, but that the works of God should be made manifest
in him. And in Jeremiah, 49, 12, it is said: They whose
judgment was not to drink of the cup have assuredly drunken.
Thus the prophets and John the Baptist and other saints were
killed. 63] Therefore afflictions are not always punishments
for certain past deeds, but they are the works of God, intended
for our profit, and that the power of God might be made more
manifest in our weakness [how He can help in the midst of death].
Thus Paul says, 2
Cor. 12, 5. 9: The strength of God is made perfect in my
weakness. Therefore, because of God's will, our bodies ought
to be sacrifices, to declare our obedience [and patience], and
not to compensate for eternal death. for which God has another
price, namely, 64] the death of His own Son. And in this
sense Gregory interprets even the punishment of David when he
says: If God on account of that sin had threatened that he,
would thus be humbled by his son, why, when
the sin was forgiven, did He fulfil that which He had
threatened against him? The reply is that this remission was
made that man might not be hindered from receiving eternal life,
but that the example of the threatening followed, in
order that the piety of the man might be exercised and tested
even in this humility. Thus also God inflicted upon man death
of body on account of sin, and after the remission of
sins He did not remove it, for the sake of exercising
justice, namely, in order that the righteousness
of those who are sanctified might be exercised and tested.
65] Nor, indeed,
are common calamities [as war, famine, and similar calamities],
properly speaking, removed by these works of canonical satisfactions,
i.e., by these works of human traditions, which, they
say, avail ex opere operato, in such a way that, even
though they are wrought in mortal sin, 66] yet they redeem
from the punishments. [And the adversaries themselves confess
that they impose satisfactions, not on account of such common
calamities, but on account of purgatory; hence, their satisfactions
are pure imaginations and dreams.] And when the passage of Paul,
1 Cor. 11, 31, is cited against us: If we would judge ourselves,
we should not be judged by the Lord [they conclude therefrom
that, if we impose punishment upon ourselves, God will judge
us the more graciously], the word to judge ought to be
understood of the entire repentance and due fruits, not of works
which are not due. Our adversaries pay the penalty for despising
grammar when they understand to judge to be the same
as to make a pilgrimage clad in mail to the church of St. James,
or similar works. To judge signifies the entire repentance;
it signifies to condemn sins. 67] This condemnation truly
occurs in contrition and the change of life. The entire repentance,
contrition, faith, the good fruits, obtain the mitigation of
public and private punishments and calamities, as Isaiah 1,
17-19 teaches: Cease to do evil; learn to do well, etc.
Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be white
as snow. If ye be willing and obedient, 68] ye
shall eat the good of the land. Neither should a most important
and salutary meaning be transferred from the entire repentance,
and from works due or commanded by God, to the satisfactions
and works of human traditions. And this it is profitable to
teach, that common evils are mitigated by our repentance and
by the true fruits of repentance, by good works wrought from
faith, not, as these men imagine, wrought in mortal sin. 69]
And here belongs the example of the Ninevites, Jonah 3, 10,
who by their repentance (we speak of the entire repentance)
were reconciled to God, and obtained the favor that their city
was not destroyed.
70] Moreover,
the making mention, by the Fathers, of satisfaction, and the
framing of canons by the councils, we have said above, was a
matter of church-discipline instituted on account of the example.
Nor did they hold that this discipline is necessary for the
remission either of the guilt or of the punishment. For if some
of them made mention of purgatory, they interpret it not as
compensation for eternal punishment [which only Christ makes],
not as satisfaction, but as purification of imperfect souls.
Just as Augustine says that venial [daily] offenses
are consumed, i.e., distrust towards God and other
71] similar dispositions are mortified. Now and then
the writers transfer the term satisfaction from the rite itself
or spectacle, to signify true mortification. Thus Augustine
says: True satisfaction is to cut off the causes of sin,
i.e., to mortify the flesh, likewise to restrain
the flesh, not in order that eternal punishments may
be compensated for, but so that the flesh may not allure
to sin.
72] Thus concerning
restitution, Gregory says that repentance is false if it
does not satisfy those whose property we have taken. For
he who still steals does not truly grieve that he has stolen
or robbed. For he is a thief or robber, so long as he is the
unjust possessor of the property of another. This civil satisfaction
is necessary, because it is written Eph. 4, 28: Let him that
stole, 73] steal no more. Likewise Chrysostom
says: In the heart, contrition; in the mouth,
confession; in the work, entire humility. This
amounts to nothing against us. Good works ought to follow repentance;
it ought to be repentance, not simulation, but a change of the
entire life for the better.
74] Likewise,
the Fathers wrote that it is sufficient if once in life this
public or ceremonial penitence occur, about which the canons
concerning satisfactions have been made. Therefore it can be
understood that they held that these canons are not necessary
for the remission of sins. For in addition to this ceremonial
penitence, they frequently wish that penitence be rendered otherwise,
where canons of satisfactions were not required.
75] The composers
of the Confutation write that the abolition of satisfactions
contrary to the plain Gospel is not to be endured. We, therefore,
have thus far shown that these canonical satisfactions, i.e.,
works not due, and that are to be performed in order to compensate
for punishment, have not 76] the command of the Gospel.
The subject itself shows this. If works of satisfaction are
works which are not due, why do they cite the plain Gospel?
For if the Gospel would command that punishments be compensated
for by such works, the works would already be due. But thus
they speak in order to impose upon the inexperienced, and they
cite testimonies which speak of works that are due, although
they themselves in their own satisfactions prescribe works that
are not due. Yea, in their schools they themselves concede that
satisfactions can be refused without [mortal] sin. Therefore
they here write falsely that we are compelled by the plain Gospel
to undertake these canonical satisfactions.
77] But we
have already frequently testified that repentance ought to produce
good fruits; and what the good fruits are the [Ten] Cornmandments
teach, namely, [truly and from the heart most highly to esteem,
fear, and love God, joyfully to call upon Him in need], prayer,
thanksgiving, the confession of the Gospel [hearing this Word],
to teach the Gospel, to obey parents and magistrates, to be
faithful to one's calling, not to kill, not to retain hatred,
but to be forgiving [to be agreeable and kind to one's neighbor],
to give to the needy, so far as we can according to, our means,
not to commit fornication or adultery, but to restrain and bridle
and chastise the flesh, not for a compensation of eternal punishment,
but so as not to obey the devil, or offend the Holy Ghost; likewise,
to speak the truth. These fruits have God's injunction, and
ought to be brought forth for the sake of God's glory and command;
and they have their rewards also. But that eternal punishments
are not remitted except, on account of the compensation rendered
by, certain traditions or by purgatory, Scripture does not teach.
78] Indulgences were formerly remission of these public
observances, so that men should not be excessively burdened.
But if, by human authority, satisfactions and punishments can
be remitted, this compensation, therefore, is not necessary
by divine Law; for a divine Law is not annulled by human authority.
Furthermore, since the custom has now of itself become obsolete
and the bishops have passed it by in silence, there is no necessity
for these remissions. And yet the name indulgences remained.
And just as satisfactions were understood not with reference
to external discipline, but with reference to the compensation
of punishment, so indulgences were incorrectly understood to
free souls from purgatory. 79] But the keys have not
the power of binding and loosing except upon earth, according
to Matt. 16, 19: Whatsoever, thou shalt bind on earth
shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose
on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Although, as we have
said above, the keys have not the power to impose penalties,
or to institute rites of worship, but only the command to remit
sins to those who are converted, and to convict and excommunicate
those who are unwilling to be converted. For just as to loose
signifies to remit sins, so to bind signifies not to
remit sins. For Christ speaks of a spiritual kingdom. And the
command of God is that the ministers of the Gospel should absolve
those who are converted, according to 2 Cor. 10, 8: The authority
which the Lord hath given us for edification. Therefore
80] the reservation of cases is a secular affair. For
it is a reservation of canonical punishment; it is not a reservation
of guilt before God in those who are truly converted. Therefore
the adversaries judge aright when they confess that in the article
of death the reservation of cases ought not to hinder absolution.
81] We have
set forth the sum of our doctrine concerning repentance, which
we certainly know is godly and salutary to good minds [and highly
necessary]. And if good men will compare our [yea, Christ's
and His apostles'] doctrine with the very confused discussions
of our adversaries, they will perceive that the adversaries
have omitted the doctrine [without which no one can teach or
learn anything that is substantial and Christian] concerning
faith justifying and consoling godly hearts. They will also
see that the adversaries invent many things concerning the merits
of attrition, concerning the endless enumeration of offenses,
concerning satisfactions; they say things (that touch neither
earth nor heaven] agreeing neither with human nor divine law,
and which not even the adversaries themselves can satisfactorily
explain.
