SR
← Augsburg Confession (Confessio Augustana)/Book 1 · Confessio Augustana
Chapter 28ConfAug.1.28

De Potestate Ecclesiastica

The Confusion of Two Powers

Historical disputes arose when bishops confused spiritual authority with civil power, leading to upheaval and prompting the need to distinguish between them.

There were major disputes over the power of bishops, where some people improperly confused ecclesiastical power with the power of the sword. And out of this confusion the greatest wars and upheavals arose, while the pontiffs, relying on the power of the keys, not only instituted new worship practices and burdened consciences with harsh excommunications through the reservation of cases, but also tried to transfer the kingdoms of the world and take the empire away from emperors. Devout and learned men in the Church condemned these abuses long ago. Therefore, to console consciences, our people had to show the distinction between ecclesiastical power and the power of the sword, and they taught that both should be reverenced and honored because of God's commandment, as the highest blessings of God on earth.

The True Nature of Ecclesiastical Power

Ecclesiastical power is defined as a divine commission to preach the Gospel, forgive sins, and administer the Sacraments.

This, then, is how they understand it: the power of the keys, or the power of bishops, is in accordance with the Gospel a power or commission from God—to preach the Gospel, to forgive and to retain sins, and to administer the Sacraments. For Christ sends the apostles with this commission: 'As the Father has sent me, so I also send you. Receive the Holy Spirit: whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained.'✦1 Mark 16. Go, preach the Gospel to every creature, etc.✦2

The Sword and Its Separate Sphere

Spiritual power deals with eternal things through the Word, while civil authority protects bodies and property through the sword.

This power is exercised only by teaching or preaching the word, and by administering the sacraments, to many or to individuals according to their calling, because what is granted is not bodily things, but eternal things: eternal justice, the Holy Spirit, eternal life. These things cannot happen except through the ministry of the word and of the sacraments, as Paul says: 'The gospel is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes.' Therefore, although ecclesiastical power grants eternal things and is exercised only through the ministry of the word, it does not hinder civil administration, just as the art of singing does not hinder civil administration. For civil administration is concerned with matters other than the gospel. The magistrate defends not minds but bodies and bodily goods against open wrongs, and restrains people by the sword and by bodily punishments, so that justice and civil peace may be maintained.

Keeping the Powers Distinct

The church must not encroach on civil governance, nor transfer kingdoms or impose laws on magistrates.

Therefore, the ecclesiastical and civil powers shouldn't be mixed together. The ecclesiastical power has its own mandate: teaching the Gospel and administering the Sacraments. It must not break into another's office, not transfer the kingdoms of the world, not repeal the laws of the magistrates, not abolish legitimate obedience, not impede judgments concerning any civil ordinances or contracts, not prescribe laws to magistrates concerning the form of the commonwealth, just as Christ says: My kingdom is not of this world.✦ Likewise: Who appointed me a judge or divider over you?✦ And Paul says to the Philippians: 3. Our citizenship is in heaven.✦ 2.

Honoring Both as God's Gifts

Both powers are to be honored as divine blessings, each fulfilling its own God-given role.

1 Corinthians 10. 10. The weapons of our warfare aren't physical, but they're powerful with God for destroying thoughts, etc.✦ In this way our people distinguish the duties of each power, and they enjoin each to be treated with honor and acknowledged, as being each a gift and blessing of God.

Sword Not Commanded to Bishops

Any sword power bishops hold comes from human law, not from the Gospel commission.

If bishops have the power of the sword, they don't have it from the command of the Gospel, but it's granted to them by human law, by kings and emperors, for the civil administration of their own interests. This, meanwhile, is another function than the ministry of the Gospel.

Episcopal Jurisdiction by Divine Right

By divine right, bishops have authority only to remit sins, examine doctrine, and exclude the ungodly through the Word.

So when the question of the bishops' jurisdiction comes up, authority must be distinguished from ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Furthermore, according to the Gospel—or, as they say, by divine right—no jurisdiction belongs to bishops as bishops, that is, to those entrusted with the ministry of the word and of the sacraments, except to remit sins. Likewise, to examine doctrine, to reject teaching that departs from the Gospel, and to exclude the impious—whose impiety is known—from the communion of the Church, not by human force but by the word. Here, necessarily and by divine right, they owe obedience to the Church, according to that saying: 'Whoever hears you hears me.'✦

When Obedience Is Refused

Obedience is owed to church leaders when they teach according to the Gospel, but not when they contradict it.

But when they teach or decree something contrary to the Gospel, then they have a command from God's Church that forbids obedience— Matt. Beware of false prophets.✦ Gal. 1. If an angel from heaven preaches another gospel, let him be accursed.✦ 2. Cor.

Building Up, Not Against the Truth

Church authority is for edification and truth, not for acting against Scripture, as attested by Paul and the Canons.

13. We cannot do anything against the truth, but only for the truth. Likewise, power has been given to us for building up, not for tearing down. So too the Canons enjoin, 2. q. 7. Cap. Priests, and Cap.

Augustine on Erring Bishops

Even Catholic bishops are not to be followed if they contradict canonical Scripture.

Sheep. And Augustine, writing against Petilian's letter, says: Catholic bishops must not be agreed with if perhaps they are mistaken anywhere, or think anything contrary to the canonical Scriptures of God.

Human Law and Emergency Jurisdiction

Any additional jurisdiction bishops hold in civil matters comes from human law for the sake of public peace.

If they have any other power or jurisdiction in judging certain cases—namely, those involving marriage or tithes, and so forth— they hold this by human law, where, when the regular authorities are unavailable, princes—even unwilling ones—are compelled to administer justice to their own subjects, so that peace may be preserved.

The Debate Over Instituting Ceremonies

Some argue bishops may institute church ceremonies and laws, citing the Spirit's guidance and apostolic examples.

Beyond these things, it's debated whether bishops or pastors have the right to institute ceremonies in the Church, and laws about foods, holidays, the ranks of ministers, or orders, etc. of enacting. Those who attribute this right to bishops cite the testimony: "I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. However, when the Spirit of truth comes, he will teach you all truth."✦3 They also cite the example of the Apostles, who directed people to abstain from blood and from what is strangled.✦4 They cite the Sabbath being changed to the Lord's Day, contrary to the Decalogue, as it seems. And no example is boasted of more than the change of the Sabbath. They contend that the power of the Church is great, because it has dispensed with the commandment of the Decalogue.

No Authority Against the Gospel

Bishops cannot institute traditions that claim to merit grace or satisfy for sins, for this contradicts Scripture.

But on this point our people teach that bishops do not have the authority to establish anything against the Gospel, as was shown above; the Canons teach the same thing in Distinction 9. Distin. Furthermore, it is contrary to Scripture to institute traditions or to require that by observing them we make satisfaction for sins, or that we thereby merit grace and righteousness. For the glory of Christ's merit is injured when, by such observances, we attempt to merit justification. It is clear, moreover, that because of this persuasion traditions have grown almost without limit in the Church, while in the meantime the teaching about faith and the righteousness of faith was suppressed; because more and more feast days were being instituted, fasts being decreed, new ceremonies and new honors for the saints being established — since their authors believed that by these works they were earning grace. This is how the penitential Canons once grew, and we still see certain traces of them in the satisfactions.

Traditions That Enslave Consciences

Human traditions imposing legalistic burdens on foods, days, and reserved cases wrongly burden consciences.

Likewise, those who devise human traditions act against God's commandment when they locate sin in foods, in days, and similar matters, and burden the Church with a servitude to the law, as if Christians needed a form of worship like the Levitical one in order to earn justification—whose regulation God entrusted to the Apostles and bishops, as some indeed write. And it seems the bishops have been somewhat deceived by the example of the Mosaic law.5 Hence come those burdens: that it is mortal sin to work with your hands on feast days even without giving offense to others; that it is mortal sin to omit the Canonical Hours; that certain foods defile the conscience; that fasts are works that placate God; that sin in a reserved case cannot be forgiven unless the authority of the one who reserved it is obtained—even though the Canons themselves speak not of the reservation of guilt, but of the reservation of ecclesiastical punishment.

The Source of Such Impositions

Bishops have no warrant from Christ or Paul to multiply traditions that ensnare consciences.

So where do bishops get the authority to impose these traditions on the churches, entangling consciences? When Peter forbids putting a yoke on the disciples, and when Paul says the power given to them is for building up, not for tearing down— why, then, do they multiply sins through these traditions?

Scripture Forbids Meritorious Traditions

Paul in Colossians and Titus explicitly forbids traditions that claim divine necessity or merit.

But there are clear testimonies that forbid establishing such traditions to merit grace, or as if they were necessary for salvation. Paul in Colossians chapter 2. Let no one judge you in matters of food or drink, or regarding a festival, new moon, or sabbath.✦ If then you have died with Christ to the elements of the world, why do you decree rules as if you were still living in the world?✦ Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle — all of which perish in the using — for they are the commandments and teachings of men, which have the appearance of wisdom.✦ Likewise, to Titus he openly forbids traditions: 'Not giving heed to Jewish fables and the commandments of those who turn away from the truth.'✦ And Christ in Matthew

Christ's Warning Against Human Plantings

Christ warns against blind leaders and declares that human plantings will be rooted up.

15. Christ says of those who demand such traditions: Leave them alone — they are blind, and they are leaders of the blind. And Christ condemns such forms of worship: Every planting that my Father in heaven did not plant will be rooted up.

Why Traditions Are Forbidden

Scripture repeatedly forbids such traditions because they conflict with Gospel freedom and justification by faith.

If bishops have the right to burden churches with endless traditions and to ensnare consciences, why does Scripture so often forbid establishing and following traditions? Why does he call them doctrines of demons? Surely the Holy Spirit did not warn against these things in vain? It remains, therefore, that since ordinances instituted as if they were necessary, or with the opinion of meriting grace, conflict with the Gospel, it is not permitted to any bishops to institute or impose such worship practices.6 For it is necessary to retain in churches the teaching about Christian freedom: that the servitude of the law is not necessary for justification, as it is written in Galatians: Do not again submit to a yoke of servitude.✦7 It is necessary to hold to the chief point of the Gospel: that we obtain grace freely through faith in Christ, not on account of certain observances or worship practices instituted by human beings.

The Proper Purpose of Church Order

Church ordinances may be made for good order, but not as necessary for salvation or to merit grace.

So what should we think about the Lord's day and similar temple rites? In response, they say that bishops or pastors are allowed to make ordinances so that things in the church can be conducted in good order, but not so that through them we might merit grace, or satisfy for sins, or so that consciences are bound to regard such worship practices as necessary, and to believe they sin when they violate them without causing offense to others.8 Thus Paul ordains that in the congregation women should cover their heads, so that in good order interpreters can be heard in the church, and so on.9

Keeping Ordinances in Love

Ordinances should be observed for love and peace, without burdening consciences as necessary.

These practices should be kept in the churches for the sake of love and peace, so that one person doesn't offend another, and so that everything in the churches may be done in order and without turmoil. But this is so that consciences are not burdened, so that they may consider these things necessary for salvation, and judge themselves to sin when they violate them without offending others — just as no one would say that a woman sins who goes out in public without a covered head, if it is done without giving offense to others.10

The Lord's Day and Sabbath Freedom

The Lord's Day was appointed by the church for order and as an example of Christian liberty, not as a necessary replacement of the Sabbath.

Such is the observance of the Lord's Day, of Easter, of Pentecost, and of similar feast days and rites. For those who judge that the observance of the Lord's Day was instituted by the Church's authority in place of the Sabbath, as if it were necessary, are far mistaken.11 Scripture has abrogated the Sabbath, which teaches that all Mosaic ceremonies can be omitted after the Gospel has been revealed.12 And yet, because there was need to establish a fixed day so that the people would know when they ought to assemble, it appears that the Church designated the Lord's Day for this purpose. It also seems to have pleased her for this further reason: so that people might have an example of Christian liberty, and might know that the observance of the Sabbath or of any other day is not necessary.1314

Errors About Ceremonial Worship

The false belief that church worship must mirror Levitical ceremonies has spawned endless debates and snares for consciences.

There are astounding debates about changing the law, about the ceremonies of the new law, about changing the Sabbath — all of which have sprung from the false conviction that worship in the church must be similar to Levitical worship. And that Christ entrusted to the apostles and bishops the task of devising new ceremonies that would be necessary for salvation. These errors crept into the church when the justice of faith wasn't being taught clearly enough. Some argue that observing the Lord's Day isn't actually a matter of divine law, but as if it were, they prescribe rules about holidays regarding how much work is permitted. What are debates like this if not snares for consciences? For although they try to soften their traditions, equity can never be recovered as long as the opinion that they are necessary remains — and they must be regarded as necessary wherever the justice of faith and Christian freedom aren't recognized.

Apostolic Decrees and Their Limits

The apostolic decree about blood was temporary and not meant to burden consciences permanently.

The Apostles commanded abstaining from blood — who observes that now?✦ Yet those who don't observe it aren't sinning, because not even the Apostles themselves wanted to burden consciences with such servitude, but forbade it for a time on account of scandal. For the perpetual will of the Gospel must be considered in the decree. Scarcely any canons are kept exactly, and many fall into disuse daily even among those who most zealously defend the traditions. Nor can consciences be properly served unless this equity is preserved, so that we may know the traditions are kept without any notion of necessity, and that consciences are not harmed even if the traditions fall into disuse.

Pleading for Relief from Burdens

Bishops should relax unjust observances, and if they refuse, God must be obeyed rather than men.

It would be easy for bishops to retain legitimate obedience, if they didn't insist on keeping traditions that can't be observed with a good conscience. Now they impose celibacy and accept no one unless he swears that he will not teach the pure doctrine of the Gospel. They don't ask the churches that bishops restore harmony at the cost of their own honor — even though that is what good pastors ought to do. They ask only that the unjust burdens be relaxed — the ones that are new and received contrary to the custom of the catholic Church. Perhaps at first certain regulations had plausible reasons, but in later times they no longer fit. It's also apparent that some were received in error, so it would be a mark of papal clemency to mitigate them now, because a change like that doesn't undermine the Church's unity. For many human traditions have been changed over time, as the Canons themselves show. If it cannot be obtained that the observances which cannot be kept without sin be relaxed, we must follow the Apostolic rule, which commands us to obey God rather than men.✦

A Final Appeal for Gospel Freedom

The aim is not to strip bishops of authority but to allow pure Gospel teaching and relieve consciences from sinful burdens.

Peter forbids bishops to lord it over others and to dictate to the churches.✦ Now the aim isn't to strip bishops of their authority, but this one thing is asked: that they allow the Gospel to be taught purely and that they relax a few certain observances that can't be kept without sin. But if they remit nothing, they themselves will have to see how they will render an account to God, since their obstinacy provides the cause for schism.

Read the original Latin

Magnae disputationes fuerunt de potestate Episcoporum, in quibus nonnulli incommode commiscuerunt potestatem Ecclesiasticam, et potestatem gladii. Et ex hac confusione, maxima bella, maximi motus extiterunt, dum Pontifices freti potestate clavium, non solum novos cultus instituerunt, reservatione casuum, violentis excommunicationibus conscientias oneraverunt, sed etiam regna mundi transferre, et imperatoribus adimere imperium conati sunt. Haec vitia multo ante reprehenderunt in Ecclesia homines pii et eruditi. Itaque nostri ad consolandas conscientias, coacti sunt ostendere discrimen Ecclesiasticae potestatis, et potestatis gladii, et docuerunt, utramque propter mandatum Dei religiose venerandam et honore afficiendam esse, tanquam summa Dei beneficia in terris.

Sic autem sentiunt, potestatem clavium, seu potestatem Episcoporum, iuxta Evangelium, potestatem esse seu mandatum Dei, praedicandi Evangelii, remittendi et retinendi peccata, et administrandi sacramenta. Nam cum hoc mandato Christus mittit Apostolos: Sicut misit me Pater, ita et ego mitto vos, Accipite Spiritum sanctum, quorum remiseritis peccata, remittuntur eis, et quorum retinueritis peccata, retenta sunt. Marc. 16. Ite, praedicate Evangelium omni creaturae, etc.

Haec potestas tantum exercetur docendo seu praedicando verbum, et porrigendo sacramenta, vel multis vel singulis iuxta vocationem, quia conceduntur non res corporales, sed res aeternae, iustitia aeterna, Spiritus sanctus, vita aeterna. Haec non possunt contingere nisi per ministerium verbi et sacramentorum, sicut Paulus dicit: Evangelium est potentia Dei, ad salutem omni credenti. Itaque cum potestas Ecclesiastica concedat res aeternas, et tantum exerceatur per ministerium verbi, non impedit politicam administrationem, sicut ars canendi nihil impedit politicam administrationem. Nam politica administratio versatur circa alias res, quam Evangelium. Magistratus defendit non mentes, sed corpora et res corporales, adversus manifestas iniurias, et coercet homines gladio, et corporalibus poenis, ut iustitiam civilem et pacem retineat.

Non igitur commiscendae sunt potestates Ecclesiastica et civilis. Ecclesiastica suum mandatum habet, Evangelii docendi et administrandi sacramenta. Non irrumpat in alienum officium, non transferat regna mundi, non abroget leges Magistratuum, non tollat legitimam obedientiam, non impediat iudicia de ullis civilibus ordinationibus aut contractibus, non praescribat leges magistratibus de forma reipublicae, sicut dicit Christus: Regnum meum non est de hoc mundo. Item: Quis constituit me iudicem aut divisorem supra vos? Et Paulus ait Philip. 3. Nostra politia in coelis est. 2.

Corinth. 10. Arma militiae nostrae non sunt carnalia, sed potentia Deo, ad destruendas cogitationes, etc. Ad hunc modum discernunt nostri utriusque potestatis officia, et iubent utramque honore afficere et agnoscere, utramque Dei donum et beneficium esse.

Si quam habent Episcopi potestatem gladii, hanc non habent Episcopi ex mandato Evangelii, sed iure humano donatam a regibus et imperatoribus, ad administrationem civilem suorum bonorum. Haec interim alia functio est, quam ministerium Evangelii.

Cum igitur de iurisdictione Episcoporum quaeritur, discerni debet imperium ab Ecclesiastica iurisdictione. Porro secundum Evangelium, seu ut loquuntur, de iure divino, nulla iurisdictio competit Episcopis, ut Episcopis, hoc est, his quibus est commissum ministerium verbi et sacramentorum, nisi remittere peccata. Item, cognoscere doctrinam, et doctrinam ab Evangelio dissentientem reiicere, et impios, quorum nota est impietas, excludere a communione Ecclesiae, sine vi humana, sed verbo. Hic necessario et de iure divino, debent eis Ecclesiae praestare obedientiam, iuxta illud, Qui vos audit, me audit.

Verum cum aliquid contra Evangelium docent aut statuunt, tunc habent Ecclesiae mandatum Dei, quod obedientiam prohibet, Matth. 7. Cavete a Pseudoprophetis. Gal. 1. Si Angelus de coelo aliud Evangelium evangelizaverit, anathema sit. 2. Corinth.

13. Non possumus aliquid contra veritatem, sed pro veritate. Item, Data est nobis potestas ad aedificationem, non ad destructionem. Sic et Canones praecipiunt, 2. q. 7. Cap. Sacerdotes, et Cap.

Oves. Et Augustinus contra Petiliani Epistolam inquit: Nec catholicis Episcopis consentiendum est, sicubi forte falluntur, aut contra Canonicas Dei scripturas aliquid sentiunt.

Si quam habent aliam vel potestatem, vel iurisdictionem in cognoscendis certis causis, videlicet matrimonii, aut decimarum, etc. hanc habent humano iure, Ubi cessantibus ordinariis coguntur Principes vel inviti, suis subditis ius dicere, ut pax retineatur.

Praeter haec disputatur, utrum Episcopi seu pastores habeant ius instituendi ceremonias in Ecclesia, et leges de cibis, feriis, gradibus ministrorum, seu ordinibus, etc. condendi. Hoc ius qui tribuunt Episcopis, allegant testimonium: Adhuc multa habeo vobis dicere, sed non potestis portare modo, Cum autem venerit ille Spiritus veritatis, docebit vos omnem veritatem. Allegant etiam exemplum Apostolorum, qui prohibuerunt abstinere a sanguine, et suffocato. Allegant sabbatum mutatum in diem Dominicum contra Decalogum, ut videtur. Nec ullum exemplum magis iactatur, quam mutatio sabbati. Magnam contendunt Ecclesiae potestatem esse, quod dispensaverit de praecepto Decalogi.

Sed de hac quaestione nostri sic docent, quod Episcopi non habent potestatem statuendi aliquid contra Evangelium, ut supra ostensum est, Docent idem Canones 9. Distin. Porro contra scripturam est, traditiones condere aut exigere, ut per eam observationem satisfaciamus pro peccatis, aut mereamur gratiam et iustitiam. Laeditur enim gloria meriti Christi, cum talibus observationibus conamur mereri iustificationem. Constat autem propter hanc persuasionem, in Ecclesia pene in infinitum crevisse traditiones, oppressa interim doctrina de fide et iustitia fidei, quia subinde plures feriae factae sunt, ieiunia indicta, ceremoniae novae, novi honores sanctorum instituti sunt, quia arbitrabantur se autores talium rerum, his operibus mereri gratiam. Sic olim creverunt Canones poenitentiales, quorum adhuc in satisfactionibus vestigia quaedam videmus.

Item, autores traditionum faciunt contra mandatum Dei, cum collocant peccatum in cibis, in diebus, et similibus rebus, et onerant Ecclesiam servitute legis, quasi oporteat apud Christianos ad promerendam iustificationem cultum esse similem Levitico, cuius ordinationem commiserit Deus Apostolis et Episcopis, sic enim scribunt quidam, Et videntur Pontifices aliqua ex parte exemplo legis Mosaicae decepti esse. Hinc sunt illa onera, quod peccatum mortale sit, etiam sine offensione aliorum, in feriis laborare manibus, quod sit peccatum mortale omittere horas Canonicas, quod certi cibi polluant conscientiam, quod ieiunia sint opera placantia Deum, quod peccatum in casu reservato non possit remitti, nisi accesserit autoritas reservantis, cum quidem ipsi Canones non de reservatione culpae, sed de reservatione poenae Ecclesiasticae loquantur.

Unde habent ius Episcopi has traditiones imponendi Ecclesiis, ad illaqueandas conscientias? Cum Petrus vetet imponere iugum discipulis, cum Paulus dicat, potestatem ipsis datam esse ad aedificationem, non ad destructionem. Cur igitur augent peccata per has traditiones?

Verum extant clara testimonia, quae prohibent condere tales traditiones ad promerendam gratiam, aut tanquam necessarias ad salutem. Paulus Coloss. 2. Nemo vos iudicet in cibo, potu, parte diei festi, novilunio aut sabbatis. Item, Si mortui estis cum Christo ab elementis mundi, quare tanquam viventes in mundo, decreta facitis? Non attingas, non gustes, non contrectes, quae omnia pereunt usu, et sunt mandata et doctrinae hominum, quae habent speciem sapientiae. Item, ad Titum aperte prohibet traditiones, Non attendentes Iudaicis fabulis, et mandatis hominum aversantium veritatem. Et Christus Matth.

15. inquit de his qui exigunt traditiones: Sinite illos, caeci sunt, et duces caecorum. Et improbat tales cultus: Omnis plantatio, quam non plantavit pater meus coelestis, eradicabitur.

Si ius habent Episcopi onerandi Ecclesias infinitis traditionibus, et illaqueandi conscientias, cur toties prohibet scriptura condere et audire traditiones? Cur vocat eas doctrinas daemoniorum? Num frustra haec praemonuit Spiritus sanctus? Relinquitur igitur, cum ordinationes institutae tanquam necessariae, aut cum opinione promerendae gratiae, pugnent cum Evangelio, quod non liceat ullis Episcopis tales cultus instituere aut exigere. Necesse est enim in Ecclesiis retineri doctrinam, de libertate Christiana, quod non sit necessaria servitus legis ad iustificationem, sicut in Galatis scriptum est: Nolite iterum iugo servitutis subiici. Necesse est retineri praecipuum Evangelii locum, quod gratiam per fidem in Christum gratis consequamur, non propter certas observationes, aut propter cultus ab hominibus institutos.

Quid igitur sentiendum est de die Dominico, et similibus ritibus templorum? Ad haec respondent, quod liceat Episcopis seu pastoribus facere ordinationes, ut res ordine gerantur in Ecclesia, non ut per illas mereamur gratiam, aut satisfaciamus pro peccatis, aut obligentur conscientiae, ut iudicent esse necessarios cultus, ac sentiant se peccare, cum sine offensione aliorum violant. Sic Paulus ordinat, ut in congregatione mulieres velent capita, ut ordine audiantur in Ecclesia interpretes, etc.

Tales ordinationes convenit Ecclesias propter caritatem et tranquillitatem servare eatenus, ne alius alium offendat, ut ordine et sine tumultu omnia fiant in Ecclesiis. Verum ita, ne conscientiae onerentur, ut ducant res esse necessarias ad salutem, ac iudicent se peccare cum violant eas sine aliorum offensione, sicut nemo dixerit peccare mulierem, quae in publicum non velato capite procedit, sine offensione hominum.

Talis est observatio diei Dominici, Paschatis, Pentecostes, et similium feriarum, et rituum. Nam qui iudicant Ecclesiae autoritate, pro sabbato institutam esse diei Dominici observationem, tanquam necessariam, longe errant. Scriptura abrogavit sabbatum, quae docet omnes ceremonias Mosaicas, post revelatum Evangelium omitti posse. Et tamen quia opus erat constituere certum diem, ut sciret populus, quando convenire deberet, apparet Ecclesiam ei rei destinasse diem Dominicum, qui ob hanc quoque causam videtur magis placuisse, ut haberent homines exemplum Christianae libertatis, et scirent nec sabbati nec alterius diei observationem necessariam esse.

Extant prodigiosae disputationes de mutatione legis, de ceremoniis novae legis, de mutatione sabbati, quae omnes ortae sunt ex falsa persuasione, quod oporteat in Ecclesia cultum esse similem Levitico. Et quod Christus commiserit Apostolis et Episcopis excogitare novas ceremonias, quae sint ad salutem necessariae. Hi errores serpserunt in Ecclesiam, cum iustitia fidei non satis clare doceretur. Aliqui disputant diei Dominici observationem non quidem iuris divini esse, sed quasi iuris divini, praescribunt de feriis, quatenus liceat operari. Huiusmodi disputationes quid sunt aliud nisi laquei conscientiarum? Quanquam enim conentur traditiones mitigare, tamen nunquam potest aequitas deprehendi, donec manet opinio necessitatis, quam manere necesse est, ubi ignorantur iustitia fidei, et libertas Christiana.

Apostoli iusserunt abstinere a sanguine, quis nunc observat? Neque tamen peccant qui non observant, quia ne ipsi quidem Apostoli voluerunt onerare conscientias tali servitute, sed ad tempus prohibuerunt propter scandalum. Est enim perpetua voluntas Evangelii consideranda in decreto. Vix ulli Canones servantur accurate, et multi quotidie exolescunt apud illos etiam, qui diligentissime defendunt traditiones. Nec potest conscientiis consuli, nisi haec aequitas servetur, ut sciamus eas sine opinione necessitatis servari, nec laedi conscientias, etiamsi traditiones exolescant.

Facile autem possent Episcopi legitimam obedientiam retinere, si non urgerent servare traditiones, quae bona conscientia servari non possunt. Nunc imperant coelibatum, nullos recipiunt, nisi iurent se puram Evangelii doctrinam nolle docere. Non petunt Ecclesiae, ut Episcopi honoris sui iactura sarciant concordiam, quod tamen decebat bonos pastores facere. Tantum petunt, ut iniusta onera remittant, quae nova sunt, et praeter consuetudinem Ecclesiae catholicae recepta. Fortassis initio quaedam constitutiones habuerunt probabiles causas, quae tamen posterioribus temporibus non congruunt. Apparet etiam quasdam errore receptas esse, quare Pontificiae clementiae esset, illas nunc mitigare, quia talis mutatio non labefacit Ecclesiae unitatem. Multae enim traditiones humanae tempore mutatae sunt, ut ostendunt ipsi Canones. Quod si non potest impetrari, ut relaxentur observationes, quae sine peccato non possunt praestari, oportet nos regulam Apostolicam sequi, quae praecipit, Deo magis obedire quam hominibus.

Petrus vetat Episcopos dominari, et Ecclesiis imperare. Nunc non id agitur, ut dominatio eripiatur Episcopis, sed hoc unum petitur, ut patiantur Evangelium pure doceri, et relaxent paucas quasdam observationes, quae sine peccato servari non possunt. Quod si nihil remisserint, ipsi viderint, quomodo Deo rationem reddituri sint, quod pertinacia sua causam schismati praebent.

Scripture echoes

  1. ↩John.20.21-John.20.23 — So Jesus said to them again, 'Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you.' John.20.22 — And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said, "Receive the Holy Spirit." John.20.23 — If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.
  2. ↩Mark.16.15 — And he said to them, "Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation."
  3. ↩John.18.36 — Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not from this world. If my kingdom were from this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But as it is, my kingdom is not from there."
  4. ↩Luke.12.14 — But he said to him, 'Man, who appointed me a judge or divider over you?'
  5. ↩Phil.3.20 — For our citizenship is in heaven, from which we also eagerly await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ.
  6. ↩2Cor.10.4 — For the weapons of our warfare are not fleshly, but powerful to God for the tearing down of strongholds,
  7. ↩Luke.10.16 — The one who listens to you listens to me, and the one who rejects you rejects me; but the one who rejects me rejects the one who sent me.
  8. ↩Matt.7.15 — Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.
  9. ↩Gal.1.8 — But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel to you beyond what we proclaimed to you, let him be accursed.
  10. ↩John.16.12-John.16.13 — I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. John.16.13 — But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. For he will not speak on his own, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are coming.
  11. ↩Acts.15.20 — but that we write to them to abstain from the pollutions of idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what is strangled, and from blood.
  12. ↩Col.2.16 — Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath.
  13. ↩Col.2.20 — If you died with Christ to the elemental forces of the world, why, as though you were still living in the world, do you submit to regulations?
  14. ↩Col.2.21-Col.2.23 — Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch— Col.2.22 — which are all destined to perish with use, according to the commandments and teachings of men. Col.2.23 — These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and self-denial and severity to the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh.
  15. ↩Titus.1.14 — not paying attention to Jewish myths and to commandments of men who turn away from the truth.
  16. ↩Gal.5.1 — For freedom Christ has set us free. Stand firm, therefore, and do not again be subject to a yoke of slavery.
  17. ↩Acts.15.20 — but that we write to them to abstain from the pollutions of idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what is strangled, and from blood.
  18. ↩Acts.5.29 — But Peter and the apostles answered, "We must obey God rather than men."
  19. ↩1Pet.5.3 — not lording it over those entrusted to you, but becoming examples to the flock.

Notes

  1. 1 ↩The Latin quotes John 20:21–23 (Vulgate). The clause 'whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained' is rendered in its familiar Gospel cadence.
  2. 2 ↩The Latin quotes Mark 16:15 (Vulgate).
  3. 3 ↩Scripture citation (John 16:12-13) preserved as candidate; awaiting Moses resolution.
  4. 4 ↩Scripture citation (Acts 15:20, 29) preserved as candidate; awaiting Moses resolution.
  5. 5 ↩The Latin relative clause 'cuius ordinationem commiserit Deus Apostolis et Episcopis' is syntactically ambiguous; it may refer back to the Levitical regulation (which God entrusted to the Levites in the Old Covenant) or be a sarcastic jab at the Roman claim that God entrusted such regulations to bishops. The translation preserves the ambiguity of the source.
  6. 6 ↩The first cum is concessive ('since...'), the second cum is causal ('with the opinion of...'); both rendered to reflect that the ordinances are being treated as necessary or as means of meriting grace, which sets them against the Gospel.
  7. 7 ↩Quoted scriptural span: 'Nolite iterum iugo servitutis subiici' — Galatians 5:1. Preserved in its familiar cadence.
  8. 8 ↩The three purpose clauses (ut...ut...ut) set up a sharp contrast between legitimate order and illegitimate soteriological obligation; the final cum clause is temporal ('when they violate') but carries a concessive edge that the English renders straightforwardly.
  9. 9 ↩Alludes to 1 Corinthians 11:5–6 (women covering heads in worship); final citation resolution belongs to a later stage.
  10. 10 ↩The Latin sicut nemo dixerit peccare mulierem... invokes the head-covering custom (cf. 1 Cor 11) as an example of a matter indifferent in itself, not a direct quotation of Paul's argument.
  11. 11 ↩longe errant: literally 'err far'; rendered 'are far mistaken' to capture the emphatic deviation from truth without archaism.
  12. 12 ↩abrogavit: 'has abrogated' preserves the perfect tense and the strong theological claim that Scripture itself sets aside the Sabbath.
  13. 13 ↩Et tamen: adversative-concessive combination rendered 'And yet' to preserve both the connective force and the concessive nuance.
  14. 14 ↩placuisse: rendered 'pleased her' with 'her' referring to the Church; the dative ei rei is rendered 'for this purpose' to clarify the Church's intention.

Augsburg Confession (Confessio Augustana) companion

Read the full Confession, one article a day

Chosen Portion serves the complete Augsburg Confession in daily readable portions — free on iOS

The Confession was written to be read aloud before an emperor in one afternoon; Chosen Portion breaks that same text into daily portions so you can confess it thoughtfully over a month.

  • All 28 articles plus the preface, split into readings under 5 minutes each
  • Finish the entire Confession in about 4 weeks of daily reading
  • Continue into Dort, the church fathers, and 78+ other historic works
Chosen Portion — Daily Prayer (free iOS app) →