De signis

De signis

We have said that the Gospel is the promise of grace. Moreover, there is a place for signs that relate to the promises. In the Scriptures, signs are added like seals to the promises, which remind us of those promises and serve as certain testimonies of God's will toward us, assuring us that we will receive what God has promised. In the use of signs, one can be misled in the most disgraceful way. For when scholars debate, what difference is there between the sacraments? T. , in the sacraments V. They deny that it has the power to justify. They attribute a power to the sacraments for justification, which is clearly a mistake. For faith alone justifies. Therefore, the nature of signs is easily understood from Paul's teaching about the Sacrament, because they operate in the power of Christ's passion, and in a certain way, the passion of Christ is applied to people through writing. It is clear that the sacrament of the Old Law, which is the passion of Christ, the cause of our justification, had no inherent power to confer the justifying grace before it was given, but that the fathers demonstrated that it was faith alone that justified. — If someone wishes to receive the Holy Supper, they must have faith, which can be understood in this way, as discussed in Romans, where it speaks about circumcision in the fourth chapter: Abraham was not justified by circumcision, but rather before circumcision and without the merit of circumcision, and he received circumcision afterward as a sign to show that God declared Abraham righteous and to confirm to Abraham that he was righteous before God, so that he would not despair in a wavering conscience. If you understand the purpose, what could be more joyful than the signs? It's not enough that the signs remind us of God's promises. This is truly great, that there is a certain testimony of divine will toward you. Thus Moses calls circumcision a sign, Genesis. This is the sign of the covenant between you and me. The sign of the covenant is circumcision, which reminds Abraham and all the circumcised of God's promise. The sign of the covenant is circumcision, which confirms Abraham's conscience so that he won't doubt that what was promised will indeed happen, and that God will fulfill what He has promised. But what was God’s promise to Abraham? Isn't it true that God promised Abraham to embrace him, to justify him, and to keep him safe? Abraham had no doubt that these things were certain, confirmed by the sign of circumcision. If you wish, you can explore the entire Scripture and seek the meaning of signs from the sacred histories, not from impious sophists. The Lord extended Hezekiah's life through the oracle of Isaiah. God confirms that promise with a sign, so the king would know for sure that it would come to pass, and the shadow of the clock would be turned back ten degrees. Gideon was confirmed by two signs so that he wouldn’t doubt what was to come, and that he would lead Israel to freedom. Let Achazum, the prophet Isaiah, rebuke those who disregard the sign of God's will toward them. For he did not believe in the promise. And what good is it to seek many things, when Scripture is so full of examples like these? From these, I believe one can learn the purpose of signs. Signs do not justify. The Apostle says: Circumcision is nothing; likewise, baptism is nothing, as the Apostle says. Participation in the Lord's table is nothing, but there are witnesses to the divine will toward you, by which your conscience may be assured if you doubt about grace or the benevolence of God toward you. Hezekiah couldn't doubt that he would recover after hearing the promise and seeing the sign that confirmed it; Gideon also had no reason to doubt that he would be victorious, having been assured by so many signs. You shouldn't doubt that you've received mercy, especially when you've heard the gospel and accepted the baptism of the gospel, along with the Body and Blood of the Lord. Ezekiel could have been restored without a sign if he had wanted to believe in the bare promise, and Gideon would have been victorious without a sign if he had believed; likewise, you can be justified without a sign, as long as you believe. Signs don't justify, but it was Ezechias' faith, just as Gideon's faith was to be supported and confirmed by such signs. Thus, our weakness is lifted up by signs, so that we do not despair of God's mercy amid so many assaults of sin. You wouldn't have any other sign of God's grace than if He were to speak with you directly, or if He were to show you some special token of His mercy, or any miracle at all. It's fitting that you should feel something about these signs, so that you can believe with certainty that God is merciful to you, when you receive baptism and when you participate in the Lord's Supper, just as you would believe if God were to speak with you or perform some other miracle that was meant just for you. Signs are given to stir up faith through grace. Now both faith and the use of signs have been extinguished by those who have them for profit. The knowledge of signs is very beneficial, and I don't know if anything else can comfort and strengthen the conscience more effectively than this use of signs. Common places. What others call sacraments, we refer to as signs, or, if you prefer, sacramental signs. For Paul calls the Sacrament itself Christ. But if the name of the sign is displeasing, call it something else that better signifies the Sacraments. It's likely that those who compared these signs to military symbols or tokens saw them merely as marks by which to recognize to whom the divine promises belonged, just as Cornelius was baptized when he was already justified, so that he would be counted among those to whom the promise of the kingdom of God and eternal life pertained. I mention these things about the nature of signs so that the proper use of the sacraments can be understood, and so that no one follows the Scholastics who attribute justification to signs in a horrifying error. There are two signs established by Christ in the Gospel. Next, the Sacraments should be the good things from heaven. Digitized by Google, baptism and participation in the Lord's table. For we judge that sacramental signs are those which have been divinely given as signs of God's grace. For we cannot establish a sign of divine will toward us, nor can we refer those signs to the divine will that Scripture has mentioned elsewhere. The more we wonder about what came to the minds of the Sophists, especially when they attributed justification to signs and included those among the sacraments, the more we realize that God did not institute marriage in this way, so that it would be a proper sign of grace. The anointing ritual is older than the sign of grace. Luther argued extensively about this in his Babylonian captivity, where he required a more thorough discussion. Moreover, this is the essence of the matter: grace cannot be signified certainly and properly except by those signs which have been divinely revealed. And so, sacramental signs cannot be called such unless they are those that have been added to the promises of God. Therefore, it has been said by the ancients that sacraments consist of things and words. A thing is a sign, and words are a promise of grace. The church has signs of divine grace, which the people call sacraments: baptism and the Eucharist, for penance is nothing other than a reminder of baptism. We wonder how the order of the name of the Sacrament has come to be, when we dismiss human statutes and marvel at these things. Isn't this amazing to you? But now, there are many things to discuss with Philip, since we've often and keenly examined these matters. Common places.