Chapter II: Of Justification (Articles IV, V, VI and XX)

p. 84 Article IV: Of Justification

In the fourth, fifth, sixth and below in the twentieth article, they condemn us, for teaching that “men obtain remission of sins, not because of their own merits, but freely for Christ’s sake, through faith in Christ.” For they condemn us both for denying, that men obtain remission of sins, because of their own merits, and for affirming that, through faith, men obtain remission of sins, and through faith in Christ are justified. But, since, in this controversy, the chief topic of Christian doctrine, is treated, which, understood aright, illumines and amplifies the honor of Christ [which is of especial service for the clear, correct understanding of the entire Holy Scriptures, and alone shows the way to the unspeakable treasure and right knowledge of Christ, and alone opens the door to the entire Bible], and brings necessary and most abundant consolation to devout consciences, we ask His Imperial Majesty to hear us with forbearance, in regard to matters of such importance. For, since the adversaries understand neither what the remission of sins, nor what faith, nor what grace, nor what righteousness is, they sadly corrupt this topic, and obscure the glory and benefits of Christ, and rob devout consciences of the consolations offered in Christ. But, not only that we may strengthen the position of our Confession, but also remove the charges which the adversaries advance against us, certain things are to be premised in the beginning, in order that the sources of both kinds of doctrine, i. e. both that of our adversaries and our own, may be known.

A. Of the Origin of the Disagreement, and the Errors of the Adversaries

All Scripture ought to be distributed into these two topics, the Law and the promises. For, in some places, it delivers the Law, and, in others, the promise concerning Christ, viz. either when it promises that Christ will come, and offers, for his sake, the remission of sins, justification and life eternal, or when in the Gospel Christ himself, since he has appeared, promises the remission of sins, justification and life eternal. Moreover, in p. 85 this discussion, by Law we designate the Ten Commandments, wherever they are read in the Scriptures. Of the ceremonies and judicial laws of Moses, we say nothing at present.

Parallel passages: Augsburg Confession, Arts. iv., xviii.; Smalcald Articles, 300; Formula of Concord, Epitome and Sol. Decl., Art. iii., 527, 610

Of these two parts, the adversaries select the Law, because human reason naturally understands, in some way, the Law (for it has the same judgment divinely written in the mind); and, by the Law, they seek the remission of sins and justification. Now, the Decalogue requires not only outward civil works, which reason can in some way produce, but it also requires other things placed far above reason, viz. to truly fear God, to truly love God, to truly call upon God, to be truly convinced that God hears, and to expect the aid of God in death, and in all afflictions; finally, it requires obedience to God, in death and all afflictions, so that we may not flee from these, or refuse them, when God imposes them.

Here the scholastics, having followed the philosophers, teach only a righteousness of reason, viz. civil works, and fabricate besides that, without the Holy Ghost, reason can love God above all things. For, as long as the human mind is at ease, and does not feel the wrath or judgment of God, it can imagine that it wishes to love God, that it wishes to do good for God’s sake. In this manner, they teach that men merit the remission of sins, by doing according to that which is in them, i. e. if reason, grieving over sin, elicit an act of love to God, or, for God’s sake be active in that which is good. And because this opinion naturally flatters men, it has brought forth and multiplied in the Church many services, monastic vows, abuses of the mass; and, with this opinion, others have, from time to time, devised other acts of worship and inventions. And, in order that they may nourish and increase confidence in such works, they affirm that God necessarily gives grace to one thus working, by the necessity not of constraint, but of immutability [not that he is constrained, but that this is the order, which God will not transgress or alter].

In this opinion, there are many great and pernicious errors, which it would be tedious to enumerate. Let the discreet reader think only of this: If this be Christian righteousness, what difference is there between philosophy and the doctrine of Christ? If we merit the remission of sins by these elicit acts, what does Christ furnish? If we can be justified by reason and the works of reason, wherefore is there need of Christ or regeneration? And from these opinions, the matter has now come to such a pass, that many ridicule us, because we teach that another righteousness than philosophic, must be sought after. We have heard that some, the Gospel being banished, have, instead of a sermon, repeated the ethics of p. 86 Aristotle. [I myself have heard a great preacher, who did not mention Christ and the Gospel, and preached the ethics of Aristotle.] Nor did such men err, if those things are true, which the adversaries defend [if the doctrine of the adversaries be true, the Ethics is a precious book of sermons, and a fine, new Bible]. For Aristotle wrote concerning civil life so learnedly, that nothing farther concerning this, is to be sought after. We see books extant, in which certain sayings of Christ are compared with the sayings of Socrates, Zeno and others, as though Christ had come for the purpose of delivering certain laws, through which we might merit the remission of sins, as though we did not receive this gratuitously, because of his merits. Therefore, if we here receive the doctrine of the adversaries, that by the works of reason, we merit the remission of sins and justification, there will be no difference between philosophic, or certainly pharisaic, and Christian righteousness.

Although the adversaries, not to pass by Christ altogether, require a knowledge of the history concerning Christ, and ascribe to him that he has merited for us that a habit be given, or as they say prima gratia, “first grace,” which they understand as a habit, inclining us the more readily to love God; yet, what they ascribe to this habit, is of little importance, because they imagine that the acts of the will are of the same kind, before, and after this habit. They imagine that the will can love God; but nevertheless this habit stimulates it to do the same the more cheerfully. And they bid us first merit this habit, by preceding merits, then they bid us merit by the works of the Law, an increase of this habit, and life eternal. Thus they bury Christ, so that men may not avail themselves of him, as a Mediator, and believe that, for his sake, they freely receive remission of sins and reconciliation, but may dream that, by their own fulfilment of the Law, they merit the remission of sins, and that by their own fulfilment of the Law, they are accounted righteous before God; while, nevertheless, the Law is never satisfied, and reason does nothing except certain civil works, and, in the meantime, neither [in the heart] fears God, nor truly believes that God cares for it. And although they speak of this habit, yet, without the righteousness of faith, neither the love of God in man can exist, nor can what the love of God is, be understood.

Their feigning a distinction between meritum congrui and meritum condigni [due and true complete merit] is only an artifice whereby they may not appear openly to pelagianize. For if God necessarily gives grace for the meritum congrui [due merit], it is no longer meritum congrui, but meritum condigni [a true duty and complete merit]. After this habit of love [is there], they imagine that man can acquire merit de p. 87 condigno. And yet they bid us doubt whether there be a habit present. How therefore do they know whether they acquire merit de congruo or de condigno? But this whole matter was fabricated by unconcerned men, who did not know how the remission of sins occurs, and how, in the judgment of God, and terrors of conscience, trust in works is driven away from us. Secure hypocrites always judge that they acquire merit de condigno, whether the habit be present, or be not present, because men naturally trust in their own righteousness; but terrified consciences waver, and hesitate, and then seek and accumulate other works, in order to find rest. Such consciences never think that they acquire merit de condigno, and they rush into despair unless they hear, in addition to the doctrine of the Law, the Gospel concerning the gratuitous remission of sins, and the righteousness of faith. [Thus some stories are told, that when the Barefooted monks had in vain praised their order and good works to some good consciences in the hour of death, they at last had to be silent concerning their order and St. Franciscus, and to say: “Dear man, Christ has died for thee.” This revived and refreshed in trouble, and alone gave peace and comfort.]

Thus the adversaries teach nothing but the righteousness of reason, or certainly of the Law, upon which they look just as the Jews upon the veiled face of Moses;¹ and, in secure hypocrites, who think that they satisfy the Law, they excite presumption and empty confidence in works, and contempt of the grace of Christ. On the contrary, they drive timid consciences to despair, which, laboring with doubt, never can find from experience what faith is, and how it is efficacious; thus, at last they utterly despair.

¹ 2 Cor. 3:13 sec.

Moreover we think concerning the righteousness of reason thus, viz. that God requires it, and that, because of God’s commandment, the honorable works which the Decalogue commands must necessarily be performed, according to the passage (Gal. 3:24): “The Law was our schoolmaster;” likewise (1 Tim. 1:9): “The Law is made for the ungodly.” For God wishes those who are carnal [gross sinners] to be restrained by civil discipline, and, to maintain this, he has given laws, Scripture doctrine, magistrates, penalties. And this righteousness reason, by its own strength, can, to a certain extent, work, although it is often overcome by natural weakness, and by the devil impelling it to manifest crimes. Moreover, although we cheerfully assign this righteousness of reason the praises that are due it (for this corrupt nature has no greater good [in this life and in a worldly nature, nothing is ever better than eloquence and virtue], and Aristotle says aright: “Neither the p. 88 evening star, nor the morning star is more beautiful than righteousness,” and God also honors it with bodily rewards); yet it ought not to be praised, so as to detract from Christ.

For it is false, that we merit the remission of sins by our works.

False also is this, that men are accounted righteous before God, because of the righteousness of reason [works and external piety].

False also is this, that reason, by its own strength, is able to love God above all things, and to fulfil God’s Law, viz. to truly fear God, to be truly confident that God hears prayer, to be willing to obey God in death and other dispensations of God, not to covet what belongs to others, etc.; although reason can work civil works.

False also and dishonoring Christ is this, that there are men who do not sin, but without grace, fulfil the commandments of God.

We have testimonies for this our belief, not only from the Scriptures, but also from the Fathers. For, in opposition to the Pelagians, Augustine contends at great length, that grace is not given because of our merits. And, in De Natura et Gratia, he says: “If natural ability, through the Free Will, suffice both for learning to know how one ought to live, and for living aright, then Christ has died in vain, then the offence of the cross is made void. Why may I not also here exclaim? Yea I will exclaim, and, with Christian grief, will chide them: ‘Christ has become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the Law; ye are fallen from grace’ (Gal. 5:4, cf. 2:21). ‘For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. For Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to every one that believeth’ (Rom. 10:3, 4). And John 8:36: ‘If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.’” Therefore, by reason, we cannot be freed from sins and merit the remission of sins. And in John 3:5, it is written: “Except: man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” But if it is necessary to be born again of the Holy Ghost, the righteousness of reason does not justify us before God, and does not fulfil the Law, Rom. 3:23: “All have come short of the glory of God,” i. e. are destitute of the wisdom and righteousness of God, which acknowledges and glorifies God. Likewise Rom. 8:7, 8: “The carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the Law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh, cannot please God.” These testimonies are so manifest, that, to use the words of Augustine which he employed in this case, p. 89 they do not need an acute understanding, but only an attentive hearer. If the carnal mind is enmity against God, the flesh certainly does not love God; if it cannot be subject to the Law of God, it cannot love God. If the carnal mind is enmity against God, the flesh sins, even when we do external civil works. If it cannot be subject to the Law of God, it certainly sins even when, according to human judgment, it possesses deeds that are excellent and worthy of praise. The adversaries consider only the precepts of the Second Table, which contain civil righteousness that reason understands. Content with this, they think that they satisfy the Law of God. In the meantime they do not see the First Table, which commands that we love God, that we be truly confident that God is angry with sin, that we truly fear God, that we be truly confident that God hears prayer. But the human heart without the Holy Ghost, either in security despises God’s judgment, or in punishment flees from, and hates God, when he judges. Therefore, it does not obey the First Table. Since, therefore, contempt of God, and doubt concerning the Word of God, and concerning the threats and promises, inhere in human nature, men truly sin, even when, without the Holy Ghost, they do virtuous works; because they do them with a wicked heart, according to Rom. 14:23: “Whatever is not of faith, is sin.”¹ For such persons perform their works with contempt of God, just as Epicurus does not believe that God cares for him, or that he is regarded or heard by God. This contempt vitiates works apparently virtuous, because God judges the heart.

¹ Cf. Apology XV. (viii. 17), p. 208.

Lastly, it was very foolish for the adversaries to write, that men who are under eternal wrath, merit the remission of sins by an elicit act of love, since it is impossible to love God, unless the remission of sins be apprehended first by faith. For the heart, truly feeling that God is angry, cannot love God, unless he be presented as reconciled. As long as he terrifies us, and seems to cast us into eternal death, human nature is not able to elevate itself, so as to love a wrathful, judging and punishing God; [poor, weak nature must lose heart and courage, and must tremble before such great wrath, which so fearfully terrifies and punishes, and cannot ever feel a spark of love, before God himself comforts]. It is easy for the unconcerned to devise such dreams concerning love, as that a mortal guilty of sin can love God above all things, because they do not feel what the wrath or judgment of God is. But in agony of conscience, and in conflicts [with Satan] conscience experiences the vanity of these philosophical speculations.

p. 90 Paul says (Rom. 4:15): “The Law worketh wrath.” He does not say that by the Law men merit the remission of sins. For the Law always accuses and terrifies consciences. Therefore, it does not justify; because conscience terrified by the Law, flees from the judgment of God. Therefore, they err who trust that by the Law, by their own works, they merit the remission of sins. It is sufficient for us to have said these things concerning the righteousness of reason or of the Law, which the adversaries teach. For afterwhile, when we will declare our belief concerning the righteousness of faith, the subject itself will compel us to adduce more testimonies, which also will be of service in overthrowing the errors of the adversaries which we have thus far reviewed.

Because, therefore, men by their own strength, cannot fulfil the Law of God, and all are under sin, and subject to eternal wrath and death; on this account, we cannot be freed, by the Law, from sin, and be justified, but the promise of the remission of sins and of justification, has been given us for Christ’s sake, who was given for us, in order that he might make satisfaction for the sins of the world, and has been appointed as a Mediator and Propitiator. And this promise has not the condition of our merits, but freely offers the remission of sins and justification, as Paul says (Rom. 11:6): “If it be of works, then is it no more grace.” And in another place (Rom. 3:21): “The righteousness of God without the Law is manifested,” i. e. the remission of sins is freely offered. Nor does reconciliation depend upon our merits. Because, if the remission of sins were to depend upon our merits, and reconciliation were from the Law, it would be useless. For, as we do not fulfil the Law, it would also follow that the promise of reconciliation would never pertain to us. Thus Paul reasons (Rom. 4:14): “For if they which are of the Law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect.” For if the promise would require the condition of our merits and the Law, it would follow, since we would never fulfil the Law, that the promise would be useless.

But since justification occurs through the free promise, it follows that we cannot justify ourselves. Otherwise, wherefore would there be need to promise? For since the promise cannot be received except by faith, the Gospel, which is properly the promise of the remission of sins and of justification for Christ’s sake, proclaims the righteousness of faith in Christ, which the Law does not teach. Nor is this the righteousness of the Law. For the Law requires of us our works, and our perfection. But the Gospel freely offers, for Christ’s sake, to us who have been vanquished by sin and death, reconciliation, which is received, not by works, but by faith alone. This p. 91 faith brings to God, not confidence in one’s own merits, but only confidence in the promise, or the mercy promised in Christ. This special faith, therefore, by which an individual believes that, for Christ’s sake, his sins are remitted him, and, that, for Christ’s sake, God is reconciled and propitious, obtains remission of sins and justifies us. And, because in repentance, i. e. in terrors, it comforts and encourages hearts, it regenerates us, and brings the Holy Ghost,¹ that then we may be able to fulfil God’s law, viz. to love God, to truly fear God, to truly be confident that God hears prayer, and to obey God in all afflictions; it mortifies concupiscence, etc. Thus, because faith, which freely receives the remission of sins, presents, against God’s wrath, Christ as Mediator and Propitiator, it does not present our merits or our love. This faith is the true knowledge of Christ, and avails itself of the benefits of Christ, and regenerates hearts, and precedes the fulfilling of the Law. And of this faith, not a syllable exists in the doctrine of our adversaries. Hence we find fault with the adversaries, equally because they teach only the righteousness of the Law, and because they do not teach the righteousness of the Gospel, which proclaims the righteousness of faith in Christ.

¹ Cf. Augsburg Confession, Art. V.

B. What is Justifying Faith?

The adversaries feign, that faith is only a knowledge of history, and, therefore, teach that it can coexist with mortal sin. Hence, they say nothing concerning faith, by which Paul so frequently says that men are justified, because those who are accounted righteous before God, do not live in mortal sin. But that faith which justifies, is not merely a knowledge of history, but it is to assent to the promise of God, in which, for Christ’s sake, the remission of sins and justification are freely offered. [It is the certainty or the certain trust in the heart, when, with my whole heart, I regard the promises of God as certain and true, through which there are offered me, without my merit, the forgiveness of sins, grace and all salvation, through Christ the Mediator.] And, that no one may suppose that it is mere knowledge, we will add further: it is to wish and to receive the offered promise of the remission of sins and of justification. [Faith is that my whole heart takes to itself this treasure. It is not my doing, not my presenting or giving, not my work or preparation, but that a heart comforts itself, and is perfectly confident with respect to this, viz. that God makes a present and gift to us, and not we to him, that he sheds upon us every treasure of grace in Christ.] And the distinction between this faith and the righteousness of the Law, can be easily p. 92 discerned. Faith is the λαρρεία [divine service], which receives the benefits, offered by God; the righteousness of the Law is the λαρρεία [divine service] which offers to God our merits. By faith, God wishes himself so to be honored, that we may receive from him those things which he promises and offers.

But, that faith signifies, not only a knowledge of history, but the faith which assents to the promise, Paul openly testifies, when he says (Rom. 4:16): “Therefore it is of faith, to the end the promise might be sure.” For he judges, that the promise cannot be received, unless by faith. Wherefore, he compares them correlatively, and connects promise and faith. Although it will be easy to decide what faith is, if we consider the Creed, where this article certainly stands: “The forgiveness of sins.” Therefore, it is not enough to believe that Christ was born, suffered, was raised again, unless we add also this article, which is the final cause of the history: “The forgiveness of sins.” To this article, the rest must be referred, viz. that, for Christ’s sake, and not for the sake of our merits, forgiveness of sins is given us. For what need would there be, that Christ be given for our sins, if for our sins our merits can give satisfaction?

As often, therefore, as we speak of Justifying Faith, we must keep in mind that these three objects concur: the promise, and that too gratuitous, and the merits of Christ, as the price and propitiation. The promise is received by faith; the “gratuitous” excludes our merits, and signifies that the benefit is offered only through mercy; the merits of Christ, are the price, because there must be a certain propitiation for our sins. Scripture frequently implores mercy; and the holy fathers often say that we are saved by mercy. As often, therefore, as mention is made of mercy, we must keep in mind, that faith is there required, which receives the promise of mercy. And, again, as often as we speak of faith, we wish an object to be understood, viz. the promised mercy. For faith justifies and saves, not on the ground that it is a work in itself worthy, but only because it receives the promised mercy.

And in the prophets and the psalms, this worship, this λαρρεία, is frequently highly praised, although the Law does not teach the gratuitous remission of sins. But the fathers knew the promise concerning Christ, that God, for Christ’s sake, wished to remit sins. Therefore, since they understood that Christ would be the price for our sins, they knew that our works are not a price for so great a matter [could not pay so great a debt]. Therefore, they received gratuitous mercy and remission of sins by faith, just as the saints in the New Testament. Here belong those frequent repetitions concerning mercy p. 93 and faith, in the psalms and the prophets, as this (Ps. 130: sq.): “If thou, Lord, shouldst mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand.” Here David confesses his sins, and does not recount his merits. He adds: “But there is forgiveness with thee.” He comforts himself by his trust in God’s mercy, and he cites the promise: “My soul doth wait, and in his word do I hope,” i. e. because thou hast promised the remission of sins, I am sustained by this thy promise.¹ Therefore, the fathers; also were justified, not by the Law, but by the promise and faith. And it is wonderful that the adversaries extenuate faith to such a degree, although they see that it is everywhere praised p. 94 as an eminent service, as in Ps. 50:15: “Call upon me in the day of trouble: I will deliver thee.” Thus God wishes himself to be made known, thus he wishes himself to be worshipped, that from him we may receive benefits, and may receive them too because of his mercy, and not because of our merits. This is the richest consolation in all afflictions. And such consolations the adversaries remove, when they extenuate and disparage faith, and teach only that, by means of works and merits, men treat with God.

¹ In the Variata, Melanchthon adds the example of Abraham, and continues: “Paul also cites concerning Abraham (Rom. 4:3): ‘He believed God and it was counted unto him for righteousness;’ i. e. Abraham knew that God was propitious to him only on account of his promise; he assented to God’s promise and did not suffer himself to be withdrawn from it, although he saw that he was impure and unworthy; he knew that God offers his promise on account of his own truth, and not on account of our works or merits. Neither can terrified consciences find rest, if they ought to know that they please [God] on account of their own works or their own love or fulfilling of the Law, because in the flesh sin inheres, which always accuses us. But hearts find rest when in these terrors they are convinced that we please God, because he has promised, and that God proffers the promise on account of his own truth, not on account of our worth. Thus Abraham heard this voice: ‘Fear not; I am thy shield,’ etc. (Gen. 15:1). This encouraged him, and he perceived that God was propitious to him, not because he deserved it, but because it was necessary that the promise of God be judged true. This faith, therefore, is imputed to him for righteousness, i. e. because he assents to the promise and receives the offered reconciliation; he is now truly righteous and accepted by God, not on account of his own worth, but because he accepts the gratuitous promise of God. Not without a cause did this testimony of Genesis (15:1) please Paul. We see how he amplifies it, how earnestly he dwells upon it, because he saw that in this passage the nature of faith can be easily observed; he saw that a testimony concerning the imputation of righteousness is expressly added; he saw that the praise of meriting justification and of pacifying conscience is denied to works. When Abraham therefore is pronounced righteous, because he assents to the promise and accepts the offered reconciliation, he does not oppose merits or works to God’s wrath. Wherefore this passage carefully considered will be sufficient to teach pious minds fully concerning the entire subject, since indeed it can be thus understood, if terrified minds propose it to themselves and are convinced that in this manner they ought to assent to the gratuitous promise. For they are not able to find rest otherwise, unless they are confident that they have a reconciled God, for the reason that he has promised, and not for the reason that our nature, life and works are worthy.”

C. That Faith in Christ Justifies

In the first place, lest any one may think that we speak concerning an inoperative knowledge of history, we must declare how faith is attained. Afterward we will show both that it justifies, and how this ought to be understood, and we will explain those things to which the adversaries object. Christ, in the last chapter of Luke (24:47), commands “that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name.” For the Gospel convicts all men, that they are under sin, that they all are subject to eternal wrath and death, and offers, for Christ’s sake, remission of sins and justification, which is received by faith.¹ The preaching of repentance which accuses us, terrifies consciences with true and earnest terrors. In these, hearts ought again to receive consolation. This happens, if they believe the promise of Christ, that, for his sake, we have remission of sins. This faith, encouraging and consoling in these fears, receives remission of sins, justifies and quickens. For this consolation is a new and spiritual life. These things are plain and clear, and can be understood by the pious, and have testimonies of the Church [as is to be seen in the conversion of Paul and Augustine.] The adversaries nowhere can say how the Holy Ghost is given. They imagine that the sacraments confer the Holy Ghost ex opere operato, without a good emotion in the recipient, as though, indeed, the gift of the Holy Ghost were a matter of indifference.

¹ Cf. Formula of Concord Ep. and Sol. Dec., V., 533 sqq., 636 sqq.; Apol., III. 65; XII. 53.

But since we speak of such faith as is not idle thought, but of that which liberates from death and produces a new life in hearts, and is the work of the Holy Ghost; this does not co-exist with mortal sin, but, as long as it is present, produces good fruits, as we will say afterwhile. For what more simple and more clear can be said concerning the conversion of the wicked, or concerning the mode of regeneration? Let them, from so great an array of writers, adduce a single commentary upon the Sententie,² that speaks of regeneration. When they p. 95 speak of the habit of love, they imagine that men merit it through works, and they do not teach that it is received through the Word, precisely as also the Anabaptists teach at this time. But God cannot be treated with, God cannot be apprehended, except through the Word. Accordingly justification occurs through the Word, just as Paul says (Rom. 1:16): “The Gospel is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth.” Likewise (10:17): “Faith cometh by hearing.” And even from this, proof can be derived, that faith justifies; because, if justification occurs only through the Word, and the Word is apprehended only by faith, it follows that faith justifies. But there are other and more important reasons. We have said these things thus far, in order that we might show the mode of regeneration, and that the nature of faith, concerning which we speak, might be understood.

² Of Peter Lombard.

Now we will show that faith justifies. Here, in the first place, readers must be admonished of this, that just as it is necessary to maintain this sentence: Christ is Mediator, so is it necessary to defend that faith justifies. For how will Christ be Mediator, if, in justification, we do not use him as Mediator; if we are not convinced that, for his sake, we are accounted righteous? But this is to believe, to trust in the merits of Christ, that for his sake God certainly wishes to be reconciled with us. Likewise just as we ought to maintain that, in addition to the Law, the promise of Christ is necessary; so also is it needful to maintain that faith justifies. For the Law cannot be performed, unless the Holy Ghost be first received. It is, therefore, needful to maintain, that the promise of Christ is necessary. But this cannot be received except by faith. Therefore, those who deny that faith justifies, teach nothing but the Law, both Christ and the Gospel being set aside.

But when it is said that faith justifies, some perhaps understand it of faith as an originating principle, viz. that faith is the beginning of justification or preparation for justification, so that that through which we are accepted by God is not faith itself, but the works which follow; and they dream, accordingly, that faith is praised, because it is an originating principle. For great is the power of an originating principle, as they commonly say, ἀρχὴ ἡμῖν παντὸς, the beginning is half of everything; just as if one would say that grammar makes the teachers of all arts, because it prepares for other arts, although in fact it is his own art that renders every one an artist. We do not believe thus concerning faith, but we maintain this, that properly and truly, by faith itself, we are for Christ’s sake accounted righteous, or are acceptable to God. And, because “to be justified” means that, out of unjust men, just p. 96 men be made, or be born again, it means also that they should be pronounced or accounted just.¹ For Scripture speaks in both ways. Accordingly we wish first to show this, that faith alone makes of an unjust, a just man, i. e. receives remission of sins.

¹ Cf. Formula of Concord, 528, 613.

The particle ALONE offends some, although even Paul says (Rom. 3:28): “We conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the Law.” Again (Eph. 2:8): “It is the gift of God; not of works, lest any man should boast.” Again (Rom. 3:24): “Being justified freely.” If the exclusive ALONE displeases, let them remove from Paul also the exclusives “freely,” “not of works,” “it is the gift,” etc. For these also are exclusives. It is, however, the opinion of merit that we exclude. We do not exclude the Word or sacraments, as the adversaries falsely charge us. For we have said above that faith is conceived from the Word, and we honor the ministry of the Word in the highest degree. Love also and works ought to follow faith. Wherefore, they are not excluded so as not to follow, but confidence in the merit of love or of works is excluded in justification. And this we will clearly show.

D. That we Obtain Remission of Sins by Faith Alone in Christ

We think that even the adversaries acknowledge that, in justification, the remission of sins is first necessary. For we all are under sin. Wherefore, we thus reason:

To attain the remission of sins is to be justified, according to Ps. 32:1: “Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven.” By faith alone in Christ, not through love, not because of love or works, do we attain the remission of sins, although love follows faith. Therefore by faith alone we are justified, understanding justification as the making a righteous man out of an unrighteous, or that he be regenerated.

It will thus become easy to declare the minor premise if we know how the remission of sins occurs. The adversaries with great indifference dispute whether the remission of sins and the infusion of grace are the same changes. Idle men did not have anything to say [cannot speak at all on this subject]. In the remission of sins, the terrors of sin and of eternal death, in the heart, ought to be overcome, as Paul testifies, 1 Cor. 15:56 sq.: “The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.” That is, sin terrifies consciences; this occurs through the Law, which shows the wrath of God against sin; but we gain the victory through Christ. How? By faith, when we comfort ourselves by confidence p. 97 in the mercy promised for Christ’s sake. Thus, therefore, we prove the minor proposition. The wrath of God cannot be appeased, if we present against it our own works, because Christ has been set forth as a Propitiator, so that, for his sake, the Father may become reconciled to us. But Christ is not apprehended as a Mediator, except by faith. Therefore, by faith alone we obtain remission of sins, when we comfort our hearts with confidence in the mercy promised for Christ’s sake. Likewise Paul, Rom. 5:2, says: “By whom also we have access,” and adds, “by faith.” Thus, therefore, we are reconciled to the Father, and receive remission of sins, when we are comforted with confidence in the mercy promised for Christ’s sake. The adversaries regard Christ as Mediator and Propitiator for this reason, viz. that he has merited the habit of love; they do not urge us to use him now as Mediator, but, precisely as though Christ were buried, they imagine that we have access, through our own works, and, through these, merit this habit, and afterwards, by this love, come to God.¹ Is not this to altogether bury Christ, and to take away the entire doctrine of faith? Paul, on the contrary, teaches that we have access, i. e. reconciliation, through Christ. And to show how this occurs, he adds, that we have access “by faith.” By faith, therefore, for Christ’s sake, we receive remission of sins. We cannot oppose our own love, and our own works, over against God’s wrath.

¹ Variata: By love have peace of conscience.

Secondly. It is certain that sins are remitted for the sake of Christ, as Propitiator, Rom. 3:25: “Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation.” Moreover Paul adds: “Through faith.” Therefore this Propitiator thus profits us, when, by faith, we apprehend the mercy promised in him, and present it, against the wrath and judgment of God. And to the same effect, it is written, Heb. 4:14, 16: “Seeing then that we have a great High Priest,” etc., “let us therefore come with confidence.” For the Apostle bids us to come to God, not with confidence in our own merits, but with confidence in Christ, as a High Priest; therefore he requires faith.

Thirdly. Peter in Acts 10: says: “To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth on him shall receive remission of sins.” How could this be said more clearly? We receive remission of sins, he says, through his name, i. e. for his sake: therefore, not for the sake of our merits, not for the sake of our contrition, attrition, love, worship, works. And he adds: “When we believe in him.” Therefore, he requires faith. For we cannot apprehend the name of Christ, except by faith. Besides he cites the agreement p. 98 of all the Fathers. This is truly to cite the authority of the Church. But of this topic we will speak after a while when treating of “Repentance.”

Fourthly. Remission of sins is something promised for Christ’s sake. Therefore, it cannot be received except by faith alone. For the promise cannot be received, except by faith alone. Rom. 4:16: “Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace, to the end that the promise might be sure;” as though he were to say: “If the matter were to depend upon our merits, the promise would be uncertain and useless, because we never could determine when we would have sufficient merit.” And this, experienced consciences can easily understand [and would not, for a thousand worlds, have our salvation depend upon ourselves]. Accordingly Paul says, Gal. 3:22: “But the Scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.” He withdraws merit from us, because he says that all are guilty and concluded under sin; then he adds that the promise, viz. of the remission of sins and of justification, is given, and adds how the promise can be received, viz. by faith. And this reasoning, derived from the nature of the promise, is the chief reasoning in Paul, and is often repeated. Nor can anything be devised or imagined whereby this argument of Paul can be overthrown.

Wherefore let not good minds suffer themselves to be forced from the opinion, that we receive remission of sins for Christ’s sake only through faith. In this, they have sure and firm consolation against the terrors of sin, and against eternal death, and against all the gates of hell.

But since we receive remission of sins and the Holy Ghost by faith alone, faith alone justifies, because those reconciled are accounted righteous and children of God, not on account of their own purity, but through mercy for Christ’s sake: if they by faith apprehend this mercy. Accordingly Scripture testifies, that by faith we are accounted righteous (Rom. 3:26). We, therefore, will add testimonies that clearly declare that faith is that very righteousness, by which we are accounted righteous before God, viz. not because it is a work, that is, in itself, worthy, but because it receives the promise, by which God has promised, that, for Christ’s sake, he wishes to be propitious to those believing in him, or, because he knows that “Christ of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness and sanctification and redemption” (1 Cor. 1:30).

In the Epistle to the Romans, Paul expressly discusses this topic, and declares that, when we believe that God, for Christ’s

Var.: And reconciliation for Christ’s sake.

p. 99 sake, is reconciled to us, we are justified freely by faith. And this proposition, which contains the statement of the entire discussion, he maintains in the third chapter: “We conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the Law” (Rom. 3:28). Here the adversaries interpret that this refers to Levitical ceremonies. But Paul speaks not only of the ceremonies, but of the whole Law. For he quotes afterward from the Decalogue (7:7): “Thou shalt not covet.” And if moral works would merit the remission of sins, and justification, there would also be no need of Christ and the promise, and all that Paul speaks of the promise would be overthrown. For he would have been wrong in writing to the Ephesians (2:8): “By grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works.” Paul likewise refers to Abraham and David (Rom. 4:1, 6). But they had the command of God concerning circumcision. Therefore if any works justified, these works must also have justified at the time that they had a command. Moreover, Augustine teaches correctly that Paul speaks of the entire Law, as he discusses at length, “of the spirit and letter,” where he says finally, “These matters, therefore, having been considered and treated, according to the ability that the Lord has thought worthy to give us, we infer that man is not justified by the precepts of a good life, but by faith in Jesus Christ.”

And lest we may think that the sentence, that faith justifies, fell from Paul inconsiderately, he fortifies and confirms this by a long discussion in the fourth chapter to the Romans, and afterwards repeats it in all his Epistles. Thus he says, Rom. 4:4, 5: “To him that worketh, is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.” Here he clearly says that faith itself is imputed for righteousness. Faith, therefore, is that thing, which God declares to be righteousness, and he adds that it is imputed freely, and says that it could not be imputed freely, if it were due on account of works. Wherefore he excludes also the merit of moral works. For if justification before God were due to these, faith would not be imputed for righteousness without works. And afterwards, Rom. 4:9: “For we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.” Chapter 5: says: “Being justified by faith, we have peace with God,” i. e. we have consciences that are tranquil and joyful before God. Rom. 10:10: “With the heart man believeth unto righteousness.” Here he declares that faith is the righteousness of the heart. Gal. 2:16: “We have believed in Christ Jesus that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the Law.” Eph. 2:8: “For by grace p. 100 are ye saved through faith: and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast.”

John 1:12: “To them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name; which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” John 3:14, 15: “As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: that whosoever believeth in him should not perish.” Likewise, v. 17: “For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned.”

Acts 13:38, 39: “Be it known unto you, therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: and by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses.” How could the office of Christ and justification be declared more clearly? The Law, he says, did not justify. Christ was given, to the end that we may believe that for his sake we are justified. He plainly denies justification to the Law. Therefore, for Christ’s sake, we are accounted righteous, when we believe that God, for His sake, has been reconciled to us. Acts 4:11, 12: “This is the stone which was set at naught of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other; for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” But the name of Christ is apprehended only by faith. Therefore, by confidence in the name of Christ, and not by confidence in our works, we are saved. For “the name” here signifies the cause which is mentioned, because of which salvation is attained. And to call upon the name of Christ is to trust in the name of Christ, as the cause or price, because of which we are saved. Acts 15:9: “Purifying their hearts by faith.” Wherefore that faith of which the Apostles speak, is not inoperative knowledge, but a reality receiving the Holy Ghost and justifying us [not a mere knowledge of history, but a strong powerful work of the Holy Ghost, which changes hearts].

Hab. 2:4: “The just shall live by his faith.” Here, he first says that men are just by faith, by which they believe that God is propitious, and he adds that the same faith quickens, because this faith produces in the heart peace and joy and eternal life.

Isa. 53:11: “By his knowledge shall he justify many.” But what is the knowledge of Christ, unless to know the benefits of Christ, the promises which by the Gospel he has diffused into the world? And to know these benefits is properly p. 101 and truly to believe in Christ, to believe that that which God has promised for Christ’s sake, he will certainly fulfil.

But Scripture is full of such testimonies, since, in some places, it presents the Law, and in others the promises concerning Christ, and the remission of sins, and the free acceptance of the sinner for Christ’s sake.

Here and there among the Fathers similar testimonies are extant. For Ambrose says in his letter to a certain Irenæus: “Moreover, the world was subject to the Law for the reason that, according to the command of the Law, all are addressed, and yet, by the works of the Law, no one is justified, i. e. because, by the Law, sin is perceived, but guilt is not discharged. The Law, which made all sinners, seemed to have done injury, but when the Lord Jesus Christ came, he forgave to all sin which no one could avoid, and, by the shedding of his own blood, blotted out the handwriting which was against us. This is what he says in Rom. 5:20: ‘The Law entered that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.’ Because after the whole world became subject, he took away the sin of the whole world, as he testified, saying (John 1:29): ‘Behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world.’ And, on this account, let no one boast of works, because no one is justified by his deeds. But he who is righteous, has it given him because he was justified after the laver [of Baptism]. Faith, therefore, is that which frees through the blood of Christ, because he is blessed, ‘whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered’ (Ps. 32:1).” These are the words of Ambrose, which clearly favor our doctrine; he denies justification to works, and ascribes it to faith which frees through the blood of Christ. Let all the Sententiarists,¹ who are embellished with magnificent titles be collected into one heap. For some are called angelic; others, subtile; and others, irrefragable.² When all these have been read and re-read, they will not be of as much aid for understanding Paul as is this one passage of Ambrose.

¹ The commentators on the Sententiæ of Peter Lombard.

² Doctor Angelicus, Thomas Aquinas; Doctor Subtilissimus, John Duns Scotus; Doctor Irrefragabilis, Alexander Halesius; Doctor Seraphicus, Bonaventura.

To the same effect, Augustine writes many things against the Pelagians. In “Of the Spirit and Letter,” he says: “The righteousness of the Law is set forth for this reason, viz. that he who should fulfil it might live in it, in order that when any one has recognized his infirmity, he may attain and work this righteousness, and live in it, not by his p. 102 own strength, neither by the letter of the Law itself, which cannot be done, but, by procuring by faith, a justifier. Except in a justified man, there is no good work, wherein he who does it may live. But justification is obtained by faith.” Here he clearly says that the justifier is procured by faith, and that justification is obtained by faith. And a little after: “By the Law, we fear God; by faith, we hope in God. But to those fearing punishment, grace is hidden; and the soul laboring under this fear, betakes itself by faith to God’s mercy, in order that he may give what he has commanded. Here he teaches that, by the Law, hearts are terrified, but, by faith, they receive consolation. He also teaches us to apprehend, by faith, mercy, before we attempt to fulfil the Law. We will shortly cite certain other passages.

Indeed, it is wonderful that the adversaries are in no way moved by so many passages of Scripture, which clearly ascribe justification to faith, and, likewise, deny it to works. Do they think that the same is repeated so often for no purpose? Do they think that these words fell inconsiderately from the Holy Ghost? But they have also devised sophistry, whereby they elude them. They say that these passages of Scripture, which speak of faith, ought to be received as referring to a fides formata, i. e. they do not ascribe justification to faith, except on account of love. Yea they do not, in any way, ascribe justification to faith, but only to love, because they dream that faith can coexist with mortal sin. Whither does this tend, unless that they again abolish the promise and return to the Law? If faith receive the remission of sins on account of love, the remission of sins will always be uncertain, because we never love as much as we ought; yea we do not love unless our hearts are firmly convinced that the remission of sins has been granted us. Thus the adversaries, while they require in the remission of sins and justification confidence in one’s own love, altogether abolish the Gospel concerning the free remission of sins; although, at the same time, they neither render this love nor understand it, unless they believe that the remission of sins is freely received.

We also say that love ought to follow faith, as Paul also says (Gal. 5:6): “For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.” And yet, for this reason, we ought not to think that, by confidence in this love or on account of this love, we receive the remission of sins and reconciliation, just as we do not receive the remission of sins because of other works that follow. But the remission of sins is received by faith alone, and indeed by faith properly so called, because the promise cannot be received except by faith. But p. 103 faith properly so called, is that which assents to the promise of Scripture [is when my heart and the Holy Ghost, in the heart, says: The promise of God is true and cert.in]. Of this faith, Scripture speaks. And because it receives the remission of sins, and reconciles us to God, by this faith we are accounted for Christ’s sake righteous before we love and do the works of the Law, although love necessarily follows. Nor indeed is this faith an idle knowledge, neither can it coexist with mortal sin, but it is a work of the Holy Ghost, whereby we are freed from death, and terrified minds are encouraged and quickened. And because this faith alone receives the remission of sins, and renders us acceptable to God and brings the Holy Ghost;¹ it could be more correctly called gratia gratum faciens, grace rendering one pleasing to God, than an effect following, viz. love.

¹ Var.: And renders consciences pacified and tranquil.

Thus far, in order that the subject might be made clear, we have shown, with sufficient fulness, both from testimonies of Scripture, and arguments derived from Scripture, that by faith alone, we obtain the remission of sins for Christ’s sake, and that by faith alone we are justified, i. e. from unrighteous men made righteous, or regenerated. But how necessary the knowledge of this faith is, can be easily judged, because, in this alone, the office of Christ is recognized, by this alone we receive the benefits of Christ; this alone brings sure and firm consolation to pious minds. And in the Church it is necessary that there should be doctrine, from which the pious may receive the sure hope of salvation. For the adversaries give men bad advice [therefore the adversaries are truly unfaithful bishops, unfaithful preachers, and doctors; they have hitherto given evil counsel to consciences, and still do so by introducing such doctrine], when they bid them doubt whether they obtain remission of sins. For how will such persons sustain themselves in death, who have heard nothing of this faith, and think that they ought to doubt whether they obtain the remission of sins? Besides it is necessary that in the Church, the Gospel be retained, i. e. the promise that for Christ’s sake sins are freely remitted. Those who teach nothing of this faith, concerning which we speak, altogether abolish the Gospel. But the scholastics mention not even a word concerning this faith. Our adversaries follow them, and reject this faith. Nor do they see that by rejecting this faith, they abolish the entire promise, concerning the free remission of sins, and the righteousness of Christ.