Moreover, it is manifest, in the first place, that the Pope rules in the Church, and by the pretext
of ecclesiastical authority and of the ministry has established for himself this kingdom. For he
assigns as a pretext these words: I will give to thee the keys. Secondly, the doctrine of the Pope
conflicts in many ways with the Gospel, and [thirdly] the Pope assumes to himself divine authority
in a threefold manner. First, because he takes to himself the right to change the doctrine of Christ
and services instituted by God, and wants his own doctrine and his own services to be observed as
divine; secondly, because he takes to himself the power not only of binding and loosing in this life,
but also the jurisdiction over souls after this life; thirdly, because the Pope does not want to be
judged by the Church or by any one, and puts his own authority ahead of the decision of Councils and
the entire Church. But to be unwilling to be judged by the Church or by any one is to make oneself
God. Lastly, these errors so horrible, and this impiety, he defends with the greatest cruelty, and
puts to death those dissenting.
This being the case, all Christians ought to beware of becoming partakers of the godless doctrine,
blasphemies, and unjust cruelty of the Pope. On this account they ought to desert and execrate the
Pope with his adherents as the kingdom of Antichrist; just as Christ has commanded, Matt. 7:15: Beware
of false prophets. And Paul commands that godless teachers should be avoided and execrated as cursed,
Gal. 1:8; Titus 3:10. And he says, 2 Cor. 6:14: Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers;
for what communion hath light with darkness?
To dissent from the agreement of so many nations and to be called schismatics is a grave matter.
But divine authority commands all not to be allies and defenders of impiety and unjust cruelty.
On this account our consciences are sufficiently excused; for the errors of the kingdom of the
Pope are manifest. And Scripture with its entire voice exclaims that these errors are a teaching of
demons and of Antichrist. The idolatry in the profanation of the masses is manifest, which, besides
other faults [besides being altogether useless] are shamelessly applied to most shameful gain [and
trafficking]. The doctrine of repentance has been utterly corrupted by the Pope and his adherents.
For they teach that sins are remitted because of the worth of our works. Then they bid us doubt
whether the remission takes place. They nowhere teach that sins are remitted freely for Christ's
sake, and that by this faith we obtain remission of sins.
Thus they obscure the glory of Christ, and deprive consciences of firm consolation, and abolish
true divine services, namely, the exercises of faith struggling with [unbelief and] despair [concerning
the promise of the Gospel].
They have obscured the doctrine concerning sin, and have invented a tradition concerning the
enumeration of offenses, producing many errors and despair.
They have devised, in addition, satisfactions, whereby they have also obscured the benefit [and
merit] of Christ.
From these, indulgences have been born, which are pure lies, fabricated for the sake of gain.
Then, how many abuses and what horrible idolatry the invocation of saints has produced!
What shameful acts have arisen from the tradition concerning celibacy!
What darkness the doctrine concerning vows has spread over the Gospel! There they feigned that
vows are righteousness before God and merit the remission of sins. Thus they have transferred the
benefit of Christ to human traditions, and have altogether extinguished the doctrine concerning faith.
They have feigned that the most trifling traditions are services of God and perfection and have preferred
these to the works of callings which God requires and has ordained. Neither are these errors to be
regarded as light; for they detract from the glory of Christ and bring destruction to souls, neither
can they be passed by unnoticed.
Then to these errors two great sins are added: The first, that he defends these errors by unjust
cruelty and death-penalties. The second, that he wrests the decision from the Church, and does not
permit ecclesiastical controversies [such matters of religion] to be judged according to the prescribed
mode; yea he contends that he is above the Council, and can rescind the decrees of Councils, as the
canons sometimes impudently speak. But that this was much more impudently done by the pontiffs, examples
testify.
Quest. 9, canon 3, says: No one shall judge the first seat; for the judge is judged neither by
the emperor, nor by all the clergy, nor by the kings, nor by the people.
The Pope exercises a twofold tyranny: he defends his errors by force and by murders, and forbids
judicial examination. The latter does even more injury than any executions because, when the true
judgment of the Church is removed, godless dogmas and godless services cannot be removed, and for many
ages they destroy innumerable souls.
Therefore let the godly consider the great errors of the kingdom of the Pope and his tyranny, and
let them ponder, first, that the errors must be rejected and the true doctrine embraced, for the glory
of God and to the salvation of souls. Then let them ponder also how great a crime it is to aid unjust
cruelty in killing saints, whose blood God will undoubtedly avenge.
But especially the chief members of the Church, kings and princes, ought to guard the interests of
the Church, and to see to it that errors be removed and consciences be healed [rightly instructed],
as God expressly exhorts kings, Ps. 2:10: Be wise, now, therefore, O ye kings; be instructed, ye judges
of the earth. For it should be the first care of kings [and great lords] to advance the glory of God.
Therefore it would be very shameful for them to lend their influence and power to confirm idolatry
and infinite other crimes, and to slaughter saints.
And even though the Pope should hold Synods [a Council], how can the Church be healed if the Pope
suffers nothing to be decreed contrary to his will, if he allows no one to express his opinion except
his adherents whom he has bound by dreadful oaths and curses to the defense of his tyranny and wickedness
without any exception concerning God's Word [not even the Word of God being excepted]?
But since the decisions of Synods are the decisions of the Church, and not of the Popes, it is
especially incumbent on kings to check the license of the Popes [not allow such wantonness], and to
act so that the power of judging and decreeing from the Word of God is not wrested from the Church.
And as the rest of the Christians must censure all other errors of the Pope, so they must also rebuke
the Pope when he evades and impedes the true investigation and true decision of the Church.
Therefore, even though the bishop of Rome had the primacy by divine right, yet since he defends
godless services and doctrine conflicting with the Gospel, obedience is not due him; yea, it is necessary
to resist him as Antichrist. The errors of the Pope are manifest and not trifling.
Manifest also is the cruelty [against godly Christians] which he exercises. And it is clear that
it is God's command that we flee idolatry, godless doctrine, and unjust cruelty. On this account all
the godly have great, compelling, and manifest reasons for not obeying the Pope. And these compelling
reasons comfort the godly against all the reproaches which are usually cast against them concerning
offenses, schism, and discord [which they are said to cause].
But those who agree with the Pope, and defend his doctrine and [false] services, defile themselves
with idolatry and blasphemous opinions, become guilty of the blood of the godly, whom the Pope [and
his adherents] persecutes, detract from the glory of God, and hinder the welfare of the Church, because
they strengthen errors and crimes to all posterity [in the sight of all the world and to the injury
of all descendants].
Of the Power and Jurisdiction of Bishops.
[In our Confession and the Apology we have in general recounted what we have had to say concerning
ecclesiastical power.] For the Gospel assigns to those who preside over churches the command to teach
the Gospel to remit sins, to administer the Sacraments and besides jurisdiction, namely, the command
to excommunicate those whose crimes are known, and again to absolve those who repent.
And by the confession of all, even of the adversaries, it is clear that this power by divine right
is common to all who preside over churches, whether they are called pastors, or elders, or bishops.
And accordingly Jerome openly teaches in the apostolic letters that all who preside over churches
are both bishops and elders, and cites from Titus 1:5f : For this cause left I thee in Crete, that
thou shouldest ordain elders in every city [and afterwards calls these persons bishops]. Then he adds:
A bishop must be the husband of one wife. Likewise Peter and John call themselves elders [or priests]
1 Pet. 5:1; 2 John 1. And he then adds: But that afterwards one was chosen to be placed over the rest,
this was done as a remedy for schism, lest each one by attracting [a congregation here or there] to
himself might rend the Church of Christ. For at Alexandria, from Mark the evangelist to the bishops
Heracles and Dionysius, the elders always elected one from among themselves, and placed him in a higher
station, whom they called bishop; just as an army would make a commander for itself. The deacons,
moreover, may elect from among themselves one whom they know to be active, and name him archdeacon.
For with the exception of ordination, what does the bishop that the elder does not?
Jerome, therefore, teaches that it is by human authority that the grades of bishop and elder or
pastor are distinct. And the subject itself declares this, because the power [the office and command]
is the same, as he has said above. But one matter afterwards made a distinction between bishops and
pastors namely, ordination, because it was [so] arranged that one bishop should ordain ministers in
a number of churches.
But since by divine authority the grades of bishop and pastor are not diverse, it is manifest that
ordination administered by a pastor in his own church is valid by divine law [if a pastor in his own
church ordains certain suitable persons to the ministry, such ordination is, according to divine law,
undoubtedly effective and right].
Therefore, when the regular bishops become enemies of the Church, or are unwilling to administer
ordination, the churches retain their own right. [Because the regular bishops persecute the Gospel
and refuse to ordain suitable persons, every church has in this case full authority to ordain its
own ministers.]
For wherever the Church is, there is the authority [command] to administer the Gospel. Therefore
it is necessary for the Church to retain the authority to call, elect, and ordain ministers. And this
authority is a gift which in reality is given to the Church, which no human power can wrest from the
Church, as Paul also testifies to the Ephesians when he says, Eph 4:8: He ascended, He gave gifts to
men. And he enumerates among the gifts specially belonging to the Church pastors and teachers,
and adds that such are given for the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ. Hence,
wherever there is a true church, the right to elect and ordain ministers necessarily exists. Just as
in a case of necessity even a layman absolves, and becomes the minister and pastor of another; as
Augustine narrates the story of two Christians in a ship, one of whom baptized the catechumen, who
after Baptism then absolved the baptizer.
Here belong the statements of Christ which testify that the keys have been given to the Church,
and not merely to certain persons, Matt. 18:20: Where two or three are gathered together in My name,
etc.
Lastly, the statement of Peter also confirms this, 1 Pet. 2:9: Ye are a royal priesthood. These
words pertain to the true Church, which certainly has the right to elect and ordain ministers since
it alone has the priesthood.
And this also a most common custom of the Church testifies. For formerly the people elected pastors
and bishops. Then came a bishop, either of that church or a neighboring one, who confirmed that one
elected by the laying on of hands; and ordination was nothing else than such a ratification. Afterwards
new ceremonies were added, many of which Dionysius describes. But he is a recent and fictitious author,
whoever he may be [this book of Dionysius is a new fiction under a false title], just as the writings
of Clement also are spurious [have a false title and have been manufactured by a wicked scoundrel
long after Clement]. Then more modern writers added [that the bishop said to those whom he was ordaining]:
I give thee the power to sacrifice for the living and the dead. But not even this is in Dionysius.
From all these things it is clear that the Church retains the right to elect and ordain ministers.
And the wickedness and tyranny of bishops afford cause for schism and discord [therefore, if the bishops
either are heretics, or will not ordain suitable persons, the churches are in duty bound before God,
according to divine law, to ordain for themselves pastors and ministers. Even though this be now
called an irregularity or schism, it should be known that the godless doctrine and tyranny of the
bishops is chargeable with it], because Paul, Gal. 1:7f , enjoins that bishops who teach and defend
a godless doctrine and godless services should be regarded as accursed.
We have spoken of ordination, which alone, as Jerome says, distinguished bishops from other elders.
Therefore there is need of no discussion concerning the other duties of bishops. Nor is it indeed
necessary to speak of confirmation, nor of the consecration of bells [nor other tomfoolery of this
kind], which are almost the only things which they have retained. Something must be said concerning
jurisdiction.
It is certain that the common jurisdiction of excommunicating those guilty of manifest crimes belongs
to all pastors. This they have tyrannically transferred to themselves alone, and have applied it to
the acquisition of gain. For it is certain that the officials, as they are called employed a license
not to be tolerated and either on account of avarice or because of other wanton desires tormented men
and excommunicated them without any due process of law. But what tyranny is it for the officials in
the states to have arbitrary power to condemn and excommunicate men without due process of law! And
in what kind of affairs did they abuse this power? Indeed, not in punishing true offenses, but in
regard to the violation of fasts or festivals, or like trifles! Only, they sometimes punished adulteries;
and in this matter they often vexed [abused and defamed] innocent and honorable men. Besides, since
this is a most grievous offense, nobody certainly is to be condemned without due process of law.
Since, therefore, bishops have tyrannically transferred this jurisdiction to themselves alone, and
have basely abused it, there is no need, because of this jurisdiction, to obey bishops. But since there
are just reasons why we do not obey, it is right also to restore this jurisdiction to godly pastors
[to whom, by Christ's command, it belongs], and to see to it that it is legitimately exercised for the
reformation of morals and the glory of God.
There remains the jurisdiction in those cases which, according to canonical law, pertain to the
ecclesiastical court, as they call it, and especially in cases of matrimony. This, too, the bishops
have only by human right, and that, not a very old one, as appears from the Codex and Novellae
of Justinian that decisions concerning marriage at that time belonged to the magistrates. And by
divine right worldly magistrates are compelled to make these decisions if the bishops [judge unjustly
or] are negligent. The canons also concede the same. Therefore, also on account of this jurisdiction
it is not necessary to obey bishops. And, indeed, since they have framed certain unjust laws concerning
marriages, and observe them in their courts, there is need also for this reason to establish other
courts. For the traditions concerning spiritual relationship [the prohibition of marriage between
sponsors] are unjust. Unjust also is the tradition which forbids an innocent person to marry after
divorce. Unjust also is the law which in general approves all clandestine and underhanded betrothals
in violation of the right of parents. Unjust also is the law concerning the celibacy of priests.
There are also other snares of consciences in their laws, to recite all of which is of no profit.
It is sufficient to have recited this, that there are many unjust laws of the Pope concerning matrimonial
subjects on account of which the magistrates ought to establish other courts.
Since, therefore, the bishops, who are devoted to the Pope, defend godless doctrine and godless
services, and do not ordain godly teachers, yea, aid the cruelty of the Pope, and, besides, have wrested
the jurisdiction from pastors, and exercise it only tyrannically [for their own profit]; and lastly,
since in matrimonial cases they observe many unjust laws, there are reasons sufficiently numerous and
necessary why the churches should not recognize these as bishops.
But they themselves should remember that riches [estates and revenues] have been given to bishops
as alms for the administration and advantage of the churches [that they may serve the Church, and
perform their office the more efficiently], as the rule says: The benefice is given because of the
office. Therefore they cannot with a good conscience possess these alms, and meanwhile defraud the
Church, which has need of these means for supporting ministers, and aiding studies [educating learned
men], and caring for the poor and establishing courts, especially matrimonial. For so great is the
variety and extent of matrimonial controversies that there is need of a special tribunal for these,
and for establishing this, the endowments of the Church are needed. Peter predicted, 2 Pet. 2:13,
that there would be godless bishops, who would abuse the alms of the Church for luxury and neglect
the ministry. Therefore [since the Holy Spirit in that connection utters dire threats] let those who
defraud the Church know that they will pay God the penalty for this crime.
DOCTORS AND PREACHERS
Who Subscribed the Augsburg Confession and Apology, A. D. 1537.
According to the command of the most illustrious princes and of the orders and states professing
the doctrine of the Gospel, we have reread the articles of the Confession presented to the Emperor
in the Assembly at Augsburg, and by the favor of God all the preachers who have been present in this
Assembly at Smalcald harmoniously declare that they believe and teach in their churches according to
the articles of the Confession and Apology. They also declare that they approve the article concerning
the primacy of the Pope and his power, and the power and jurisdiction of bishops, which was presented
to the princes in this Assembly at Smalcald. Accordingly, they subscribe their names.
I, Dr. John Bugenhagen, Pomeranus, subscribe the Articles of the Augsburg Confession, the Apology,
and the Article presented to the princes at Smalcald concerning the Papacy.
I also, Dr. Urban
Rhegius, Superintendent of the churches in the Duchy of Lueneburg, subscribe.
Nicolaus Amsdorf
of Magdeburg subscribed.
George Spalatin of Altenburg subscribed.
I, Andrew Osiander,
subscribe.
Magister Veit Dieterich of Nuernberg subscribed.
Stephen Agricola, Minister at Hof,
subscribed with his own hand.
John Draconites of Marburg subscribed.
Conrad Figenbotz subscribed
to all throughout.
Martin Bucer.
I, Erhard Schnepf, subscribe.
Paul Rhodius, Preacher
in Stettin.
Gerhard Oeniken, Minister of the Church at Minden.
Brixius Northanus, Minister
at Soest.
Simon Schneweis, Pastor of Crailsheim.
I, Pomeranus, again subscribe in the name
of Magister John Brentz, as he ordered me.
Philip Melanchthon subscribes with his own hand.
Anthony
Corvinus subscribes with his own hand, as well as in the name of Adam a Fulda.
John Schlainhauffen
subscribes with his own hand.
Magister George Helt of Forchheim.
Michael Coelius, Preacher at
Mansfeld.
Peter Geltner, Preacher of the Church of Frankfort.
Dionysius Melander subscribed.
Paul
Fagius of Strassburg.
Wendel Faber, Pastor of Seeburg in Mansfeld
Conrad Oettinger of Pforzheim,
Preacher of Ulric, Duke of Wuerttemberg.
Boniface Wolfart, Minister of the Word of the Church at
Augsburg.
John Aepinus, Superintendent of Hamburg, subscribed with his own hand.
John Amsterdam
of Bremen does the same.
John Fontanus, Superintendent of Lower Hesse, subscribed.
Frederick
Myconius subscribed for himself and Justus Menius.
Ambrose Blaurer.
I have read, and again and again reread, the Confession and Apology presented at Augsburg by the
Most Illustrious Prince, the Elector of Saxony, and by the other princes and estates of the Roman Empire,
to his Imperial Majesty. I have also read the Formula of Concord concerning the Sacrament, made at
Wittenberg with Dr. Bucer and others. I have also read the articles written at the Assembly at Smalcald
in the German language by Dr. Martin Luther, our most revered preceptor, and the tract concerning the
Papacy and the Power and Jurisdiction of Bishops. And in my humble opinion I judge that all these agree
with Holy Scripture, and with the belief of the true and genuine catholic Church. But although in so
great a number of most learned men who have now assembled at Smalcald I acknowledge that I am of all
the least yet, as I am not permitted to await the end of the assembly, I ask you, most renowned man,
Dr. John Bugenhagen, most revered Father in Christ, that your courtesy may add my name, if it be
necessary, to all that I have above mentioned. For I testify in this my own handwriting that I thus
hold, confess, and constantly will teach, through Jesus Christ, our Lord.
John Brentz, Minister
of Hall.
Done at Smalcald, February 23, 1537.