Locus 21 — Human Ceremonies in the Church
vocation of God, that is, when they command some thing to be done which cannot be done without offense of conscience. Just as Eve sinned in obeying the voice of the devil, so others sin when they place ungodly laws above the mandate of God and allows themselves to reject the true invocation of God. trine of repentance, of faith, of true invocation, of the profaning of the Lord's Supper, and of the invocation of the dead.
I must break off what is not a disputation (for the matter is perfectly clear) but a lament about the first rule, and speak more briefly and more dispassionately than the enormity of the evils involved merits—evils which have arisen out of ungodly and tyrannical laws in the church over such a long period of time, and still are arising and will continue to do so until the Son of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, delivers His church and shows Himself to the entire human race at the resur rection of the dead. But I pray this Lord that He would lessen the burdens of the church and rescue some remnant for Himself and cleanse the sons of Levi, that is, that from time to time He would raise up teachers who rightly teach and not allow the light of the Gospel to be extinguished.
No one can sufficiently deplore the enormity of the sin which this tragic servitude brings with it. Indeed, the wisdom of men is not great enough to understand sufficiently the greatness of these evils. The great ma jority of the people who are called the church lie under the oppression of tyrannical laws which establish the worship of idols, errors, and wicked lusts, and hinder the true invocation of God. And these laws are de fended with great cruelty and punishments. Honorable men are put to death and many pious people are killed when they violate some ungodly law. Many godly priests have been cruelly put to death because they married, although no barbarian ruler ever killed men for such a reason.
The second rule. Certain works are by their very nature adiaphora—matters of indifference—things which are neither commanded by the law of God nor forbidden by it, such as refraining from eating meat, using a common vestment, or the clothing of monks.
Although it is granted that it is a matter of adiaphora to do such things (as long as it is without superstition), yet in our teaching we must oppose laws regarding matters of adiaphora because many pernicious errors are attached to them; and it is a godly thing to show appropriate examples of teaching in the use of our lib erty. Therefore, I shall cite seven errors which have been attached to traditions of this kind.
Civil rulers are vociferous in asserting that they must not assent to any changes in the laws, lest an anarchy of frightful evils should follow, and then would come the destruction of necessary dogmas and divine laws. They raise as an objection the old precept which Aristotle quoted in his Politica: "Small beginnings must not be overlooked," since additions of wrongdoing are soon added. Yet these matters are put ahead of the eternal and immutable law [of Deut. 6:5], "You shall love the Lord your God with your whole heart." And again [Lev. 19:43], "Flee idols." Therefore it is nec essary that in teaching we attack unjust laws, and in the face of these edicts we must obey the command of God.
The first error. Many people have taught and still do teach that fasting and similar exercises merit the remission of sins—both the remission of the guilt as well as the punishment. This Pharisaic error can cap ture the minds of the people and obfuscate the light of the doctrine of the benefits of Christ and of faith. For when men think that they merit the remission of sins by these rituals, they transfer the honor which they owe to God over to these rites. In some cases they develop an empty confidence or create doubts which finally lead to their destruction. And particularly for this reason,
Paul contends so sharply for the abrogation of circum cision and other ceremonial laws of Moses—so that this light of the doctrine will not be extinguished in the church, and so that, for the sake of Christ, the mediator, believers might have the remission of their sins and be accounted righteous and be made heirs of eternal life, not because of circumcision or the other ceremonies of Moses. Often he warns that we must beware that this light of the Gospel not be obscured by new human ceremonies. And there is no doubt that this Pharisaic error must be attacked at once.
At this point I am not speaking of the bondage of our bodies or our property, for we must endure the calamities which are caused by negligence or wicked ness on the part of civil rulers, along with their plun dering, their outward uproars, and the injuries and the evils of their wars. But I do deplore the bondage of consciences since it hinders true invocation, and it drives countless hoards of people either into Epicurean contempt for God or into eternal despair. "Woe to those," says Isaiah [10:1], "who write unrighteous laws." Woe to those who in our age defend them either with punishments or sophistic trickery. Pighius dares to issue this most shameful statement, which we find in his writings—that it is less sinful for a priest to pollute himself with adultery than to take a wife. Certain wise men publicly applaud this. But the superstitions of hu man laws must never be placed above the true invo cation of God or the salvation of souls, since that would be a manifest impiety. Although certain crafty men try to paint over these errors, the truth is so clearly revealed that no sophistry, no sycophancy can hide it. Before our eyes are the miseries which have arisen out of the law of celibacy. No person in his right mind can consider without tears and groaning the perversion of the doc
The second error is not so obvious, but it is still pernicious. Certain people who are very astute now recognize that the previous Pharisaic error cannot be defended, and thus they have restated it: Although these ceremonies do not merit the remission of sins,
yet they are good works and the worship of God, so we must defend these traditions, just as in the law of Moses the abstinence of the Nazirites was defended— even though it did not merit the remission of sins—since it was pleasing to God and was a form of worship which He appreciated, and it had its rewards. the Holy Spirit calls them "the doctrines of demons"— because men become fascinated with them, and be cause of these rites they desert the true knowledge of Christ, faith, and endurance, and devise for themselves new dogmas and wild ideas beyond all measure, as happened with the Marcionites and the Manichaeans.
Our age'is clearly witnessing this taking place in the case of the Anabaptists and their fanatical errors which are tossed here and there by the waves.
Recently certain people have learned how to reinstate these traditions. They are people who still not only contend for matters of adiaphora but try to estab lish even worse abuses. Therefore, it is necessary that godly people be on their guard against these tricks, for great error is hidden under this whitewash. It is not correct to cite the example of Moses. There is an enor mous difference between the works which have been instituted by God and ordained by Him, and those works which men have dreamed up, which have been neither commanded nor ordained by God. The former were worship forms—works which were ordained in the law—even though they did not merit the remission of sins. But the man-made religions which were created by men without the mandate of God neither were nor are the worship of God—no more than the ceremonies of the Gentiles and their hymns of praise were the wor ship of God, even though many of them were very beau tiful. Christ cries [Matt. 15:9], "In vain do they worship
Therefore we must cling to the correct definition of the worship of God. The worship of God is the work which has been commanded by God or established with the sure testimony of God. God pronounces that He is honored by it. It is a work which must be per formed with the immediate or principal purpose of obey ing God and honoring Him. Indeed, it must be performed in the light of faith in Christ. The work of the First Commandment is the immediate purpose, so that God is indeed given honor, is known, and is respected.
The work of the Second Table is the immediate pur pose, namely, the defense of our body and our neigh bor, just as it is the immediate purpose of the godly soldier to do battle for the common deliverance, and yet the ultimate purpose is that he might give honor to God. But the hypocrites imagine that the immediate purpose of why they cannot eat meat on the sixth day
Me, teaching the commandments of men." And else where the prophets and apostles often reject these rit uals which have been established without the Word of God, as in 1 Tim. 4[:1], where they are called "the doctrine of devils." The sheer force of this statement ought to move pious minds to consider with what kind of wisdom matters of adiaphora ought to be accepted. is because God judges that He is given honor through this ritual. This is a foolish opinion. Thus, when we have established the definition, we can refute these tricks which these vagabonds and cheats mix in regarding the worship now with their painting of pictures of human traditions.
Even if for the sake of order certain honorable rituals ought to be retained (as in the schools, where we continue to observe the order of Scripture readings), yet it is a vastly different thing to attribute to these rites the honor that they are the worship of God, that is, works which God approves, so that through them He might judge that He is being honored. And yet if we adopt this erroneous notion, then the problem grows; we begin to think that through them we merit the re mission of sins. God rejects and detests this effrontery of men which devises worship forms according to hu man reason. Just as the Israelites set up the figure of a calf and established rites according to their own rea son, so also the Gentiles did the same thing. But why was their example condemned if it is permitted to ev eryone to devise his worship of God on his own au thority? But men do not understand this little-known sin unless the doctrine of the Gospel is well known. For they love their own inventions and they adorn them with many pretexts—not only as a discipline, but they also put them forward as sacraments through which they say that God is efficacious, and they promote their en thusiasms, as do the Corybantes, the Manichaeans, and now in our time the Anabaptists.
The third error. Above all, these hypocrites dream up the notion that perfection is performing the works of human traditions, that is, works which are better and more pleasing to God than those which the Decalogueue prescribes. And under this persuasion they place monasticism above church government, civil life, and marriage. This dementia is particularly to be con demned, and it has already been attacked by Gerson.
The fourth error. They also add the idea of ne cessity. They believe that the observance of human traditions is necessary even beyond a case of giving offense. Under this persuasion they condemn those who do not observe these rituals as people who have deserted the church—seditious schismatics who have turned away from the people of God and have been excluded from the church, just as in ancient times some were condemned because they did not observe the same date of Easter as did the rest. We must contend against this idea of necessity, in the first place because the righteousness of the Gospel must not be thought of as some kind of external civil order, or that discord should arise over differences of this kind in the matter of rituals. Freedom in the Gospel has been given on such things, and it must not be abolished by human authority. Thus Christ wants us to believe that neither the Mosaic ceremonies nor human traditions are mat
Such ravings accompany the admiration we have for human traditions. In some degree this indicates why
ters of necessity, as in Col. 2 [:16], where it says, "Let emonies onto the Gentiles, saying, "Why do you tempt
God by placing a yoke on the necks of the disciples, something which neither you nor your fathers could bear?" no one judge you in food or in drink, ... " that is, let no one bind or condemn your conscience because of these rituals. And again [Verses 20-21], "Since you are dead with Christ to the elements of the world," that is, dead to the precepts or ordinances by which the life of this world is regulated, "Why are you—as if you are still living in this world—carrying out its edicts, such as It is no light crime to tempt God. For it is not from the weakness of offense, but from contempt for God that His Word is set aside, as if we were setting up a contention with Him and a love of conflict between our wisdom and His. God commanded the people of Israel to sacrifice in no place other than in that one place where He willed that the teachers be gathered and the ark set up. But human wisdom went to work and set aside the Word of God, and reasoned that it would be good for men to worship God in other places and with different ceremonies: "Therefore let us establish little sanctuaries and altars in different places, and let us sacrifice not only cattle but also men, so that in so great and difficult an action our zeal might be clearly seen."
These were the sources of the worship of idols. In the same way, in more recent times Masses have been piled up and the command has been given to remain celibate. But here the pious should remember the word of Peter which teaches that the defense of such laws and notions is a serious sin. For it is no small error to tempt God, that is, to put our wisdom ahead of His, and to arouse His wrath by our zeal for seeking things con trary to His Word and by contending against Him. These are evils which are not well known and which civil wis dom cannot judge. But having been instructed about these things, we in the church must consider that we must subject ourselves to the Word of God and not desire to be governed by our own notions.
'Touch not, taste not?' " And Gal. 5[:1], "Stand fast in the liberty for which Christ has made you free, so that you do not again fall into bondage." He commands us to keep hold of this statement about our freedom lest our consciences be tormented by foolish talk about meat, or lest discords arise if one of us does not ob serve human traditions.
The fifth error. The idea of necessity has pro duced great darkness, that is to say, unfortupate imi tations of the law of Moses. After these persuasions have taken possession of our minds, [we erroneously think that] just as in the law of Moses there were nec essary ceremonies, so now there are necessary cer emonies. The kingdom of Christ is transformed into a civil state similar to the Jewish state. They put one man in charge of the whole church as high priest, then they devise levels of priests and an external system of sac rifices. To the high priest they give the additional power of establishing ceremonies and the law of celibacy. This whole imitation has brought great darkness to the minds of people and obscured their understanding of both Law and Gospel, with great attacks leveled against the epistles to the Galatians and the Hebrews. The Levitical priests signify to us the ministry of the Gospel, and the Mosaic sacrifices signify the administration of the Gospel and repentance in our minds. The new righ teousness signifies the Spirit, invocations, confession, the bearing of the cross, etc., as it says in John 4[:23],
"The true worshiper worships the Father in spirit and in truth." and 1 Peter 2[:5], "Bring forth spiritual sacri fices which are pleasing to God for the sake of Jesus
Christ."
The seventh error. Since this notion of righteous ness or necessity in regard to human traditions clings to our minds, terrible discords follow, just as in days gone by dissentions arose about the date of the Passover and the use of leavened bread. And in our day the popes not only use the thunder and lightening of excommunication against married priests and disturb the church with unjust accusations, but they even use
The sixth error. In addition to this, the bishops arrogate to themselves the authority to create tradi tions, which the Gospel does not give them the right to do. But as long as this persuasion controls them—that works devised by men, without the Word of God, are the worship of God—then the bishops pile up traditions, because they are in charge, and so that they will seem to be anxious about the increase in piety. Gregory did this first, then Innocent, and then many [other] popes who have made the laws even more intolerable and confirmed this notion of necessity in order to increase their own authority. They have said that those people are guilty of the eternal wrath of God if they do not observe the traditions which have been laid down by their bishops. The statements which I have cited above refute this error, such as Col. 2[:16], "Let no one judge you in food or in drink." And in Acts [15:10], Peter ear nestly rebukes those who wish to load the Mosaic cer
Neronian cruelty to kill pious priests who have violated some unjust traditions.
Human traditions are defended because of these seven errors (whether because of all seven or only some of them), as testified by the books of those who confess that they are the enemies of our churches.
Although they claim to be speaking about matters of adiaphora, God commands that these errors be held in check and attacked, and Christ and the prophets and apostles do attack them repeatedly. Nor should our teachers be mute when the church is polluted with un godly ceremonies or consciences are caught in the traps of human traditions.
It is also beneficial to refute these errors after the doctrine of true ceremonies has been taught carefully.
For superstitious opinion hangs on very tenaciously un less examples of deliverance from it are shown to us.
Thus Paul did not want Titus to be circumcized [cf. Gal.
Thus I say that the rites which are matters of adiaphora in the churches which have been reformed should be preserved for the sake of good order, but not added because of the notion of righteousness, worship, necessity, or in support of other errors which I have mentioned above. And we need to keep in mind that except for the matter of offense there is no sin in vio lating these traditions. Now I shall mention shortly what offenses we must avoid.
2:3], in order that he might show him as an example of liberty; and he argued against Peter, using this ex ample when Peter was corroborating the stubbornness of those who wanted to hang on to the Mosaic cere monies [cf. v. 11 ff.]. The story is told of Spiridon, the bishop of Cyprus, and it is worth remembering. When a guest came to his house on a fast day, and they could not on such a day easily buy or cook the usual meal for this person, the bishop ordered the meat which had been prepared and set aside to be placed before him.
"I do not eat this meat on this day," said the guest, ''for Gerson has sought out a great variety of nec essary traditions. He' sees that this enormous burden is a bloody torment for the consciences of right-minded men, and that on the other hand men who are less able to bear the burdens of the laws adopt an Epicurean contempt for all religion, since they cannot observe too many traditions. Therefore, he establishes grades of traditions. Some, he says, are established for the sake of outward beauty, and others for the sake of necessity.
But the mitigations of Gerson do not unburden con sciences. The divine authority lightens them by the Word given us through the apostles, which expressly rejects the notion of righteousness and necessity. And public tranquility will again be strengthened by this doc trine: we say that these rites which have been set forth for the sake of good order must be observed for the sake of propriety, and that stubborn men are indeed sinning when they disregard such rituals and give of fense in the churches of the Reformation. This is the true necessity of traditions which also unburdens con sciences and is useful for maintaining peace.
I am a Christian." Spiridon replied to him, ''It is proper that you do eat this meat for the very reason that I am a Christian. For every creation of God is a good thing, and nothing is rejected which can be eaten with thanks giving." The guest obeyed, and instructed by this ex ample he learned that there are far greater acts of worship which should be presented to God than this distinction of foods. Indeed, in this very meal he offered a greater form of worship: he gave thanks to God, and he turned his thoughts to the freedom which has been given by our Lord Jesus Christ. He not only frees us from the laws regarding food, but much more impor tantly delivers us from much more frightful chains. He nails them to His cross so that He does not condemn us.
I have mentioned these matters in order that godly people may understand why human traditions may be violated by both precept and example, and why they may oppose this list of errors with new statements by new orators who have learned now to paint human traditions with marvelous sophistries, and who, if they are successful, can also excuse the religions of the Gentiles with their marvelous sophistry. But this love of sophistry must be blown out of the church, and we must call a spade a spade and not play games with words.
Some men are by nature savage, and they regard all laws as hateful prisons. It is certainly beneficial to instruct such people regarding the purpose of the law, namely, good order. And we should exhort them to avoid offense and understand that they do not live only for themselves but also for others—indeed, for the church of God.
Now that we have pointed out the errors which are inherent in these traditions and have condemned them, I will say what we should believe regarding these adiaphoristic rituals, which ones should be preserved in the churches of the Reformation, and which errors should be removed.
Others are more placid by nature and more con cerned about the feelings of others, and understand that they are born for society. Indeed, they perceive that their chief task is to be eager to help and promote the church. Of their own will, they do observe honorable and useful rituals and avoid offenses. They realize that the public worship services of the church have been established by the special counsel and blessing of God, and that God wills that these services be held fre quently, so that the Word of the Gospel may be pro claimed publicly in the land. Such people are eager to maintain good order, tranquility, and reverence in the gatherings of the churches and in the schools, espe cially since order is conducive for teaching the uned ucated multitude, so long as a lengthy series of feast days is not rashly created. For not all the accounts can be recited in one day, and it is better to delay part of the lesson until later. And when the division of time is congruent with the events which are taking place, it will not be more pleasant, but it still will be better for the memory.
The third rule. In the churches which have been reformed, some rituals which are matters of adiaphora do remain, because in this life our actions have to be arranged in some kind of order. The nature of men understands and loves order, and it is particularly ap propriate for the church and gatherings of people. Thus
Paul very earnestly says in 1 Cor. 14[:40], "Let all things be done properly and in order." He demands not only order but a particular care for adorning this order, and thus he adds "properly" in order that we may see what is appropriate for the persons, the places, and the times. There is more need for reverence in churches than in the theater. The action and the speaking of those who teach is more dignified and serious in the divinely called meeting at which Christ and the angels are present than on the stage.
Not only should men observe a definite series of days, but also God Himself has preserved in the Old and the New Testaments an order of festival days to observe His marvelous deeds. Just as He willed that a lamb be sacrificed at the beginning of spring, at the same time of year our Lord Jesus Christ was crucified and raised again. Just as on the fiftieth day after the departure from Egypt the law was promulgated with public testimony from Mount Sinai, so on the fiftieth day after the Passover by manifest testimony the Holy Spirit was given. without superstition, and they are beneficial for teach ing. For where there is no order, no discipline, it is impossible to teach people. And it is necessary that the Gospel be heard and taught. For God does not gather
His church in any other way than through the preaching of the Gospel, and we should not even consider a church of the elect except in this visible assembly in which the Gospel is rightly and purely taught. There fore, this visible assembly is to be loved and cared for, and the ministry of the Gospel must be retained and honorable gatherings must be held. For this purpose there is constant need for order and proper rites.
Now we are in the 1,544th year after the birth of Christ. Therefore God Himself and our Lord Jesus
Christ and the prophets and the whole church of God, from the Exodus from Egypt to this very year, have attributed to the days of Passover and Pentecost cer tain sacred activities for 3,049 years. A man who looks at this consensus between God and the church and at these examples, unless he is a one-eyed cyclops, will judge that it is an honorable thing to gather together before God and the everlasting church, and he will con sider that he is present as a spectator of those events by which God in those times signified something very important. Indeed, we ought to regard these public gatherings as a beautiful image of our eternal relation ship with God, with Christ, and with the patriarchs, the prophets, the apostles, and other godly men. Such rit uals are useful when they are observed in this way
Indeed, each head of the household should see to it that there is reading and the saying of prayers each morning and evening in his home. Nor should a day go by without calling upon God and giving Him thanks. For in this way, we who have been created and redeemed by God should honor Him as God, and these exercises are profitable for instruction and for arousing fear and faith in us. And in these exercises we must keep in mind the statement of Christ [Luke 11:13], "How much more will your heavenly Father give His Holy Spirit to those who ask Him!" Therefore, we must pray to be taught, guided, and sanctified by the Holy Spirit. And whenever we pray, we must determine with certainty and remember that the Holy Spirit is efficacious through our meditation on the Gospel.
Locus 22 The Mortification of the Flesh Some defend the laws of fastings, satisfactions
(as they call them), and the superstitions of monks un der the pretext of statements which have been made regarding mortification. Since mortification, they say, is a good and pious work, why should we not also praise those human laws concerning fastings and similar rites? Again at this point hypocrisy sets its traps for the true doctrine and true worship. We must distinguish
Luke 21 [:34], "Take heed to yourselves, lest your hearts be weighed down with carousing and drunkenness."
Matt. 17[:21 ], "This kind of demon is not cast out except by prayer and fasting:" Eph. 6[:4], "Bring up your chil dren in the discipline and teaching of the Lord," that is, teach the doctrine to your children and get them ac customed to it with godly training; guide their morals so that they may be humble, chaste, and godly, and train them by honorable and clear labor so that they may not—as often happens—give way to idleness and dissipation, which in turn produce sins which drive out the Holy Spirit! between the mandates of God and human mandates, and carefully consider what Paul calls true mortification.
We must not apply the term—which actually describes very important matters, which God has commanded— to futile and useless rites, as in all ages the arrogance of hypocrites has shown off and defended their cere monies by high-sounding titles.
Whether mortification refers to the enduring un der the cross or the moderation, the word speaks of works which have been commanded. But it is also true that there is freedom for each person individually to choose the honorable exercise of his faith which is suit able for his age and his powers, just as school masters are free to determine the reading lesson and the order of the discussions. Thus also Paul says in 1 Cor. 9[:27],
"I discipline my body and bring it into subjection" with this purpose—that intemperance not hinder the Holy
Spirit, and the good intention of my mind in my worship, in my studies, or in my business affairs. Nor does he establish as the immediate purpose of fasting that a person should think that God is honored by such a work.
The term "mortification" signifies either the pa tience commanded by God in true sorrows, in the sense of the wrath of God with sufferings and afflictions, or the moderation commanded by God which controls our lusts. It does not refer to man-made religions or cere monies which we have added without the command of God.
In regard to the first kind of mortification, that is, patience in true sorrows and under the cross, Paul says in 2 Cor. 4[:10], "Always bearing about in the flesh the mortification of the Lord Jesus, that also the life of Jesus may be manifested in our body." And the words which follow give an interpretation as to what he means by the term "mortification." He says that as long as we live, we are delivered to death for the sake of Jesus, in order that our life in Jesus might be made manifest in our mortal body. We are always subject to death; we are seized to be punished because of our confession of Christ; we are vexed by the terrors of the devil. He calls this the "mortification" of Christ, that is to say, a mortification which is similar to the afflictions of Christ and which is a characteristic of the church. In regard to this point, Rom. 12[:1 ] also says, "Present your bod ies as a living sacrifice—pleasing to God—which is your rational worship." Paul is not speaking of ceremonies or simulated exercises, but of the cross, that is, speak ing about endurance under real and great anguish. This is the sacrifice among those people who sustain them selves by their faith in the Son of God, as Ps. [51:17] says, "The sacrifice of God is a contrite spirit; a broken and a humble spirit, O God, You will not despise." We have spoken above about this kind of mortification un der the section on the cross.
And moderation in general is commanded, but other spiritual exercises are also appropriate. And thus the choice of these is a matter of freedom. Otherwise old people would be preoccupied with cares, sorrows, and pains, and their weaknesses would control their bodies. On the other hand, vigorous young people would not be bothered at all, as in the case of David who before his exile had greater need of training than afterwards, when he was broken down with the great ness of his sorrows and dragged his weakened mem bers around half-alive. Good physical health and a vigorous mind are wonderful gifts of God, necessary for studies and for our business relationships. There fore they must be guarded, and the body is not to be debauched either by gluttony or by self-imposed star vation. Paul commands us to hold our body in honor.
Since there is so great a dissimilarity among peo ple, the church does not promulgate laws by which it prescribes one particular mode of fasting or spiritual exercises. But it makes general prescriptions for mod eration and at the same time it instructs that these ex ercises be not turned superstitiously into a kind of worship, and it mandates that we maintain the differ ence between the works commanded by God and those exercises which we have chosen to do. Thus Paul says
In regard to the second kind of mortification, that is, the moderation which has been commanded by God there are many statements which are made repeatedly.