The Apology of the Augsburg Confession

Article XIIa (V) Repentance

[1] In Article XII, the adversaries approve of the first part, in which we present this: those who have fallen after Baptism may obtain the forgiveness of sins whenever and as often as they are converted. They condemn the second part, in which we say that the parts of repentance are contrition and faith. They deny that faith is the second part of repentance. [2] O Charles, most invincible Emperor, what should we do? This is the very voice of the Gospel: through faith we obtain the forgiveness of sins. These writers of the Confutation condemn this voice of the Gospel. Therefore, we can in no way agree to the Confutation. We cannot condemn the voice of the Gospel; it is beneficial and full of comfort. What else is the denial that we obtain the forgiveness of sins by faith than contempt for Christ’s blood and death? [3] We beg you, O Charles, most unconquerable Emperor. Patiently and diligently hear and examine this most important subject. It contains the chief topic of the Gospel, the true knowledge of Christ, and the true worship of God. For all good people will determine that especially on this subject we have taught things that are true, godly, beneficial, and necessary for Christ’s whole Church. All good people will determine from the writings of our theologians that very much light has been added to the Gospel and many deadly errors have been corrected. By these errors, through the opinions of the Scholastics and canonists, the doctrine of repentance was previously covered up.

[4] Before we defend our position, we must first say this: All good people of all situations, even the theological profession, undoubtedly confess that the teaching of repentance was very much confused before Luther’s writings appeared. [5] Theologians were never able to explain satisfactorily the numberless questions found in the books of the commentaries on the Sentences. The people could not grasp the big picture, nor could they see what things were necessary for repentance, in which peace of conscience could be found. [6] Let any one of the adversaries come forth and tell us when the forgiveness of sins takes place. O good God, there is such darkness! The adversaries do not know whether the forgiveness of sins happens in attrition or contrition. If forgiveness happens because of contrition, why do we need Absolution? What does the Power of the Keys bring about, if sins have been forgiven already? Here they work even harder and wickedly divert from the Power of the Keys. [7] Some imagine that guilt is not forgiven by the Power of the Keys, but that eternal punishments are changed into temporal ones. So the most beneficial power would be the service, not of life and the Spirit, but only of God’s anger and punishments. The more cautious imagine that sins are forgiven before the Church, and not before God, by the Power of the Keys. This also is a deadly error. For if the Power of the Keys does not comfort us before God, what will quiet the conscience? [8] What follows is even more involved. The adversaries teach that we merit grace by contrition. In reference to this, if anyone should ask why Saul, Judas, and similar persons (who were dreadfully contrite) did not receive grace, here is the answer: We take it from faith and according to the Gospel, that Judas did not believe. He did not support himself by the Gospel and Christ’s promise. For faith shows the distinction between the contrition of Judas [Matthew 27:3–5] and of Peter [Matthew 26:75]. But the adversaries take their answer from the Law, that Judas did not love God, but feared the punishments. [9] When will a terrified conscience be able to decide whether it fears God for His own sake or is fleeing from eternal punishments? The Psalms and the Prophets describe those serious, true, and great terrors, which the truly converted experience. Such great emotions can be distinguished in letters and terms, but they are not separated in fact, as these dear philosophers imagine. [10] Here we appeal to the judgments of all good and wise people. Undoubtedly, they will confess that these discussions in the writings of the adversaries are very confused and intricate. Still, the most important subject is at stake, the chief topic of the Gospel, the forgiveness of sins. In the writings of the adversaries, this entire doctrine about these questions is full of errors and hypocrisy and clouds over Christ’s benefit, the Power of the Keys, and the righteousness of faith.

[11] These things happen in the first act of this play. What about Confession? What a work there is in the endless listing of sins. Nevertheless, this is in great part devoted to sins against human traditions! So that good minds may be more tortured by this, the adversaries falsely assert that this listing is of divine right. [12] They demand this listing under the claim of divine right. In the meantime, they speak coldly about Absolution, which is truly of divine right. They falsely assert that the Sacrament itself bestows grace by the mere performance of one act (ex opere operato) without a good disposition on the part of the one using it. They do not mention faith grasping the Absolution and comforting the conscience. This is truly what is generally called departing before the mysteries.

[13] The third act of this play, concerning satisfactions, remains. It contains the most confused discussions. The adversaries imagine that eternal punishments are switched to the punishments of purgatory and teach that a part of them is forgiven by the Power of the Keys and that a part is to be redeemed by means of satisfactions. [14] Further, they add that satisfactions should be extraordinary works (supererogation). They make these consist of most foolish observances, such as pilgrimages, rosaries, or similar observances that do not have God’s command. [15] Then, just as they redeem purgatory by means of satisfactions, so a scheme was created for redeeming satisfactions, which was most abundant in revenue. They sell indulgences, which they interpret as the pardon of satisfactions. This revenue is not only from the living, but is much more plentiful from the dead. Nor do they redeem the satisfactions of the dead only by indulgences, but also by the sacrifice of the Mass. [16] In a word, the topic of satisfactions is infinite. The doctrine of the righ teousness of faith in Christ and the benefit of Christ lies buried among these scandals (for we cannot list everything) and doctrines of devils. Therefore, all good people understand that the doctrine of the learned persons and canon lawyers about repentance has been criticized for a useful and godly purpose. For the following teachings are clearly false and foreign, not only to Holy Scripture, but also to the Church Fathers:

[17] 1. Through good works, apart from grace, we merit grace from the divine covenant.

[18] 2. We merit grace by attrition.

[19] 3. Merely hating the crime is enough for the blotting out of sin.

[20] 4. We obtain forgiveness of sins because of contrition, and not by faith in Christ.

[21] 5. The Power of the Keys provides the forgiveness of sins before the Church, but not before God.

[22] 6. Sins are not forgiven before God by the Power of the Keys; rather, the Power of the Keys has been set up to transfer eternal punishments to temporal, to put certain satisfactions upon consciences, to set up new acts of worship, and to put consciences in debt to such satisfactions and acts of worship.

[23] 7. The listing of offenses in Confession, as taught by the adversaries, is necessary according to divine right.

[24] 8. Canonical satisfactions are necessary for redeeming the punishment of purgatory, or they benefit as a compensation for blotting out guilt. This is how uninformed persons understand it.

[25] 9. Without a good disposition on the part of the one using it, that is, without faith in Christ, the reception of the Sacrament of repentance by the outward act (ex opere operato) obtains grace.

[26] 10. Our souls are freed from purgatory through indulgences by the Power of the Keys.

[27] 11. In the reservation of cases, not only canonical punishment, but also the guilt, should be reserved for one who is truly converted.

[The Two Parts of Repentance]

[28] To deliver godly consciences from these mazes of the learned persons, we have attributed these two parts to repentance: contrition and faith. If anyone desires to add a third—fruit worthy of repentance, that is, a change of the entire life and character for the better—we will not oppose it. [29] We separate from contrition those useless and endless discussions regarding grief from loving God and from fearing punishment. We say that contrition is the true terror of conscience, which feels that God is angry with sin and grieves that it has sinned. This contrition takes place when sins are condemned by God’s Word. The sum of the preaching of the Gospel is this: to convict of sin; to offer for Christ’s sake the forgiveness of sins and righteousness, the Holy Spirit, and eternal life; and that as reborn people we should do good works. [30] So Christ includes the sum of the Gospel when He says, “Repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in His name to all nations” (Luke 24:47). [31] Scripture speaks about these terrors:

[32] In these terrors, conscience feels God’s wrath against sin. This is unknown to secure people living according to the flesh. The conscience sees the corruption of sin and seriously grieves that it has sinned. Meanwhile, it also runs away from God’s dreadful anger. Human nature, unless sustained by God’s Word, cannot endure His anger. [33] So Paul says, “For through the law I died to the law” (Galatians 2:19). [34] For the Law only accuses and terrifies consciences. In these terrors our adversaries say nothing about faith. They present only the Word that convicts of sin. When this is taught alone, it is the doctrine of the Law, not of the Gospel. By these griefs and terrors, they say, people merit grace, as long as they love God. But how will people love God in true terrors when they feel God’s horrible wrath, which is beyond words? What besides despair do those people teach who, during these terrors, show forth only the Law?

[35] As the second part of repentance we add faith in Christ. The Gospel, in which the forgiveness of sins is freely promised concerning Christ, should be presented to consciences in these terrors. They should believe that, for Christ’s sake, their sins are freely forgiven. [36] This faith cheers, sustains, and enlivens the contrite, according to Romans 5:1, “Since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God.” This faith obtains the forgiveness of sins. It justifies before God, as the same passage testifies, “since we have been justified by faith.” This faith shows the distinction between the contrition of Judas and Peter, of Saul and David. The contrition of Judas or Saul [Matthew 27:3–5; 1 Samuel 31:4–6] is useless because faith is not added. Faith grasps the forgiveness of sins, given as a gift for Christ’s sake. So the contrition of David or Peter [2 Samuel 12:13; Matthew 26:75] helps because faith, which takes hold of the forgiveness of sins granted for Christ’s sake, is added to it. [37] Love is not present before reconciliation has been made through faith. For without Christ, the Law is not performed, according to Romans 5:2, “Through [Christ] we have also obtained access [to God].” This faith grows gradually and throughout the entire life, struggles with sin, in order to overcome sin and death. Love follows faith, as we have said above. [38] So childlike fear can be clearly defined as anxiety that has been connected with faith, that is, where faith comforts and sustains the anxious heart. It is slavish fear when faith does not sustain the anxious heart.

[39] Furthermore, the Power of the Keys administers and presents the Gospel through Absolution, which is the true voice of the Gospel. We also include Absolution when we speak of faith, because “faith comes from hearing,” as Paul says in Romans 10:17. When the Gospel is heard and the Absolution is heard, the conscience is encouraged and receives comfort. [40] Because God truly brings a person to life through the Word, the Keys truly forgive sins before God. According to Luke 10:16, “The one who hears you hears Me.” Therefore, the voice of the one absolving must be believed no differently than we would believe a voice from heaven. [41] Absolution can properly be called a Sacrament of repentance, as even the more learned scholastic theologians say. [42] Meanwhile, in temptations this faith is nourished in a variety of ways: through the declarations of the Gospel and the use of the Sacraments. For these are signs of the New Testament, that is, signs of the forgiveness of sins. They offer the forgiveness of sins as the words of the Lord’s Supper clearly testify, “This is My body, which is given for you. This is the cup of the New Testament,” and so on. (See Matthew 26:26, 28.) So faith is conceived and strengthened through Absolution, through the hearing of the Gospel, through the use of the Sacraments, so that it may not give in to the terrors of sin and death while it struggles. [43] This method of repentance is plain and clear. It increases the worth of the Power of the Keys and of the Sacraments. It illumines Christ’s benefit and teaches us to make use of Christ as Mediator and the Atoning Sacrifice.

[Scriptural Proofs]

[44] Because the Confutation condemns us for having assigned these two parts to repentance, we must show that Scripture expresses these as the chief parts in repentance or conversion. Christ says, “Come to Me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest” (Matthew 11:28). Here there are two parts. The “labor” and the burden signify the contrition, anxiety, and terrors of sin and death. To “come to” Christ is to believe that sins are forgiven for Christ’s sake. When we believe, our hearts are brought to life by the Holy Spirit through Christ’s Word. [45] Here, therefore, are these two chief parts: contrition and faith. In Mark 1:15, Christ says, “Repent and believe in the gospel.” In the first clause He convicts of sins, and in the second He comforts us and shows the forgiveness of sins. Believing the Gospel is not the general faith that devils also have, but in the proper sense it is believing that the forgiveness of sins has been granted for Christ’s sake. This is revealed in the Gospel. You see also here that the two parts are joined: contrition when sins are rebuked; and faith when it is said, “Believe in the gospel.” If anyone should say here that Christ also includes the fruit of repentance or the entire new life, we shall not disagree. For this satisfies us, that contrition and faith are named as the chief parts.

[46] When Paul describes conversion or renewal, he almost everywhere designates these two parts, making dead and making alive, as in Colossians 2:11, “In Him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands,” namely, “by putting off the body of the flesh.” And afterward, “in which you were also raised with Him through faith in the powerful working of God” (2:12). Here are the two parts. One is putting off the body of sins, the other is the rising again through faith. Neither should these terms “making dead,” “making alive,” “putting off the body of sins,” “rising again” be understood in a Platonic way, about a fake change. Rather, “making dead” means true terrors, such as those of the dying, which nature could not sustain unless it were supported by faith. Paul calls that “the putting off the body of sins,” which we ordinarily call contrition. In these griefs the natural, lustful desire is purged away. The “making alive” should not be understood as a Platonic fancy, but as comfort that truly sustains life that flickers in contrition. [47] Here, therefore, are two parts: contrition and faith. For conscience cannot be quieted except through faith. Therefore, faith alone makes alive, according to this declaration: “The righteous shall live by his faith” (Habakkuk 2:4; Romans 1:17).

[48] Colossians 2:14 says, “[Christ canceled] the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands.” Here also there are two parts, the handwriting and the blotting out of the handwriting. The handwriting, however, is conscience, convicting and condemning us. The Law, furthermore, is the Word that rebukes and condemns sins. Therefore, this voice that says, “I have sinned against the Lord,” as David says (2 Samuel 12:13), is the handwriting. Wicked and secure people do not seriously give forth this voice, for they do not see. They do not read the sentence of the Law written in the heart. This sentence is perceived in true griefs and terrors. Therefore, the handwriting that condemns us is contrition itself. To blot out the handwriting is to chisel away the sentence by which we declare that we shall be condemned and to engrave the sentence by which we know that we have been freed from this condemnation. Faith is the new sentence. It reverses the former sentence and gives peace and life to the heart.

[49] What need is there to cite many testimonies since they are everywhere clear in the Scriptures?

Here, contrition is contained in the first clause, and how we are revived in contrition is clearly described in the second. We are revived by God’s Word, which offers grace. [50] This sustains and enlivens hearts.

Contrition is meant by one of these; faith is meant by the other.

He calls it the “strange” work of the Lord when He terrifies, because to make alive and comfort is God’s own proper work. But He terrifies, Isaiah says, for this reason—that there may be a place for comfort and making alive. For hearts that are secure and do not feel God’s wrath hate consolation. [52] In this manner Scripture is accustomed to join these two, the terrors and the consolation. It does this to teach that there are these chief parts in repentance: contrition and faith that comforts and justifies. Neither do we see how the nature of repentance can be presented more clearly and simply.

[53] God’s two chief works among people are these: to terrify; to justify and make alive those who have been terrified. Into these two works all Scripture has been distributed. The one part is the Law, which shows, reproves, and condemns sins. The other part is the Gospel, that is, the promise of grace bestowed in Christ. This promise is constantly repeated in the whole of Scripture, first having been delivered to Adam ‹“I will put enmity” in Genesis 3:15›, afterward, to the patriarchs. Then, it was still more clearly proclaimed by the prophets. Lastly, it was preached and set forth among the Jewish people by Christ and then spread out over the entire world by the apostles. [54] All the saints were justified through faith in this promise, and not by their own attrition or contrition.

[55] The examples also show these two parts. After his sin, Adam is rebuked and becomes terrified; this was contrition. Then, God promises grace and speaks of a future seed (the blessed seed, that is, Christ) by which the devil’s kingdom, death, and sin will be destroyed [Genesis 3:15]. There He offers the forgiveness of sins. These are the chief things. For although the punishment is added afterward, it does not merit the forgiveness of sin. We will speak about this kind of punishment a little later.

[56] David is rebuked by Nathan in this way. Terrified, he says, “I have sinned against the LORD” (2 Samuel 12:13). This is contrition. Afterward, he hears the Absolution, “the LORD also has put away your sin; you shall not die.” This voice encourages David, and through faith it sustains, justifies, and enlivens him. A punishment is also added, but this punishment does not merit the forgiveness of sins. [57] Nor are special punishments always added. In repentance these two things ought always to exist, namely, contrition and faith, as in Luke 7. The woman, who was a sinner, came to Christ weeping. By these tears the contrition is recognized. Afterward, she hears the Absolution, “Your sins are forgiven. Your faith has saved you; go in peace” (vv. 48, 50). This is the second part of repentance, namely, faith that encourages and comforts her. [58] From all these it is clear to godly readers that we assign to repentance those parts that properly belong to it in conversion, or the new birth, and the forgiveness of sin. Worthy fruit and punishments follow rebirth and the forgiveness of sin. For this reason we have mentioned these two parts so that the faith required in repentance might be seen better, and so that faith, which the Gospel proclaims, can be better understood when it is contrasted with contrition and making dead.

[Forgiveness of Sins Received by Faith]

[59] Since the adversaries clearly condemn our statement that people obtain the forgiveness of sins by faith, we shall add a few proofs. From these it will be understood that the forgiveness of sins is received not by the outward deed (ex opere operato) because of contrition, but by that special faith by which an individual believes that sins are pardoned for him. For this is the chief article that we are debating with our adversaries and the knowledge we regard is necessary to all Christians. However, we have said enough already about the same subject and will be brief. For the doctrine of repentance and justification are very closely related.

[60] When the adversaries speak of faith, saying that it comes before repentance, they understand faith this way: not that faith justifies, but that, in a general way, it believes that God exists, that punishments have been threatened to the wicked, and so on. In addition to this faith, we require that each one believe that his sins are pardoned. We are arguing about this specific faith, and we contrast it to the opinion that asks us to trust not in Christ’s promise, but in the outward act (opus operatum) of contrition, confession, satisfactions, and so on. This faith follows terrors in such a way as to overcome them and make the conscience peaceful. We attribute justification and regeneration to this faith, since it frees from terrors and produces not only peace and joy, but also a new life in the heart. ‹With God’s help,› we shall defend ‹to eternity and against all the gates of hell› that this faith is truly necessary for the forgiveness of sins, and so place it among the parts of repentance. Nor does Christ’s Church believe otherwise, although our adversaries contradict us.

[61] Furthermore, we ask the adversaries whether or not Absolution is a part of repentance. If they separate it from Confession (they are clever in making the distinction), we do not see what benefit Confession has without Absolution. If, however, they do not separate Absolution from Confession, it is necessary for them to hold that faith is a part of repentance, because Absolution is not received except through faith. However, that Absolution is received only through faith is proven from Paul, who teaches that the promise cannot be received except by faith (Romans 4:16). Absolution is the promise of the forgiveness of sins. Therefore, it necessarily requires faith. [62] Neither do we see how the person who does not yield to Absolution may be said to receive Absolution. What else is the refusal to yield to Absolution but charging God with falsehood? If the heart doubts, it regards those things that God promises as uncertain and of no account. So, it is written, “Whoever does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has borne concerning His Son” (1 John 5:10).

[63] Second, we think that the adversaries recognize that the forgiveness of sins is either a part of repentance or its end (the terminus ad quem). Therefore, whatever receives the forgiveness of sins is correctly added to the parts of repentance. However, it is very certain that even though all the gates of hell contradict us, the forgiveness of sins cannot be received except by faith alone. This faith believes that sins are pardoned for Christ’s sake, according to Romans 3:25, “whom God put forward as a propitiation by His blood, to be received by faith.” Likewise, “Through Him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace” (Romans 5:2). [64] For a terrified conscience cannot set our works or our love against God’s wrath. It is eventually quieted when it takes hold of Christ as Mediator and believes the promises given for His sake. For those who imagine that hearts become quieted without faith in Christ do not understand what the forgiveness of sins is or how it came to us. [65] So 1 Peter 2:6 cites from Isaiah 49:23 and 28:16, “Whoever believes in Him will not be put to shame.” It is necessary, therefore, that hypocrites be puzzled. They are confident that they receive the forgiveness of sins because of their own works, and not because of Christ. Peter also says, “To Him all the prophets bear witness that everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins” (Acts 10:43). What he says, through His name, could not be expressed more clearly. He adds, “everyone who believes in Him.” So we receive the forgiveness of sins only through Christ’s name, that is, for Christ’s sake, and not for the sake of any merits and works of our own. This happens when we believe that our sins are forgiven for Christ’s sake.

[66] Our adversaries cry out that they are the Church, that they are following the general agreement of the Church. But Peter also cites here in our issue the consensus of the Church, “To Him all the prophets bear witness that everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins” (Acts 10:43). The general agreement of the prophets is certainly to be judged as the general agreement of the Church universal. We admit neither to the pope nor to the Church the power to make decrees against this general agreement of the prophets. [67] But the bull of Leo openly condemns this article, “Repentance,” and the adversaries condemn it in the Confutation. It is clear what sort of a Church we must judge these men to be. By their decrees they not only condemn the doctrine that we obtain the forgiveness of sins through faith (not on account of our works, but because of Christ), but they also give the command to abolish it by force and the sword and by every kind of cruelty to put to death good people who believe this way.

[68] They have famous authors, Scotus, Gabriel Biel, and the like, and passages of the Fathers that are quoted in a butchered form in the decrees. Certainly, if the quotations are to be counted, they win. For there is a very great crowd of most silly writers on the Sentences. As though they had worked together, they defend these fables about the merit of attrition and of works and other things that we have mentioned previously. [69] But let no one be moved by the multitude of citations. There is no great weight in the testimonies of the later writers. They did not create their own writings, but only, by compiling from the writers before them, transferred these opinions from some books into others. They have exercised no judgment. Just like petty judges they have silently approved the errors of their superiors, which they have not understood. [70] Therefore, let us not hesitate to use this saying of Peter, which summarizes the Prophets and opposes ever so many legions of the commentators on the Sentences. [71] The Holy Spirit’s testimony is added to this statement of Peter. For the text speaks in this way, “While Peter was still saying these things, the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word” (Acts 10:44). [72] Therefore, let godly consciences know that God’s command is this: They are to believe that they are freely forgiven for Christ’s sake, and not for the sake of our works. Let them sustain themselves against despair and against the terrors of sin and of death by this command of God. [73] Let them know that this belief has existed among saints from the beginning of the world. For Peter clearly cites the general agreement of the Prophets, and the writings of the apostles confirm that they believe the same thing. Nor are testimonies of the Fathers lacking. For Bernard says the same thing in words that are in no way hidden:

[74] These words of Bernard shed a wonderful light upon our cause, because he not only requires that we believe in a general way that sins are pardoned through mercy, but he also asks us to add special faith, by which we believe that our sins are forgiven. He teaches how we can be sure about the forgiveness of sins, namely, when our hearts are encouraged through faith and become peaceful through the Holy Spirit. What more do the adversaries require? Do they still dare deny that we receive the forgiveness of sins through faith or that faith is a part of repentance?

[75] Third, the adversaries say that sin is pardoned because an attrite or contrite person brings forth an act of love to God, and by this act deserves the forgiveness of sins. This is nothing but teaching the Law, the Gospel being blotted out, and the promise about Christ being abolished. For they require only the Law and our works because the Law demands love. Besides, they teach us to be confident that we obtain forgiveness of sins because of contrition and love. What else is this than to put confidence in our works, not in God’s Word and promise about Christ? But if the Law is enough for receiving the forgiveness of sins, what need is there of the Gospel? What need is there of Christ if we receive forgiveness of sins because of our own work? [76] We, on the other hand, call consciences away from the Law to the Gospel, and from confidence in their own works to confidence in the promise and Christ. We do so because the Gospel presents Christ to us and freely promises the forgiveness of sins for Christ’s sake. In this promise it asks us to trust, namely, that we are reconciled to the Father for Christ’s sake, not for the sake of our own contrition or love. For there is no other Mediator or Atoning Sacrifice than Christ. Neither can we do the works of the Law unless we have first been reconciled through Christ. If we would do anything, we must believe that for Christ’s sake, as Mediator and Atoning Sacrifice, we receive the forgiveness of sins, and not for the sake of these works.

[77] Yes, it is a disgrace to Christ and a repeal of the Gospel to believe that we receive the forgiveness of sins because of the Law, or any way other than through faith in Christ. We discussed this before in the article on justification. There we declared why we confess that people are justified through faith, not through love. [78] The doctrine of the adversaries is merely the doctrine of the Law, when they teach that by their own contrition and love people receive the forgiveness of sins and trust in this contrition and love. Even so, it is not understood ‹they do not understand the kind of love toward God it demands›, just as the Jewish people looked upon Moses’ veiled face [2 Corinthians 3:15]. Let us imagine that love is present, and let us imagine that works are present. Yet neither love nor works can be an atoning sacrifice for sin. The adversaries cannot even be opposed to God’s wrath and judgment, according to Psalm 143:2, “Enter not into judgment with Your servant, for no one living is righteous before You.” Neither should Christ’s honor be transferred to our works.

[79] For these reasons Paul argues that we are not justified by the Law. He contrasts the Law to the promise of the forgiveness of sins, which we freely receive and which is granted for Christ’s sake. Paul calls us away from the Law to this promise. Upon this he asks us to look. The promise certainly will be void if we are justified by the Law before we are justified through the promise, or if we receive the forgiveness of sins because of our own righ teousness. [80] Clearly the promise was given to us and Christ was offered to us because we cannot do the works of the Law. Therefore, it is necessary that we are reconciled by the promise before we do the works of the Law. The promise, however, is received only through faith. It is necessary for contrite persons to take hold of the promise of the forgiveness of sins granted for Christ’s sake through faith and to be confident that they have a reconciled Father freely for Christ’s sake. [81] This is Paul’s meaning when he says, “That is why it depends on faith, in order that the promise may rest on grace and be guaranteed” (Romans 4:16). And, “The Scripture imprisoned everything under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe” (Galatians 3:22). This means that all are under sin, neither can they be freed except by grasping the promise of the forgiveness of sins through faith. [82] Therefore, we must accept the forgiveness of sins through faith before we do the works of the Law. Although, as has been said before, love follows faith because the reborn person receives the Holy Spirit and so begins to do the works of the Law.

[83] We would cite more testimonies if they were not clear in the Scriptures to every godly reader. We do not wish to be too wordy, so that we may bring this case to a conclusion. [84] Neither is there any doubt that we are defending Paul’s meaning. He teaches that through faith we receive the forgiveness of sins for Christ’s sake, and that through faith we should set Christ as Mediator against God’s wrath, and not our works. Nor should godly minds be disturbed when the adversaries find fault with Paul’s judgments. Nothing is said so simply that it cannot be distorted by objecting. We know that we have mentioned Paul’s true and genuine meaning. We know that our belief brings sure comfort to godly consciences, without which no one can stand in God’s judgment.

[85] Let these legalistic opinions of the adversaries be rejected. Among these are that we do not receive the forgiveness of sins by faith, but that it should be merited by our love and works. Another opinion is that we should set our love and our works against God’s wrath. This doctrine is not of the Gospel, but of the Law. It wrongly teaches that a person is justified by the Law before he has been reconciled through Christ to God. Christ says, “Apart from Me you can do nothing”; likewise, “I am the vine; you are the branches” (John 15:5). [86] But the adversaries wrongly teach that we are branches not of Christ, but of Moses. For they want to be justified by the Law and to offer their love and works to God before they are reconciled to God through Christ, before they are branches of Christ. On the other hand, Paul argues that the Law cannot be obeyed without Christ. We must receive the promise first so that through faith we may be reconciled to God on account of Christ. Then we can do the works of the Law. Those who truly feel and have experienced sin and anguish of conscience must cling to the promise of grace. [87] We think that these things are clear enough to godly consciences. In this way they will understand why we have declared before that people are justified through faith, not through love. We must set against God’s anger not our love or works (or trust in our love or works), but Christ as Mediator. We must grasp the promise of the forgiveness of sins before we do the works of the Law.

[88] Finally, when will conscience be quieted if we receive forgiveness of sins on the ground that we love, or that we do the works of the Law? The Law will always accuse us, because we never satisfy God’s Law. Just as Paul says, “The law brings wrath” (Romans 4:15). Chrysostom asks about repentance, “Where are we made sure that our sins are forgiven?” The adversaries also, in their Sentences, ask about the same subject. This cannot be explained; consciences cannot be made at peace unless they know it is God’s command and the very Gospel that they should be firmly confident that sins are forgiven freely for Christ’s sake, and that they should not doubt this. If anyone doubts, he charges the divine promise with falsehood, as 1 John 5:10 says. We teach that the Gospel requires this certainty of faith. The adversaries leave consciences uncertain and wavering. [89] Consciences, however, do nothing by faith when they constantly doubt whether they have forgiveness. In this doubt how can they call upon God? How can they be confident that they are heard? So the entire life would be without God and without the true worship of God. This is what Paul says, “Whatever does not proceed from faith is sin” (Romans 14:23). Because they are constantly occupied with this doubt, they never experience what faith is. So finally they rush at last into despair. Such is the doctrine of the adversaries, the doctrine of the Law, the setting aside of the Gospel, the doctrine of despair. [90] We are glad to refer judgment about this subject of repentance (for it is clear) to all good people. They can decide whether we or the adversaries have taught those things that are more godly and healthful to consciences. Indeed, these disagreements in the Church do not delight us. If we did not have great and necessary reasons for disagreeing with the adversaries we would, with the greatest pleasure, be silent. But since they condemn the clear truth, it is not right for us to abandon what is not our own cause, but the cause of Christ and the Church.

[Faith and Repentance]

[91] We have declared why we assigned these two parts, contrition and faith, to repentance. We have done this willingly. Many writings about repentance are published that cite the Fathers in a butchered way. The adversaries have distorted these to put faith out of sight. Among these are, “Repentance is to lament past evils, and not to commit again deeds that ought to be lamented.” Again, “Repentance is a kind of vengeance of him who grieves, thus punishing in himself what he is sorry for having committed.” In these passages, no mention is made of faith. Not even in the schools, when they interpret them, is anything added about faith. [92] Therefore, in order that the doctrine of faith might be clearer, we have named it among the parts of repentance. For experience shows that those passages are dangerous that require contrition or good works, and make no mention of justifying faith. [93] Caution can justly be desired in those who have collected these centos of the Sentences and decrees. Since the Fathers speak in some places about one part of repentance, and in other places about another part, it would have been good to select and combine their judgments not only about one part but about both, that is, about contrition and faith.

[94] Tertullian speaks very well about faith, discussing the oath in the prophet Ezekiel, “As I live, declares the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live” (33:11). As God swears that He does not want the death of a sinner, He shows that faith is required, in order that we may believe the one swearing and be firmly confident that He forgives us. In our estimation, the authority of the divine promises should be great by itself. But this promise has also been confirmed by an oath. Therefore, if anyone is not confident that he is forgiven, he denies that God has sworn what is true. A more horrible blasphemy cannot be imagined. For Tertullian says this:

[95] Here we must know that this faith should be confident that God freely forgives us for Christ’s sake, for the sake of His own promise, not for the sake of our works, contrition, confession, or satisfactions. For if faith relies upon these works, it immediately becomes uncertain, because the terrified conscience sees that these works are unworthy. [96] So Ambrose speaks well about repentance:

Again,

[97] Therefore, there are sentences written by the Fathers not only about contrition and works, but also about faith. But the adversaries, since they understand neither the nature of repentance nor the language of the Fathers, select passages about a part of repentance, namely, about works. They overlook the declarations made elsewhere about faith, since they do not understand them.