Of the Distinction of Meats
1] It has been the general persuasion, not of the people alone, but also of those teaching in
the churches, that making Distinctions of Meats, and like traditions of men, are works
profitable to merit grace, and able to make satisfactions for sins. And that 2] the world so
thought, appears from this, that new ceremonies, new orders, new holy‐days, and new
fastings were daily instituted, and the teachers in the churches did exact these works as a
service necessary to merit grace, and did greatly terrify men's consciences, if they should
omit any of these things. 3] From this persuasion concerning traditions much detriment has
resulted in the Church.
4] First, the doctrine of grace and of the righteousness of faith has been obscured by it, which
is the chief part of the Gospel, and ought to stand out as the most prominent in the Church,
in order that the merit of Christ may be well known, and faith, which believes that sins are
forgiven for Christ's sake be exalted far above works. Wherefore Paul also lays 5] the greatest
stress on this article, putting aside the Law and human traditions, in order to show that
Christian righteousness is something else than such works, to wit, the faith which believes
that sins 6] are freely forgiven for Christ's sake. But this doctrine of Paul has been almost
wholly smothered by traditions, which have produced an opinion that, by making distinctions
in meats and like services, 7] we must merit grace and righteousness. In treating of
repentance, there was no mention made of faith; only those works of satisfaction were set
forth; in these the entire repentance seemed to consist.
8] Secondly, these traditions have obscured the commandments of God, because traditions
were placed far above the commandments of God. Christianity was thought to consist wholly
in the observance of certain holydays, rites, fasts, and vestures. These 9] observances had
won for themselves the exalted title of being the spiritual life and the perfect life. Meanwhile
the commandments of God, according to 10] each one's calling, were without honor namely,
that the father brought up his offspring, that the mother bore children, that the prince
governed the commonwealth,—these were accounted works that were worldly and
imperfect, and far below those glittering observances. And this error greatly tormented 11]
devout consciences, which grieved that they were held in an imperfect state of life, as in
marriage, in the office of magistrate; or in other civil ministrations; on the other hand, they
admired the monks and such like, and falsely imagined that the observances of such men
were more acceptable to God.
12] Thirdly, traditions brought great danger to consciences; for it was impossible to keep all
traditions, and yet men judged these observances to be necessary acts of worship. Gerson
writes that many fell 13] into despair, and that some even took their own lives, because they
felt that they were not able to satisfy the traditions, and they had all the while not heard any
consolation of the righteousness of faith and 14] grace. We see that the summists and
theologians gather the traditions, and seek mitigations whereby to ease consciences, and yet
they do not sufficiently unfetter, but sometimes entangle, consciences even more. 15] And
with the gathering of these traditions, the schools and sermons have been so much occupied
that they have had no leisure to touch upon Scripture, and to seek the more profitable
doctrine of faith, of the cross, of hope, of the dignity of civil affairs of consolation of sorely
tried consciences. 16] Hence Gerson and some other theologians have grievously complained
that by these strivings concerning traditions they were prevented from giving attention to a
better kind of doctrine. Augustine also forbids that men's consciences should be burdened
17] with such observances, and prudently advises Januarius that he must know that they are
to be observed as things indifferent; for such are his words.
18] Wherefore our teachers must not be looked upon as having taken up this matter rashly
or from hatred of the bishops, 19] as some falsely suspect. There was great need to warn the
churches of these errors, which had arisen from misunderstanding the traditions. 20] For the
Gospel compels us to insist in the churches upon the doctrine of grace, and of the
righteousness of faith; which, however, cannot be understood, if men think that they merit
grace by observances of their own choice.
21] Thus, therefore, they have taught that by the observance of human traditions we cannot
merit grace or be justified, and hence we must not think such observances necessary acts of
worship. 22] They add hereunto testimonies of Scripture. Christ, Matt. 15, 3, defends the
Apostles who had not observed the usual tradition, which, however, evidently pertains to a
matter not unlawful, but indifferent, and to have a certain affinity with the purifications of
the Law, and says, 15, 9: In vain do they worship Me with the commandments of men. 23]
He, therefore, does not exact an unprofitable service. Shortly after He adds: Not that which
goeth into the mouth defileth a man. So also Paul, Rom. 14, 17: 24]The kingdom of God is not
meat and drink. 25] Col. 2, 16: Let no man, therefore, judge you in meat, or in drink, or in
respect of an holy‐day, or of the Sabbath‐day; also: If 26]ye be dead with Christ from the
rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances:
Touch not, taste not, handle not! And Peter says, Acts 15, 10: Why 27] tempt ye God to put a
yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But
we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ 28] we shall be saved, even as
they. Here Peter forbids to burden the consciences with many rites, 29] either of Moses or of
others. And in 1 Tim. 4, 1. 3 Paul calls the prohibition of meats a doctrine of devils; for it is
against the Gospel to institute or to do such works that by them we may merit grace, or as
though Christianity could not exist without such service of God.
30] Here our adversaries object that our teachers are opposed to discipline and mortification
of the flesh, as Jovinian. But the contrary may be learned 31] from the writings of our
teachers. For they have always taught concerning the cross that it behooves Christians to
bear afflictions. This is the true, 32] earnest, and unfeigned mortification, to wit, to be
exercised with divers afflictions, and to be crucified with Christ.
33] Moreover, they teach that every Christian ought to train and subdue himself with bodily
restraints, or bodily exercises and labors that neither satiety nor slothfulness tempt him to
sin, but not that we may merit grace or make satisfaction for sins by such exercises. 34] And
such external discipline ought to be urged at all times, not only on a few and set days. So
Christ commands, 35] Luke 21, 34: Take heed lest your hearts 36] be overcharged with
surfeiting; also Matt. 17, 21: This kind goeth not out but 37] by prayer and fasting. Paul also
says, 1 Cor. 9, 27: I keep under my body and bring it into subjection. 38] Here he clearly
shows that he was keeping under his body, not to merit forgiveness of sins by that discipline,
but to have his body in subjection and fitted for spiritual things, and for the discharge of duty
according 39] to his calling. Therefore, we do not condemn fasting in itself, but the traditions
which prescribe certain days and certain meats, with peril of conscience, as though such
works were a necessary service.
40] Nevertheless, very many traditions are kept on our part, which conduce to good order in
the Church, as the Order of Lessons 41] in the Mass and the chief holy‐days. But, at the same
time, men are warned that such observances do not justify before God, and that in such
things it should not be made sin if they be omitted without offense. 42] Such liberty in
human rites was not unknown to the Fathers. 43] For in the East they kept Easter at another
time than at Rome, and when, on account of this diversity, the Romans accused the Eastern
Church of schism, they were admonished by others 44] that such usages need not be alike
everywhere. And Irenaeus says: Diversity concerning fasting does not destroy the harmony of
faith; as also Pope Gregory intimates in Dist. XII, that such diversity does not violate the unity
of the Church. 45] And in the Tripartite History, Book 9, many examples of dissimilar rites are
gathered, and the following statement is made: It was not the mind of the Apostles to enact
rules concerning holy‐days, but to preach godliness and a holy life [to teach faith and love].