Of Ecclesiastical Power — Augsburg Confession

1] There has been great controversy concerning the Power of Bishops, in which some have

awkwardly confounded the power of the Church 2] and the power of the sword. And from

this confusion very great wars and tumults have resulted, while the Pontiffs, emboldened by

the power of the Keys, not only have instituted new services and burdened consciences with

reservation of cases and ruthless excommunications, but have also undertaken to transfer

the kingdoms of this world, 3] and to take the Empire from the Emperor. These wrongs have

long since been rebuked in the Church 4] by learned and godly men. Therefore our teachers,

for the comforting of men's consciences, were constrained to show the difference between

the power of the Church and the power of the sword, and taught that both of them, because

of God's commandment, are to be held in reverence and honor, as the chief blessings of God

on earth.

5] But this is their opinion, that the power of the Keys, or the power of the bishops, according

to the Gospel, is a power or commandment of God, to preach the Gospel, to remit and retain

sins, and to administer Sacraments. 6] For with this commandment Christ sends forth His

Apostles, John 20, 21 sqq.: As My Father hath sent Me, even so send I you. Receive ye the

Holy Ghost. Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whosesoever sins

ye retain, they are retained. 7] Mark 16, 15: Go preach the Gospel to every creature.

8] This power is exercised only by teaching or preaching the Gospel and administering the

Sacraments, according to their calling either to many or to individuals. For thereby are

granted, not bodily, but eternal things, as eternal righteousness, the Holy Ghost, eternal life.

9] These things cannot come but by the ministry of the Word and the Sacraments, as Paul

says, Rom. 1, 16: The Gospel is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth.

10] Therefore, since the power of the Church grants eternal things, and is exercised only by

the ministry of the Word, it does not interfere with civil government; no more than the art of

singing interferes with civil government. 11] For civil government deals with other things

than does the Gospel. The civil rulers defend not minds, but bodies and bodily things against

manifest injuries, and restrain men with the sword and bodily punishments in order to

preserve civil justice and peace.

12] Therefore the power of the Church and the civil power must not be confounded. The

power of the Church has its own commission to teach the Gospel and 13] to administer the

Sacraments. Let it not break into the office of another; let it not transfer the kingdoms of this

world; let it not abrogate the laws of civil rulers; let it not abolish lawful obedience; let it not

interfere with judgments concerning civil ordinances or contracts; let it not prescribe laws to

civil rulers concerning the form of the Commonwealth. 14] As Christ says, John 18, 36: My

kingdom is not of this world; 15] also Luke 12, 14: Who made Me a judge or a divider over

you? 16] Paul also says, Phil. 3, 20: Our citizenship is in heaven; 17] 2 Cor. 10, 4: The weapons

of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the casting down of imaginations.

18] After this manner our teachers discriminate between the duties of both these powers,

and command that both be honored and acknowledged as gifts and blessings of God. 19] If

bishops have any power of the sword, that power they have, not as bishops, by the

commission of the Gospel, but by human law having received it of kings and emperors for the

civil administration of what is theirs. This, however, is another office than the ministry of the

Gospel.

20] When, therefore, the question is concerning the jurisdiction of bishops, civil authority

must be distinguished from 21] ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Again, according to the Gospel or,

as they say, by divine right, there belongs to the bishops as bishops, that is, to those to whom

has been committed the ministry of the Word and the Sacraments, no jurisdiction except to

forgive sins, to judge doctrine, to reject doctrines contrary to the Gospel, and to exclude from

the communion of the Church wicked men, whose wickedness is known, and this without

human force, 22] simply by the Word. Herein the congregations of necessity and by divine

right must obey them, according to Luke 10, 16: He that heareth you heareth Me. 23] But

when they teach or ordain anything against the Gospel, then the congregations have a

commandment of God prohibiting obedience, Matt. 7, 15: Beware of false prophets; 24] Gal.

1, 8: Though an angel from heaven preach any other gospel, let him be accursed; 25] 2 Cor.

13, 8: We can do nothing against the truth, but for the truth. 26] Also: The power which the

Lord hath given me to edification, and not to destruction. 27] So, also, the Canonical Laws

command (II. Q. VII. Cap., Sacerdotes, and Cap. Oves). 28] And Augustine (Contra Petiliani

Epistolam): Neither must we submit to Catholic bishops if they chance to err, or hold

anything contrary to the Canonical Scriptures of God.

29] If they have any other power or jurisdiction, in hearing and judging certain cases, as of

matrimony or of tithes, etc., they have it by human right, in which matters princes are bound,

even against their will, when the ordinaries fail, to dispense justice to their subjects for the

maintenance of peace. 30] Moreover, it is disputed whether bishops or pastors have the right

to introduce ceremonies in the Church, and to make laws concerning meats, holy‐days and

grades, that is, orders of ministers, etc. 31] They that give this right to the bishops refer to

this testimony John 16, 12. 13: I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear

them now. Howbeit when He, the Spirit of Truth, is come, He will guide you into all truth. 32]

They also refer to the example of the Apostles, who commanded to abstain from blood and

from things strangled, Acts 15, 29. 33] They refer to the Sabbath‐day as having been changed

into the Lord's Day, contrary to the Decalog, as it seems. Neither is there any example

whereof they make more than concerning the changing of the Sabbath‐day. Great, say they,

is the power of the Church, since it has dispensed with one of the Ten Commandments!

34] But concerning this question it is taught on our part (as has been shown above) that

bishops have no power to decree anything against the Gospel. The Canonical Laws teach the

same thing (Dist. IX). 35] Now, it is against Scripture to establish or require the observance of

any traditions, to the end that by such observance we may make satisfaction for sins, or

merit grace and righteousness. 36] For the glory of Christ's merit suffers injury when, by such

observances, 37] we undertake to merit justification. But it is manifest that, by such belief,

traditions have almost infinitely multiplied in the Church, the doctrine concerning faith and

the righteousness of faith being meanwhile suppressed. For gradually more holy‐days were

made, fasts appointed, new ceremonies and services in honor of saints instituted, because

the authors of such things thought that by these works they were meriting 38] grace. Thus in

times past the Penitential Canons increased, whereof we still see some traces in the

satisfactions.

39] Again, the authors of traditions do contrary to the command of God when they find

matters of sin in foods, in days, and like things, and burden the Church with bondage of the

law, as if there ought to be among Christians, in order to merit justification a service like the

Levitical, the arrangement of which God had committed to the Apostles and bishops. 40] For

thus some of them write; and the Pontiffs in some measure seem to be misled by the

example 41] of the law of Moses. Hence are such burdens, as that they make it mortal sin,

even without offense to others, to do manual labor on holy‐days, a mortal sin to omit the

Canonical Hours, that certain foods defile the conscience that fastings are works which

appease God that sin in a reserved case cannot be forgiven but by the authority of him who

reserved it; whereas the Canons themselves speak only of the reserving of the ecclesiastical

penalty, and not of the reserving of the guilt.

42] Whence have the bishops the right to lay these traditions upon the Church for the

ensnaring of consciences, when Peter, Acts 15, 10, forbids to put a yoke upon the neck of the

disciples, and Paul says, 2 Cor. 13, 10, that the power given him was to edification not to

destruction? Why, therefore, do they increase sins by these traditions?

43] But there are clear testimonies which prohibit the making of such traditions, as though

they merited grace or were necessary to 44] salvation. Paul says, Col. 2, 16‐23: Let no man

judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy‐day, or of the new moon, or of the

Sabbath‐days. 45]If 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, which all

are to perish with the using) after the commandments and doctrines of men! which things

have indeed a show of wisdom. 46] Also in Titus 1, 14 he openly forbids traditions: Not giving

heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men that turn from the truth.

47] And Christ, Matt. 15, 14. 13, says of those who require traditions: Let them alone; they be

blind leaders of the blind; 48] and He rejects such services: Every plant which My heavenly

Father hath not planted shall be plucked up.

49] If bishops have the right to burden churches with infinite traditions, and to ensnare

consciences, why does Scripture so often prohibit to make, and to listen to, traditions? Why

does it call them "doctrines of devils"? 1 Tim. 4, 1. Did the Holy Ghost in vain forewarn of

these things? 50] Since, therefore, ordinances instituted as things necessary, or with an

opinion of meriting grace, are contrary to the Gospel, it follows that it is not lawful for any

bishop 51] to institute or exact such services. For it is necessary that the doctrine of Christian

liberty be preserved in the churches, namely, that the bondage of the Law is not necessary to

justification, as it is written in the Epistle to the Galatians, 5, 1: Be not entangled again with

the yoke of bondage. 52] It is necessary that the chief article of the Gospel be preserved, to

wit, that we obtain grace freely by faith in Christ, and not for certain observances or acts of

worship devised by men.

53] What, then, are we to think of the Sunday and like rites in the house of God? To this we

answer that it is lawful for bishops or pastors to make ordinances that things be done orderly

in the Church, not that thereby we should merit grace or make satisfaction for sins, or that

consciences be bound to judge them necessary services, and to think that it is a sin to break

them 54] without offense to others. So Paul ordains, 1 Cor. 11, 5, that women should cover

their heads in the congregation, 1 Cor. 14, 30, that interpreters be heard in order in the

church, etc.

55] It is proper that the churches should keep such ordinances for the sake of love and

tranquillity, so far that one do not offend another, that all things be done in the churches in

order, and without confusion, 1 Cor. 14, 40; comp. Phil. 2, 14; 56] but so that consciences be

not burdened to think that they are necessary to salvation, or to judge that they sin when

they break them without offense to others; as no one will say that a woman sins who goes

out in public with her head uncovered provided only that no offense be given.

57] Of this kind is the observance of the Lord's Day, Easter, Pentecost, and like holy‐days and

58] rites. For those who judge that by the authority of the Church the observance of the

Lord's Day instead of the Sabbath‐day was ordained as a thing necessary, 59] do greatly err.

Scripture has abrogated the Sabbath‐day; for it teaches that, since the Gospel has been

revealed, all the ceremonies of Moses can be omitted. And 60] yet, because it was necessary

to appoint a certain day, that the people might know when they ought to come together, it

appears that the Church designated the Lord's Day for this purpose; and this day seems to

have been chosen all the more for this additional reason, that men might have an example of

Christian liberty, and might know that the keeping neither of the Sabbath nor of any other

day is necessary.

61] There are monstrous disputations concerning the changing of the law, the ceremonies of

the new law, the changing of the Sabbath‐day, which all have sprung from the false belief

that there must needs be in the Church a service like to the Levitical, and that Christ had

given commission to the Apostles and bishops to devise new ceremonies as necessary to 62]

salvation. These errors crept into the Church when the righteousness of faith was not taught

clearly enough. 63] Some dispute that the keeping of the Lord's Day is not indeed of divine

right, but in a manner so. They prescribe concerning holy‐days, how far it is lawful to work.

What else 64] are such disputations than snares of consciences? For although they endeavor

to modify the traditions, yet the mitigation can never be perceived as long as the opinion

remains that they are necessary, which must needs remain where the righteousness of faith

and Christian liberty are not known.

65] The Apostles commanded Acts 15, 20 to abstain from blood. Who does now observe it?

And yet they that do it not sin not; for not even the Apostles themselves wanted to burden

consciences with such bondage; but they forbade it for a time, to avoid offense. 66] For in

this decree we must perpetually consider what the aim of the Gospel is.

67] Scarcely any Canons are kept with exactness, and from day to day many go out of use

even among those who are the most zealous advocates of traditions. 68] Neither can due

regard be paid to consciences unless this mitigation be observed, that we know that the

Canons are kept without holding them to be necessary, and that no harm is done

consciences, even though traditions go out of use.

69] But the bishops might easily retain the lawful obedience of the people if they would not

insist upon the observance of such traditions as cannot be kept with a good conscience. 70]

Now they command celibacy; they admit none unless they swear that they will not teach 71]

the pure doctrine of the Gospel. The churches do not ask that the bishops should restore

concord at the expense of their honor; which, nevertheless, 72] it would be proper for good

pastors to do. They ask only that they would release unjust burdens which are new and have

been received contrary to the custom of the Church Catholic. 73] It may be that in the

beginning there were plausible reasons for some of these ordinances; and yet they are not

adapted to later times. 74] It is also evident that some were adopted through erroneous

conceptions. Therefore it would be befitting the clemency of the Pontiffs to mitigate them

now, because such a modification does not shake the unity of the Church. For many human

traditions have been changed in process of time, 75] as the Canons themselves show. But if it

be impossible to obtain a mitigation of such observances as cannot be kept without sin, we

are bound to follow the apostolic rule, Acts 5, 29, which commands us to obey God rather

than men.

76] Peter, 1 Pet. 5, 3, forbids bishops to be lords, and to rule over the churches. 77] It is not

our design now to wrest the government from the bishops, but this one thing is asked,

namely, that they allow the Gospel to be purely taught, and that they relax some few

observances which 78] cannot be kept without sin. But if they make no concession, it is for

them to see how they shall give account to God for furnishing, by their obstinacy, a cause for

schism.

Conclusion.

1] These are the chief articles which seem to be in controversy. For although we might have

spoken of more abuses, yet, to avoid undue length, we have set forth the chief points, from

which the rest may be readily judged. 2] There have been great complaints concerning

indulgences, pilgrimages, and the abuse of excommunications. The parishes have been vexed

in many ways by the dealers in indulgences. There were endless contentions between the

pastors and the monks concerning the parochial right, confessions, burials, sermons on

extraordinary occasions, and 3] innumerable other things. Issues of this sort we have passed

over so that the chief points in this matter, having been briefly set forth, might be the more

readily understood. 4] Nor has anything been here said or adduced to the reproach of any

one. 5] Only those things have been recounted whereof we thought that it was necessary to

speak, in order that it might be understood that in doctrine and ceremonies nothing has been

received on our part against Scripture or the Church Catholic. For it is manifest that we have

taken most diligent care that no new and ungodly doctrine should creep into our churches.

6] The above articles we desire to present in accordance with the edict of Your Imperial

Majesty, in order to exhibit our Confession and let men see a summary of the doctrine of our

teachers. 7] If there is anything that any one might desire in this Confession, we are ready,

God willing, to present ampler information according to the Scriptures.

8] Your Imperial Majesty's faithful subjects:

9] John, Duke of Saxony, Elector

10] George, Margrave of Brandenburg.

11] Ernest, Duke of Lueneberg.

12] Philip, Landgrave of Hesse.

13] John Frederick, Duke of Saxony.

14] Francis, Duke of Lueneburg.

15] Wolfgang, Prince of Anhalt.

16] Senate and Magistracy of Nuremburg.

17] Senate of Reutlingen.