Gutenberg Articles

Appearance

Excerpt ​

Excerpt from The Confutatio Pontificia, by Unknown Author

The nineteenth article is likewise approved and accepted. For God,
the supremely good, is not the author of evils, but the rational and
defectible will is the cause of sin; wherefore let no one impute his
midsdeeds and crimes to God, but to himself, according to Jer. 2:19:
"Thine own wickedness shall correct thee and thy backslidings shall
reprove thee;" and Hos. 13:9: "O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself;
but in me is thy help." And David in the spirit acknowledged that God is
not one that hath pleasure in wickedness, Ps. 5:4.

To Article XX.

In the twentieth article, which does not contain so much the confession
of the princes and cities as the defense of the preachers, there is only
one thing that pertains to the princes and cities--viz. concerning good
works, that they do not merit the remission of sins, which, as it has
been rejected and disapproved before, is also rejected and disapproved
now. For the passage in Daniel is very familiar: "Redeem thy sins with
alms," Dan. 4:24; and the address of Tobit to his son: "Alms do deliver
from death and suffereth not to come into darkness," Tobit 4:10; and
that of Christ: "Give alms of such things as ye have, and behold all
things are clean unto you," Luke 11:41. If works were not meritorious
why would the wise man say: "God will render a reward of the labors of
his saints"? Wisd. 10:17. Why would St. Peter so earnestly exhort to
good works, saying: "Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence by
good works to make your calling and election sure"? 2 Pet. 1:19. Why
would St. Paul have said: "God is not unrighteous to forget your work
and labor of love, which ye have showed towards his name"? Heb. 6:10.
Nor by this do we reject Christ's merit but we know that our works are
nothing and of no merit unless by virtue of Christ's passion. We know
that Christ is "the way, the truth and the life,". John 14:6. But
Christ, as the Good Shepherd, who "began to do and teach," Acts 1:1, has
given us an example that as he has done we also should do, John 13:15.
He also went through the desert by the way of good works, which all
Christians ought to pursue, and according to his command bear the cross
and follow him. Matt. 10:38; 16:24. He who bears not the cross, neither
is nor can be Christ's disciple. That also is true which John says: "He
that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he
walked," 1 John 2:6. Moreover, this opinion concerning good works was
condemned and rejected more than a thousand years ago in the time of
Augustine.

Explanation ​

Detailed Explanation of the Excerpt from The Confutatio Pontificia ​

1. Context of the Source ​

The Confutatio Pontificia (1530), also known as the Pontifical Confutation, was the official Catholic response to the Augsburg Confession (1530), the foundational Lutheran statement of faith presented to Emperor Charles V at the Diet of Augsburg. The Augsburg Confession outlined key Protestant doctrines, including sola fide (justification by faith alone) and the rejection of the Catholic teaching that good works contribute to salvation.

The Confutatio was drafted by Catholic theologians (likely including Johann Eck, Johannes Cochlaeus, and others) to refute the Protestant positions. The excerpt provided addresses Articles XIX and XX of the Augsburg Confession, which deal with:

  • Article XIX: The cause of sin (whether humans or God are responsible).
  • Article XX: The role of good works in salvation (whether they merit forgiveness or are merely fruits of faith).

The Catholic response here defends synergism (the idea that humans cooperate with God’s grace) and the meritorious nature of good works, countering the Protestant emphasis on sola fide.

2. Breakdown and Analysis of the Text ​

A. Article XIX: The Cause of Sin ​

"The nineteenth article is likewise approved and accepted. For God, the supremely good, is not the author of evils, but the rational and defectible will is the cause of sin; wherefore let no one impute his misdeeds and crimes to God, but to himself, according to Jer. 2:19: 'Thine own wickedness shall correct thee and thy backslidings shall reprove thee;' and Hos. 13:9: 'O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself; but in me is thy help.' And David in the spirit acknowledged that God is not one that hath pleasure in wickedness, Ps. 5:4."

Key Themes & Arguments:

  1. Divine Goodness vs. Human Responsibility

    • The text asserts that God is not the author of evil—a direct rebuttal to any deterministic view (e.g., Calvinist predestination) that might suggest God ordains sin.
    • Instead, human free will ("rational and defectible will") is the cause of sin. This aligns with Catholic anthropology, which holds that humans, though wounded by original sin, retain moral agency.

  2. Biblical Support for Human Culpa­bility

    • Jeremiah 2:19: "Thine own wickedness shall correct thee" → Sin is self-inflicted.
    • Hosea 13:9: "O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself" → Humans bring judgment upon themselves.
    • Psalm 5:4: God takes no pleasure in wickedness → Reinforces God’s holiness and distance from evil.

Literary Devices:

  • Antithesis: Contrast between God’s goodness ("supremely good") and human defect ("defectible will").
  • Appeal to Authority: Heavy reliance on Scripture (Jeremiah, Hosea, Psalms) to bolster the argument.
  • Rhetorical Question: "Let no one impute his misdeeds to God" implies an accusation against those who might blame God (possibly a veiled critique of Protestant views on predestination).

Significance:

  • This section rejects any theological determinism (e.g., Luther’s Bondage of the Will) and affirms human moral responsibility, a cornerstone of Catholic moral theology.
  • It also prefigures later Catholic-Protestant debates on free will (e.g., the Council of Trent’s decrees on justification).

B. Article XX: The Merit of Good Works ​

"In the twentieth article... there is only one thing that pertains to the princes and cities—viz. concerning good works, that they do not merit the remission of sins, which, as it has been rejected and disapproved before, is also rejected and disapproved now."

Initial Rejection of Protestant Claim:

  • The Protestants (in Augsburg Confession XX) argued that good works do not earn salvation—they are merely evidence of faith.
  • The Confutatio immediately dismisses this, calling it a repeated error.

Counterarguments for the Merit of Good Works:

  1. Biblical Proofs for Meritorious Works

    • Daniel 4:24: "Redeem thy sins with alms" → Suggests almsgiving has expiatory value.
    • Tobit 4:10: "Alms do deliver from death" → Good works have soteriological (salvific) efficacy.
    • Luke 11:41: "Give alms... and all things are clean unto you" → Works purify the soul.
    • Wisdom 10:17: "God will render a reward for the labors of his saints" → Divine reward for human effort.
    • 2 Peter 1:10: "Give diligence by good works to make your calling sure" → Works confirm election.
    • Hebrews 6:10: God "will not forget your work and labor of love" → God acknowledges and rewards human cooperation.

  2. Christ as Model and Enabler of Good Works

    • John 14:6: Christ is "the way, the truth, and the life" → Salvation is through Him, but...
    • John 13:15: "As I have done, so should you do" → Christ’s example demands imitation.
    • Matthew 10:38 & 16:24: "Take up your cross and follow Me" → Discipleship requires active participation.
    • 1 John 2:6: "He who abides in Him ought to walk as He walked" → Sanctification through works.

  3. Reconciliation with Christ’s Merit

    • The text does not deny sola gratia (grace alone) but argues that human works are efficacious only because of Christ’s passion.
    • "Our works are nothing and of no merit unless by virtue of Christ’s passion" → A synergistic view: Grace enables works, and works (thus empowered) have merit.

  4. Appeal to Tradition (Augustine)

    • The claim that this view was "condemned... in the time of Augustine" is historically debatable (Augustine himself struggled with Pelagianism, which denied grace’s necessity).
    • Likely a reference to semi-Pelagianism (5th-6th century), which overemphasized human effort—though the Confutatio here misrepresents Augustine’s actual position (which was closer to grace-first synergism).

Literary Devices:

  • Rhetorical Questions: "If works were not meritorious, why would Scripture say...?" → Forces the reader to confront the biblical evidence.
  • Parallelism: Repeated structure ("Why would X say Y?") to build cumulative argument.
  • Appeal to Christ’s Authority: Using Jesus’ own words (John, Matthew) to justify works.
  • False Dilemma: Implies that rejecting meritorious works means rejecting Christ’s example (though Protestants would argue works are fruit, not cause, of salvation).

Significance:

  • This section defends the Catholic doctrine of merit, which would later be formalized at the Council of Trent (1547).
  • It rejects the Protestant "faith alone" doctrine, insisting that justification involves both grace and human cooperation.
  • The misuse of Augustine reflects the theological tensions of the Reformation era, where both sides claimed his authority.

3. Theological & Historical Significance ​

  1. Catholic vs. Protestant Anthropology

    • Catholic View: Humans, though fallen, can cooperate with grace (synergism). Good works, enabled by grace, contribute to justification and sanctification.
    • Protestant View: Humans are totally depraved; good works are only evidence of faith, not causative (sola fide).

  2. Biblical Hermeneutics

    • The Confutatio selects verses emphasizing human action (Daniel, Tobit, James-like themes).
    • Protestants would counter with Pauline texts (Ephesians 2:8-9: "Not by works, lest any man should boast").

  3. Impact on the Reformation

    • The failure of the Confutatio to reconcile differences led to the Augsburg Confession’s rejection by Catholics and solidified the Protestant-Catholic divide.
    • The Council of Trent (1545-63) later affirmed the Confutatio’s position, declaring:
      • Justification is both infusion of grace and human cooperation (Session VI).
      • Good works increase justification and merit eternal life (Canon 32).

  4. Modern Relevance

    • The debate continues in ecumenical dialogues (e.g., Joint Declaration on Justification, 1999, between Lutherans and Catholics).
    • The tension between grace and works remains a defining theological difference.

4. Conclusion: Summary of the Text’s Core Message ​

The excerpt from The Confutatio Pontificia vigorous­ly defends:

  1. Human responsibility for sin (against any deterministic view).
  2. The meritorious nature of good works (against sola fide).
  3. A synergistic view of salvation—grace enables works, and works (thus empowered) contribute to justification.

It uses Scripture, tradition (Augustine), and logical argumentation to counter Protestant claims, setting the stage for Trent’s dogmatic definitions. The text is a classic example of Reformation-era polemics, where biblical interpretation, patristic appeals, and theological precision were wielded as weapons in the battle for doctrinal supremacy.

Would you like further elaboration on any specific aspect (e.g., the historical reception, comparisons with Lutheran responses, or deeper analysis of the biblical citations)?