Chapter 26 — Article XXVI: Of the Distinction of Meats
Section 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 the world so thought, appears from this, that new ceremonies, new orders, new holidays, and new fasts 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. From this persuasion concerning traditions much detriment has resulted in the Church. First, it has obscured the doctrine of grace and the righteousness of faith, which is the chief part of the Gospel, and ought to stand out as the most prominent in the Church, that the merit of Christ may be well known, and that faith which believes that sins are forgiven for Christ's sake, may be exalted far above works and above all other acts of worship. Paul, therefore, lays the greatest stress on this article, and puts 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 are freely forgiven for Christ's sake. But this doctrine of Paul has been almost wholly smothered by traditions, which have produced the opinion that, by making distinctions in meats and like services, 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 whole of repentance seemed to consist. 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 holidays, rites, fasts, and vestments. These observances had a striking appearance of sanctity and wisdom, and in the meantime the commandments of God, according to each one's calling, were without honor, namely, that a father brought up his children, that a mother governed her household, that a prince governed the commonwealth; these were accounted worldly matters, and imperfect, and far below those glittering observances. And this error greatly tormented 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. 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 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 heard nothing of the consolation of the righteousness of faith and of grace. We see that the summists and theologians gather the traditions together, and seek mitigations whereby to ease consciences, and yet they do not sufficiently unloose, but sometimes entangle, the consciences still more. 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. Hence Gerson and some other theologians have been moved with complaints that they were hindered by these strivings about traditions from attaining to a better kind of doctrine. Augustine also forbids that men's consciences should be burdened 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. Wherefore our teachers must not be looked upon as having taken up this matter rashly or from hatred of the bishops, as some falsely suspect. There was great need to warn the churches of these errors, which had arisen from misunderstanding of traditions. 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. 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. They add testimonies of Scripture. Christ, Matt. 15:3, defends the Apostles who had not observed the usual tradition, which, however, evidently pertained to a matter not unlawful, but indifferent, and excuses them, saying: In vain do they worship Me with the commandments of men. He, therefore, does not exact a useless worship. Shortly after He adds: Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man. So also Paul, Rom. 14:17: The kingdom of God is not meat and drink. Col. 2:16: Let no man judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the Sabbath-day. Also in Tit. 1:14 he openly says that they must not give heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men that turn from the truth. And Christ says of those who urge traditions: Let them alone, they be blind leaders of the blind. Matt. 15:14. These things being so, our people refuse unjust accusations. For they keep the traditions, as many as may be kept without sin. But some traditions are, of themselves, such that they cannot be kept without sin. As to festivals, they teach that the Lord's Day ought to be retained for the sake of the instruction and rest of the people, but that we are not bound to observe the Jewish Sabbath, which the Lord Himself abrogated, as it is written: Col. 2:16, 17. But since the ancient observances are retained in regard to the Lord's Day and other holy days, the adversaries cannot accuse us of departing from the ancient customs. Furthermore, the fasts are not wholly abolished. Specific fasts are retained, as a discipline of the body, not as a means of meriting grace. But the notion that fasts are works which merit grace and expiate sins is renounced. Therefore those traditions are to be distinguished which are contrary to the Gospel, from those which are not. Hence we must separate the commandments of God from the traditions of men, and distinguish what belongs to the divine order from the observances of the church, which the church may change for good reasons. Lastly, the adversaries condemn us for teaching that men are free from the law. For they say we teach in this that man is free from the law of God. But we teach that we are free from the ceremonies of Moses, not from the moral law. God has indeed commanded us not to observe the ceremonies of Moses, but the moral law remains in force.