JESUS

1. We have seen[1] that the sacrament of the holy body of Christ is a

sign of the communion of all saints, therefore it becomes necessary to

know also what the ban is which is employed in the Church by the power

of the spiritual estate. For its chief and peculiar function and power

is to deprive guilty Christians of the holy sacrament and forbid it to

them. Therefore the one cannot be understood apart from the other,

because the one is the opposite of the other; for the Latin word

_communio_ means fellowship, and thus do the learned designate the

Holy Sacrament. Its opposite is the word _excommunicatio_, which means

exclusion from this fellowship, and so the learned term the ban.

2. There is a twofold fellowship, corresponding to the two things in

the sacrament, the sign and the thing signified, as was said in the

treatise[2]. The first is an inner, spiritual and invisible fellowship

of the heart, by which one is incorporated by true faith, hope and

love in the fellowship of Christ and of all the saints, signified and

bestowed in the sacrament; and this is the effect and virtue of the

sacrament. This fellowship can neither be given nor taken away by any

one, be he bishop, pope, or angel or any creature. God alone through

His Holy Spirit must pour it into the heart of the one who believes in

the sacrament, as was said in the treatise[3]. This fellowship no ban

can touch or affect, but only the unbelief or sin of the person

himself; by these he can excommunicate himself, and thus separate

himself from the grace, the and salvation of the fellowship. This St.

Paul proves in Romans viii: "Who shall separate us from the God? Can

anguish or need, or hunger or poverty, or danger or persecution, or

shedding of blood? Nay, I am convinced that neither death nor life,

neither angels nor principalities nor angelic hosts, neither things

present nor things to come, naught that is mighty on the earth,

neither height nor depth nor any other creature can separate us from

the love of God which is ours in Christ Jesus our Lord." [Rom. 8:35,

38] And St. Peter says: "And who is he that will harm you, if ye be

followers of that which is good?" [1 Peter 3:13]

3. The second kind of fellowship is an outward, bodily and visible

fellowship, by which one is admitted to the Holy Sacrament and

receives and partakes of it together with others. From this fellowship

or communion bishop and pope can exclude one, and forbid it to him on

account of his sin, and that is called putting him under the ban. This

ban was much in vogue of old, and is now known as the lesser ban. For

the ban goes beyond this and forbids even burial, selling, trading,

all association and fellowship with men, finally, as they say, even

fire and water[4], and this is known as the greater ban.

Not satisfied with this, there are some who go still farther and use

the temporal powers against those under the ban, to coerce them with

sword, fire, and war[5]. These, however, are new inventions, rather

than the real meaning of Scripture. To wield the temporal sword

belongs to the emperor, to kings, to princes, and to the rulers of

this world, and by no means to the spiritual estate[6], whose sword is

not to be of iron, but the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word and

commandment of God, as St. Paul says. [Eph. 6:17]

4. This external ban, both the lesser and the greater, was instituted

by Christ when He said in Matthew xviii: "If thy brother shall

trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him

alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. If he will

not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth

of two or three witnesses every word or transaction may be

established. If he will not hear them, then tell it unto the whole

congregation, the Church. If he neglect to hear the Church, let him be

unto thee a heathen man and a publican." [Matt. 18:15 ff.]

Likewise St. Paul says in I Corinthians v: "If any man among you be a

fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard,

or an extortioner, with such an one keep not company, neither eat with

him." [1. Cor. 5:11] Again he says in II Thessalonians iii: "If any

man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man and have no

company with him, that he may be ashamed." [2 Thess. 3:14] Again, John

says in his second Epistle: "If any one come unto you, and bring not

this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God

speed, and he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil

deeds." [2 John 10]

From all these sayings we learn how the ban is to be used. First, we

should seek neither vengeance nor our own profit, as is at present the

disgraceful practice everywhere, but only the correction of our

neighbor. Second, the penalty should stop short of his death or

destruction; or St. Paul limits the purpose of the ban to the

correction of our neighbor, that he be put to shame when no one

associates with him, and he adds in 11 Thessalonians iii: "Count him

not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother." [2 Thess. 3:15] But

now the ruthless tyrants deal with men as though they would cast them

down to hell, and do not in any wise seek their correction.

5. It may often happen that a person under the ban is deprived of the

holy sacrament, and also of burial, and is nevertheless inwardly[7]

secure and blessed in the fellowship of Christ and of all saints,

signified in the sacrament. On the other hand, there are many who are

not under the outward ban and who freely partake of the sacrament, but

are nevertheless inwardly quite estranged and excommunicated from the

fellowship of Christ; even though they be buried under the high altar

in a golden pall with much pomp and singing and tolling of bells.

Therefore, no one is to be judged, even if he be under the ban,

especially if he has not been put under the ban for heresy or sin, but

for the purpose of correction. For to put men under the ban for the

sake of money or other temporal considerations is a new invention, of

which the apostles and Christ knew nothing.

6. To put under the ban is not, as some think, to deliver a soul to

Satan and deprive it of the intercession and of all the good works[8]

of the Church. For where the true faith and love of God remain in the

heart, there remains a real participation in all the possessions and

intercessions of the Church, together with all the benefits of the

sacrament, since the ban is and can be nothing else than exclusion

from the external sacrament or from association with men. If I were

cast into prison I would, of course, be deprived of the outward

companionship of my friends, and yet not be deprived of their favor

and friendship; so he that is put under the ban must relinquish the

sacrament and association with men, but is not on that account cut off

from their love, intercession and good works.

7. It is true that the ban, when it is rightly and deservedly applied,

is a sign, an admonition and a chastisement, whereby the one under the

ban should recognize that he himself has delivered his soul unto Satan

by his transgression and sin, and has deprived himself of the

fellowship of all the saints and of Christ. For by the penalty of the

ban our mother, the holy Church, would show her dear son the awful

consequences of sin and thereby bring him back from the devil to God.

When an earthly mother rebukes and chastises her erring son, she does

not give him over to the hangman or to the wolves, nor make a knave of

him, but she restrains him and shows him by her chastisement that he

is in danger of the hangman, and thus keeps him at home in his

father's house. In the same way, when the spiritual power puts any one

under the ban, it should be in this spirit: "Behold, thou has done

this or that, whereby thou hast delivered thy soul unto the devil,

deserved God's wrath, and deprived thyself of all Christian

fellowship; thou art fallen under the inward spiritual ban in the

sight of God and art unwilling to cease or to return. So then, I put

thee also outwardly under the ban in the sight of men, and to thy

shame I deprive thee of the sacrament and of fellowship with men,

until thou come to thyself and bring back thy soul."

8. Let every bishop, provost or official[9], who uses the ban for any

other purpose, take heed lest he put himself under the everlasting ban

from which neither God nor any creature shall deliver him. There are

none to whom the ban is more harmful and dangerous than those who

apply it, even though it be laid quite justly and only on account of

wrongdoing, for the reason that they seldom if ever have this object

in view. Besides they go about it without fear and do not consider how

perchance they themselves may be more worthy of a hundred bans in the

sight of God, as the Gospel records of the servant who owed his Lord

ten thousand pounds and yet would not have patience with his fellow

servant who owed him a hundred pence. What will become of these

miserable taskmasters, who for the sake of money have brought things

to such a pass with their bans, often violently and unjustly imposed,

that Turks and heathen have an easier life than Christians? It is very

evident that many of them are under the ban in the sight of God, and

are deprived of the blessing of the sacrament and of inward, spiritual

fellowship, although they do nothing day and night but cite others to

appear, harass them and put them under the ban, and deprive of the

external sacrament those who are a thousandfold better inwardly and in

the sight of God and are living in the spiritual fellowship of the

sacrament. O miserable business! O terrible existence maintained by

this abominable trade! I am not sure whether such publicans and

officials were wolves before becoming officials or whether they are on

the way to becoming wolves; their work is certainly wolves' work.

9. From this there follows the truth that the ban of itself ruins,

condemns or harms no one, but seeks and finds the ruined and condemned

soul for the purpose of bringing it back. For all chastisement is for

the correction of sin; the ban is simply a chastisement and motherly

correction; therefore it makes no one worse or more sinful, but is

ordained solely to restore the inward spiritual fellowship when justly

laid, or to deepen it when unjustly imposed. This is proved by St.

Paul when he says in II Corinthians xiii: This I write to you

according to the power which the Lord hath given me, to edification

and not to destruction," [2 Cor. 13:10] And thus, when he rebukes him

who had taken his step-mother to wife, he says in I Corinthians v: "I

together with you deliver him unto the devil for the destruction of the

flesh, that the spirit may be saved at the last day." [1 Cor. 5:5]

Thus also in the passage quoted above he said: "We should not count

him who is under the ban as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother,

in order that he may be put to shame and not be lost." [2 Thess. 3:15]

Nay, even Christ Himself, as man, had not the power to cut off and

deliver a single soul to the devil, as He says in John vi: "Him that

cometh to Me I will in no wise cast out, and this is the will of My

Father Who sent Me, that I should not destroy or lose what He giveth

Me." [John 6:37, 39] Again He says: "The Son of Man is not come to

destroy, but to save men's souls." [Luke 9:56] If Christ Himself and

all the apostles had no other power than to help souls, and have let

behind them no other power in the Church, how dare the blind tyrants

presume and boast in their presumption that they have power to curse,

to condemn and to destroy, which power is even denied them by their

own canon law; for in the Liber Sextus[10], which treats of the

sentence of excommunication, we read: "Since the ban is a medicine and

not a poison, only a discipline, not a destructive uprooting, in so

far as the one subjected to it does not despise it: therefore let

every spiritual judge give diligence to prove himself one who seeks by

the ban naught but to correct and to cure."

10. From the above passage it is evident that the ban, when it is not

despised, is wholesome and harmless, and not fatal to the soul, as

certain timid and dejected consciences, frightened by the outrageous

abuses of some, imagine; although in apostolic times it was able to

deliver the body to the devil and to death[11], as indeed it might

still be, if the judges would wield the ban, not in the abuse of

power, but in humble faith and love, for the correction of their

neighbor. It follows further that the ban brings greater danger and

terror to those who apply it and are not careful to seek only the

correction and salvation of those under the ban, according to the

words of the above passage[12]. For the ban can be nothing else than a

kind, motherly scourge applied to the body and temporal possessions,

by which no one is cast into hell, but rather drawn out of it, and

freed from condemnation unto salvation. Therefore we should not only

endure it without impatience, but receive it with all joy and

reverence. But for the tyrants, who seek therein nothing else than

power, awe and gain for themselves, the ban must be a terrible injury,

because they pervert it and its purpose, turn the medicine into a

poison, and seek only to become a terror to a frightened people; of

correction they never think. For this they will have to give an awful

reckoning--woe unto them!

11. They have devised a saying, to wit: "Our ban must be feared, right

or wrong." With this saying they insolently comfort themselves, swell

their chests and puff themselves up like adders, and almost dare to

defy heaven and to threaten the whole world; with this bugaboo they

have made a deep and mighty impression, imagining that there is more

in these words than there really is. Therefore we would explain them

more fully and prick this bladder, which with its three peas makes

such a rightful noise.

Now, it is true, the ban must be feared and not be despised, whether

it be just or unjust. But why apply this only to the ban, which is a

motherly chastening, and not to all the other and greater penalties

and tribulations as well? For what great thing have you done or the

ban by saying it must be feared? Must we not also fear when we are

sick, poor, slandered, despised, or deprived of goods, income or

justice, nay, when the Turk and other enemies attack or afflict us?

For all these and other adversities, whether deserved or undeserved,

we should fear, suffer and endure, and in all things conduct ourselves

as though we but received our deserts, as the Lord teaches: "O him

that taketh away thy goods ask them not again." [Luke 6:30] Why are

you not also afraid, dear tyrant, when you suffer injustice, when your

income is refused, your property stolen, your rights denied, and why

do you not think that you should endure these things in fear, whether

they be right or wrong? Do you think that others are commanded to

endure your power in ear, whether right or wrong, and that you are

free from this commandment and need not endure violence or wrong in

fear? You will learn that you also are human and under the same law

with which you threaten others, puffing yourself up in your folly.

12. What perversity! The spiritual powers come along with their ban

and say it should be eared and endured, whether right or wrong. But if

they are subjected to violence and injustice they will not endure it

to the extent of a single heller, but without any fear at all, cast up

the accounts in their favor and demand what is theirs. Thus they

withdraw themselves from God's commandment, in keeping which they,

most of all, should be an example to others. For if it is true that

pope, bishop and the whole spiritual estate may without fear resist

injustice, injury and contempt in their own interest, then it is also

true that the ban may be resisted and be repelled, as vigorously as

they seek their interest. There is no distinction in God's

commandment, it concerns every one alike. But may God forbid that! We

are to bear both the ban and whatever tribulation may befall us in

fear, as the Gospel teaches. Therefore, if any one wrong you or take

your income, and you do not endure it in fear, but would frighten him

with the ban[13], especially when you are seeking not his improvement,

but your own benefit or self-will, take heed, you are already worse

than he. For you intend to draw yourself out of fear and to draw him

in, which you have no right to do, and compel him to keep the Gospel

which you tear to pieces. How will you be able to stand before God?

Therefore when they say, "Our ban must be feared, right or wrong," we

reply: "Yes, that is true, but it is also true that your unjust ban

harms no one but yourselves, and harms you in body and soul. And the

just ban harms you more than it harms me. Therefore you should also

endure your injury in fear, be it right or wrong, and if you glory

over me because of the ban I will glory over you because of your

suffering. If a criminal took my coat and said: 'You should endure it

in fear and humility,' I would say, 'I will; not for the sake of your

theft, which harms me not, but for the sake of Christ's commandment

[Matt. 5:40].' Just so I fear your ban, not for the ban's sake (it

does not harm me, but rather yourself), but for the sake of Christ's

commandment."

13. Though it is true that the ban must be feared, whether it be right

or wrong, yet those who lay the ban are always in greater danger than

those on whom it is laid. He who is banned is in no danger but that of

despising the ban and not bearing it, whether it be right or wrong.

But he who bans is in danger, in the first place, of not enduring

injustice in fear; in the second place, of avenging himself through

the ban without any fear; in the third place, of not seeking, with

singleness of purpose, his sinful neighbor's correction by means of

the ban. This is evident because he despises his own sin and that of

others, and only attacks the man who injures him, all of which is

contrary to the Gospel. Hence it comes that by means of their dreadful

perverseness those who use the ban nowadays pick up the spoon and

tread in the dish[14]; they put others under the external ban and put

themselves under condemnation inwardly; in addition, they become so

blinded that they boast how greatly their external ban is to be

feared, and inwardly they condemn themselves, and rejoice boldly and

without fear like fools and madmen. For this reason I am sure that the

Holy Spirit did not invent the saying, Our ban must be feared, right

or wrong. It does not become a Christian, not to say one in the

spiritual estate[15], to wrong another, much less to lord it over him

and boast that this injustice must be feared. It behooves me to say,

Thy injustice makes me tremble; it behooves thee much more to take

heed and be in fear lest thou do me wrong and threaten me besides,

saying that I must endure it in fear; or thy injustice can harm me

only in time, but thee it harms to all eternity. So evil and

lamentable are these present times, in which such furious tyrants

shamelessly and openly boast of their sin and everlasting hurt (which

would be horrible even in Turks and heathen), in order that they may

be defiant now and mock at the misfortunes of those who suffer, whom

they do not seek to correct, but only to inspire with fear and false

terror.

In a word, the higher estate is always, with all its works, in greater

danger than the lower estate, and where the lower estate must needs be

in fear once, there the higher estate needs be in fear ten times over.

On this account those who exercise the ban have no reason to lord it

over those who are under the ban or to deal arrogantly with them, but

all the more reason to weep or themselves. For God's judgment will not

be pronounced on the lowly, but on the mighty, as Wisdom the wise man

says [Wisdom 6:8 f.].

14. It were indeed better if Christians were taught to love the ban

rather than to fear it[16], as we are taught by Christ to love

chastisement, pain and even death, and not to fear them. But these

prattlers speak only of fear in the ban, though they teach that all

other chastisements and misfortunes are to be borne cheerfully.

Whereby they betray their blind and cursed purpose, which is to rule

by force over the people of Christ, and as it were to take the free

Christian Church captive in fear. Therefore let us learn what is our

chief duty with respect to the ban, namely, not to despise it or bear

it impatiently, and this for two reasons. First, because the authority

of the ban was given by Christ to the holy mother, the Christian

Church, that is, to the community of all Christians. Therefore, in

this matter we should honor and submit to our dear mother Church and

to Christ. For what Christ and the Church do should have our approval,

our love and our filial fear. Secondly, because the effect and purpose

of the ban is beneficial and salutary and never injurious, if one

endures it and does not despise it. To use a homely illustration: When

a mother punishes her beloved son, whether he has deserved it or not,

she certainly does not do it with evil intent, but it is a maternal,

harmless and salutary punishment, if the son bears it patiently. Only

when he becomes impatient, and is not influenced by it to leave the

wrong or to do the good for the sake of which he is punished, but

turns against his mother and despises her, does the punishment begin

to do him harm; or then he offends against God, Who has commanded:

"Thou shalt honor thy father and mother" [Ex. 20:12]; and out of a

light, harmless, yea even beneficial chastisement he makes a terrible

wrong and sin, to his everlasting pain and punishment.

15. Thus it happens in our day that certain officials[17] and their

associates are murdered, beaten and bound, or are in constant fear of

death. Doubtless this would not occur at all, or at least much less

frequently, if the people did not hold the wrong opinion that the ban

is more harmful than profitable. For this reason they venture

everything, and commit such crimes as it were in despair. Although

this is terrible, yet by God's dispensation the tyrants get what they

deserve, because they conceal the real benefit of the ban from the

people, and misuse it, making no effort toward correction, but aiming

simply to increase their own power. For although every one ought to

endure the ban, they too ought not to despise a poor human being, be

he guilty or innocent, as Christ says: "Take heed that ye despise not

one of these little ones that believe on Me, for I say unto you that

their angels do always behold the face of My Father which is in

heaven." [Matt. 18:10] Why should they wonder if, in the providence of

God, at times their heads are broken and their commands despised,

because of the unjust tyrannical ban, since without ceasing they act

so insolently against God's commandment? True, there is great wrong on

both sides. Yet if the people were taught that the power of the ban is

wholesome and necessary and that it is not ordained nor used to their

hurt, but to their benefit, the officials would be in less danger, and

find greater and readier obedience, nay, greater love, good will and

honor among all the people.

16. Therefore the people should be taught in some such way as this: My

dear people, let not those who have and use the power of the ban drive

you to despair, whether they be pious or evil, whether they do you

justice or injustice. The power of the ban cannot harm you, but must

always be beneficial to the soul, if only you bear and endure it

aright; their abuse of the ban does not hinder its virtue. Or if you

cannot endure it, then try to escape from it with meekness, not with

revenge and retaliation by word or deed. And in all things look not to

them, but to the dear mother Church. What difference does it make to

you whether she lays her rods of chastisement upon you through pious

or through wicked rulers? It is and remains, nevertheless, your

dearest mother's most salutary rod. From the beginning of the world it

has been so, and will ever remain, that spiritual and temporal power

is more often given to the Pilates, Herods, Annases and Caiaphases

than to the pious Peters, Pauls and the like, and as in all other

estates so in that of government there are always more of the wicked

than of the pious. It is not to be supposed or hoped that we shall

ever have an entirely pious government, nay, it must come as a pure

git of grace or by special prayer and merit, if good government or a

right use of power is to be had at all. For God punishes wicked

subjects by wicked rulers, as He says: "I will give children to be

their prelates and their rulers shall be childish men, I will take

from them every mighty man, the wise, the prudent and the man of war,"

[Isa. 3:4] etc. Since, then, incapable or evil rulers are God's

chastisement, and there are so many among us who deserve such

chastisement, we must not be surprised if the government wrongs us and

abuses its power toward us, nay, we must wonder and thank God when it

does not wrong us and do us injustice.

17. Wherefore, since the world is at present overburdened, as it has

abundantly deserved to be because of its heinous sins, with young,

imprudent and inexperienced rulers, especially in the spiritual

estate, so that this age of ours is extraordinarily perilous, we must

act very prudently and by all means see to it that we hold the

government and all authority in the highest honor, even as Christ

honors the authority of Pilate, Herod, Annas, Caiaphas, and of the

temporal rulers of His time we must not permit such grievous abuses

and the childish rule of the prelates to move us to despise all

authority, so that despite those unworthy persons who bear rule we may

not at the same time despise their authority, but cheerfully bear what

it imposes, or reuse to bear it at least with humility and proper

respect. For God cannot and will not permit authority to be wantonly

and impudently resisted when it does not force us to do what is

against God or His commandments[18], though they themselves do as much

as they can against God, or injure us as much as they will. There are

some whom He Himself would judge and condemn, and such are those great

and powerful tyrants; so too, there are those whom He would help, and

such are the oppressed sufferers. Therefore we should yield to this

His will and leave the mighty to His sword and judgment, and allow Him

to help us, as St. Paul says: "O dearly beloved brethren, neither

avenge nor defend yourselves, but rather give place unto the wrath of

God, because it is written. Vengeance belongs to Me alone and I will

repay each one [Deut. 32:35]." [Rom. 12:19]

And yet we should humbly tell these prelates (especially should the

preachers rebuke them, yet only by showing them from the Word of God)

that they are acting against God and show them what He would have them

do, and in addition diligently and earnestly pray to God or them; even

as Jeremiah wrote to the children of Israel in Babylon that they

should zealously pray or the king of Babylon, or his son and for his

kingdom, although he had taken them captive, had troubled and slain

them and done them all manner of evil.

And we can easily do this if we remember that the ban and all

unrighteous authority cannot harm our souls, provided we submit to

them, and they must ever be of profit, unless they are despised. So

also are the authorities a thousandfold worse in the sight of God than

we, and are therefore to be pitied rather than wickedly to be

despised. For this reason we are also commanded in the law of Moses

that no one shall revile the rulers, be they good or evil, even though

they give great occasion. In short, we must have evil or childish

rulers,--if it is not the Turk, then it must needs be the Christians.

The world is far too wicked to be worthy of good and pious lords, it

must have princes who go to war, levy taxes and shed blood, and it

must have spiritual tyrants who impoverish and burden it with bulls

and letters[19] and laws. This and other chastisements are rather what

it has deserved, and to resist them is nothing else than to resist

God's chastisement. As humbly as I conduct myself when God sends me a

sickness, so humbly should I conduct myself toward the evil

government, which the same God also sends me.

18. When we are justly and deservedly put under the ban our chief

concern should be to correct the sins of commission and omission which

caused the ban, since the ban always is imposed on account of sin

(which is far worse than the ban itself), and yet here as elsewhere

things are perverted, so that we only consider how much the rod hurts

and not why we are punished. Where can you find men to-day who are as

much in fear of sinning and provoking God as they are in fear of the

ban? Thus it happens that we are more in fear of the wholesome

chastisement than of the heinous sins. We must let men think and act

thus, because the natural man does not see the spiritual harm in sin

as he feels the smarts of chastisement; although the fear of the ban

has also been exaggerated by the tyrannous methods and threatenings of

the spiritual judges who drive the people to fear punishment more than

sin.

When, however, we are unjustly put under the ban, we should be very

careful that we in no way do, omit, say or withhold that on account of

which we are under the ban (unless we cannot do so without sin and

without injury to our neighbor)[20], but rather should we endure the

ban in humility, die happily under it, if it cannot be otherwise, and

not be terrified, even though we do not receive the sacrament and are

buried in unconsecrated ground. The reason is this: Truth and

righteousness belong to the inner, spiritual fellowship[21] and may

not be abandoned under penalty of falling under God's eternal ban.

Therefore they dare not be surrendered for the sake of the external

fellowship, which is immeasurably inferior, nor because of the ban. To

receive the sacrament and to be buried in consecrated ground are of

too little consequence that or their sake truth and righteousness be

neglected. And that no one may think this strange I will go further

and say that even he who dies under a just ban is not damned, unless

indeed he did not repent of his sin or despised the ban. For sorrow

and repentance make all things right, even though his body be exhumed

or his ashes cast into the water[22].

19. The unjust ban then is much more to be desired than either the

just ban or the external fellowship. It is a very precious merit in

the sight of God, and blessed is he who dies under an unjust ban. God

will grant him an eternal crown for the truth's sake, on account of

which he is under the ban. Then let him sing in the words of Psalm

cix, "They have cursed me, but Thou hast blessed me." [Ps. 109:28]

Only let us beware of despising the authorities, and humbly declare

our innocence; if this does not avail, then we are free and without

guilt in the sight of God. For if we are in duty bound by the

commandment of Christ to agree with our adversary [Matt. 5:25]; how

much more should we agree with the authority of the Christian Church,

be it exercised justly or unjustly, by worthy or unworthy rulers.

An obedient child, though it does not deserve the punishment it

receives from its mother, suffers no harm from the unjust

chastisement, nay, by its very patience it becomes much dearer and

more pleasing to the mother; how much more do we become lovable in

God's sight, if at the hands of evil rulers we endure the unmerited

punishment of the Church, as our spiritual mother. For the Church

remains our mother because Christ remains Christ, and she is not

changed into a step-mother simply because of our evil rulers.

Nevertheless, the prelates and bishops and their officials should be

temperate and not hastily use the ban, for many bans means nothing

else than many laws and commandments, and prescribing many laws is to

set many snares for poor souls. And so by numerous ill-advised bans

nothing more results than great offence and an occasion or sin, by

which the wrath of God is provoked, although the ban was ordained to

reconcile Him. And although we are truly bound to obey them, still

more are they bound to direct, change and regulate their decree and

authority according to our ability and need and for our correction and

salvation; for we have shown from St. Paul[23] that power is given not

for destruction but for edification [2 Cor. 13:10].

20. The ban should be applied not only to heretics and schismatics,

but to all who are guilty of open sin, as we have shown above from St.

Paul, who commands that the railer, extortioner, fornicator and

drunkard be put under the ban [1 Cor. 5:11]. But in our day such

sinners are let in peace, especially if they are bigwigs; and to the

disgrace of this noble form of authority, the ban is used only for the

collection of debts of money, often so insignificant that the costs

amount to more than the original debt. In order to gloss this over

they have hit upon a new device, saying they put under the ban not

because of debt but because of disobedience, because the summons was

not respected; were it not for debt, however, they would forget the

disobedience, as we see when many other sins, even their own, escape

the ban. A poor man must often be disobedient if he is cited to go so

many miles, lose time and money and neglect his trade. It is utter

tyranny to summon a man to come such a distance across country to

court.

And I commend the temporal princes[24] who will not permit the ban and

the abuses connected with it in their lands and among their people.

What are princes and counsellors for if they do not concern themselves

with and judge such temporal matters as debts, each in their city and

province and among their subjects? The spiritual powers should be

concerned with the Word of God, with sin, and with the devil, in order

to bring souls to God, and should relinquish temporal cases to the

temporal judges, as Paul writes[25][1 Cor. 6:1]. Indeed, as things are

now, it is almost necessary to use the ban in order to drive the

people into the Church and not out of it.

21. Whether one be justly or unjustly under the ban, no one may

exclude him from the Church until the Gospel has been read or the

sermon preached[26]. For from the hearing of the Gospel and the sermon

no one shall or can exclude or be excluded. The hearing of the Word of

God should remain free to every one[27]. Nay, those who are under a

just ban ought most of all to hear it, that they may perchance be

moved by it to acknowledge their sin and to reform. We read that it

was the ancient practice of the Church to dismiss those under the ban

after the sermon, and if a whole congregation were under the ban the

sermon must be allowed to proceed just as though there were no ban. In

addition, even though he who is under the ban may not remain for the

mass after the sermon, nor come to the sacrament[28], nevertheless he

should not neglect it, but spiritually come to the sacrament, that is,

he should heartily desire it and believe that he can spiritually

receive it, as was said in the treatise on the sacrament[29].

Works of Martin Luther, with Introductions and Notes (Volume II) · 第 16 / 131 题