Now that we have devoted so much time and space to the Reformed Confessions and Catechism, it is natural that we should ask, to what extent are these still authoritative and binding on the Church and on individual believers? Naturally no one would claim that any of the Reformed confessions or catechisms stand on the same level with the Bible. They are the products of man, and therefore errors and disagreements must be expected, but on the other hand we must own them for what they are. It is no exaggeration to say that the creeds, confessions and catechisms are the best and most perfect works ever produced by the Church through the ages since the days of the apostles.

First we must recognize what was done before the Reformation. We have the Apostles' Creed, the Nicene Creed (325), the Creed of Chalcedon adopted by the Ecumenical Council held at Chalcedon (451), and the Athanasian Creed. Further, we must recognize the seven great (Ecumenical Councils, each of which was attended by 150 to 520 bishops. The first four are the most important, because they settled the orthodox faith on the Trinity and the Incarnation. Besides this, there is a host of Church Fathers with their voluminous writings. These short creeds seem to have been sufficient for the early Church which stood so close to the days of the apostles and had not been molested by too many heresies.

But coming now to the Reformation after the dark days of Roman ignorance and corruption, the Reformers found it necessary to state the doctrines anew; not new doctrines, but to state the biblical doctrines again. While at first short statements were sufficient, yet by and by it became necessary to present a whole system of biblical doctrines. Into this work went the sincerity, devotion and biblical scholarship of the best men the Church could ever assemble - Zwingli, Bullinger, Calvin, de Brès, Lasco, Knox, etc. In Scotland the six Johns, great theologians of that land, drew up the Scottish Confession. At the Synod of Dort 84 divines of great learning and piety from all the Reformed countries worked for almost six months to draw up the Canons of Dort. In England learned theologians from Scotland and England, originally 151 in number, worked over six years to prepare the Westminster Confession and the two Catechisms. And what learned men did Frederick III. gather to prepare the Heidelberg Catechism! Some theologians have a life-time study behind them before writing a great work, but we must remember that most of the men that worked on the Confessions and Catechisms had also a life-time of hard study behind them before they offered the Confessions and Catechisms to the world.

Now when we consider the authoritativeness and the binding character of the creeds, confessions and catechisms, it is necessary to consider what these contain. When we go through these confessions and catechisms; we find statements about the inspiration of the Scriptures, the Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Ghost; man's original state and his fall and total depravity; this is followed by the mediatorial work of Christ, with statements concerning his divine and human natures. Since this is a subject that was fought out against great heresies throughout the ages, the Church has carved out words that are fixed in their meaning and clearly understood. The doctrines of vicarious suffering and death, atonement, justification, forgiveness of sin, and eternal life are all linked up with the person of Christ. Then we have the doctrines concerning the Holy Spirit, regeneration, conversion, sanctification, the Sacraments, concerning the Church, judgment, preservation, election, effectual calling, resurrection and the final judgment. While these are not all arranged in their proper order, yet we have here the sum and substance of the confessions and catechisms. Will any one dare to say that these doctrines of the Bible are not authoritative and binding? The Bible is a Word that "altereth not." If its doctrines are once accurately stated, then these statements have an enduring character, and are therefore authoritative and binding.

There is a reason for stressing the importance of the confessions and catechisms and for emphasizing what has just been said. On every side we are told that it is necessary to rewrite our confessions. If this remark is repeated often enough, the people might be inclined to think there is something to it. Let me give you a plain sample of what these men mean. Dr. Willian A. Curtis in his book, A History of the Creeds and Confessions of Faith, after writing so loftily about John Calvin, of his exact acquaintance with the teaching of the Bible as a whole, and that he had no peer as a student of Holy Writ, says that he had one defect, that he could not detach at any point the Old and New Testaments from each other, because he regarded both equally inspired. And this was the reason why Dr. Curtis concluded that Calvin left out of his own doctrinal scheme all mention of the universal Fatherhood of God. Curtis regards this as a teaching of Christ in the New Testament. Naturally, Calvin never believed nor taught the "universal Fatherhood of God," because such a doctrine is contained neither in the Old nor in the New Testament. Do you see what Dr. Curtis is doing? He is trying to establish his false belief in the "universal Fatherhood of God" by saying that Calvin was wrong, though he does not prove it. This is just the very thing that we find in those who propose a rewriting of the Confessions. It is some false belief, which they cherish, or at least a rejection of some points of our biblical faith, and in order to establish their position, they want to rewrite the confession, if they care for one at all, that leaves out every doctrine that is against them. We are warned in Scripture that Satan comes as an angel of light and also in sheep's clothing. Beware, before you leave your confessions and your catechisms.

One thing that all the authors of the confessions and catechisms had in common was their belief in a plenary, verbal inspiration of the Bible. The written Word of God was to them a great rock in the ocean of time, which though beaten by the great billows whipped up by the gales of fierce heresies, remained firm and glorious. While you may point your finger at some for holding a view of a mechanical inspiration, yet they believed in inspiration as a fact. It was not the men that were inspired, but the Book itself. It is "all Scripture", it is all that is written, that is inspired of God. We are not told, and we are not asked, how God did it. All what was written were words from God. And in this belief they supported every statement with Scripture proofs. They were also most careful in the use of Scripture, to ascertain by sound exegesis the true sense of Scripture. They did not resort to careless translations to establish a doctrine, as for example the revisers tranlated 2 Tim. 3:16: "Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable" instead of "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable", or to give you a more flagrant example, where the Revised Standard Version, and most modern translations in similar vein, translates Rom. 8:10: "But if Christ is in you, although your bodies are dead because of sin, your spirits are alive because of righteousness", instead the way it should read, "And if Christ in you, the body dead because of sin; but the Spirit life because of righteousness."

The Bible stands separate all by itself. It is in agreement only with God's eternal wisdom from whence it came, and was never intended that it should agree with the views of man in any age. The same is true in respect to any of its statements on science. If they were in agreement with the views of one age, they would be wrong in another age with different theories and hypotheses. If the Bible had agreed with Swedenborg, it would have been wrong for Schleiermacher; if it had agreed with Schleiermacher, it would have been wrong for Wellhausen; if it ageed with some of our modern theologians, it certainly would not agree with a future generation that has different views. Our reformers who wrote the confessions and catechisms knew the permanent character of the Word of God, and that is why they based the doctrines which they stated upon the very words of Scripture. This is why the true doctrines of the Scriptures have a lasting character and are always authoritative and binding In connection herewith, however, we should be reminded of a matter to which The Scotch Confession of Faith calls attention, when it speaks of good policy and order agreed on by a general assembly: "Not that we think that any polity or any order in ceremonies can be appointed for all ages, times, and places: for as ceremonies, such as men have devised, are but temporal; so may and ought they to be changed, when they rather foster superstition than that they edify the Church using the same." We must always be careful to distinguish policy and order from doctrines.

Now as to the permanency and the unchangeable character of doctrine, let us briefly review a few things: the same Bible, which the reformers received as inspired, is still, after 400 years, the same inspired (theopneustia) Bible; the same God, as a Trinity of three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, whom they found revealed in Scripture, is still the same triune God, whom all true believers worship today; the same Saviour, who was to them very God of very God, and very man of very man, is still the same human and divine Jesus Christ blessed for ever; just as then no one could ever see the kingdom of God without being born again by water and by Spirit, so even today none enters into the kingdom of God who is not regenerated. The Reformers stated that true faith is the work of the Holy Spirit by the Gospel in our hearts, so even today we have no greater authority than this: the gospel of Jesus Christ "is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth." Rom. 1:16. We are still justified by faith; satisfaction to God for our sins still rests upon the vicarious suffering and death of Christ as an atonement; we are still saved by grace; the Holy Spirit is still the Indweller and Sanctifier of the saints, the Giver of comfort and the Author of all our good works; the sacraments of baptism and the Lord's supper have not changed in character nor in virtue; the Church is still the body of all true believers gathered from all the four corners of the earth by the gospel, to which no one is joined except by an individual new birth; the saints are still heirs of eternal life, and are preserved in the hands of God; the providence of God is still over all to accomplish God's good pleasure and will; the saints still have a sure hope of a blessed resurrection, and of a glorious translation into the full and everlasting enjoyment of heaven's bliss. God still calls effectually and election is still a biblical doctrine, which is the comfort of all of God's children, otherwise none would be saved. These doctrines are eternal truths and they change not with time. The Reformed confessions and catechisms are not all inclusive. There are many other truths stated in the Bible that are not expressly formulated into doctrinal statements by the Church, and many of those already stated are much fuller and more comprehensively taught in Scripture. However, what the fathers gave us in these confessions and catechisms is sufficient as a systematic form of instruction to train the youth and the adults in the principal truths of Scripture, and as a medium whereby they can easily distinguish the truth from the heresies of the times.

Perhaps it is in place at this point to call attention to a most serious matter about confessions and catechisms. You know, the Church teaches these confessions and catechisms and this is usually followed by a public examination before the church and by confirmation. I remember years ago a lady expressed herself in a rather Lutheran fashion, when speaking of her daughter by saying, jetzt ist sie eingesegnet. The idea which she expressed was, that now everything is all right. It is necessary to warn against a mere notional or rational knowledge of our standards and a mere memorizing of a catechism. There is a notional knowledge, and there is a saving knowledge. "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." John 17 :3. Peter once answered the Lord and said, "Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life." John 6 :68. "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life; and they are they which testify of me." John 5:39. In Hebrews 4:2 we have a remarkable passage; "For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them (that enter not into his rest): but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it." It is not enough that we have studied and now know the contents of the confessions; it is not enough that we have memorized our catechism. It is a matter whether, after having learned these biblical truths, we can say: God is my Father and I am his child; Christ is my Saviour, who suffered and died for my sins, and now I have forgiveness of sin; I am saved by grace through faith, and am now an heir of eternal life; I have been regenerated by the Holy Ghost, and now I am a new creature; I have communion with the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost; I am and for ever shall remain a member of his Church, and have the promise of entering into his rest. This is a saving knowledge which we attain through the Holy Ghost, who works faith by the Gospel. Certainly the fathers who wrote our confessions never once thought that a bare knowledge of the confessions and catechisms was sufficient, but they thought of a saving knowledge of those things which they stated.

In closing this long subject of the Reformed Confessions and Catechisms, I would like to answer one more question: Did the Reformers have a Bible in such a pure form, that they could rest their statements on the words of Scripture, and were their Scripture proofs so correct as to words so as to be vindicative (tending to vindicate)? To this our answer is: Yes. Of this there is no doubt. As to their faith in their Bible, they did not need a spade to dig up an archæology, nor a volume of apologetics as external props; their faith rested on internal evidences. Since their days all sorts of studies have been made, parading about in high sounding names, but in spite of all these, we shall confirm our answer by quoting part of a sentence from Kenyon's Handbook of the Textual Criticism of the New Testament:

"Yet no doctrine of Christianity rests solely upon a disputed text." This is said in respect to the Greek text in which the New Testament was written. Now we know that the reformers read the Word of God in its original text. The Old Testament was written in Hebrew. The Massoretic Hebrew text which the reformers used dates way back to the apostolic times, and here is a statement on this text from Bruce's book, Second Thoughts on the Dead Sea Scholls: "But in general the new discoveries have increased our respect for the Massoretic Hebrew text. In a number of places it calls for emendations.... but over the whole area of the Old Testament writings its superiority to the other forms of text current at the end of the pre-Christian era is assured."

This now brings to a close a long subject. I have tried to be honest and fair to the Reformed Confessions and Catechisms, to the reformers and the authors, and to the Church to which they were given. I have been very open in my convictions about them, and did not hesitate to give my reasons for these convictions. I believe that many Reformed church members were blessed by going over this subject with me, and I hope some ministers too.

Rev. Emil Buehrer

There may be some persons of the Reformed faith and confession, who do not know just what the Reformed faith is; and, likewise, there are many who have departed from it, or at least regard it lightly, that do not know from what they have departed or what they regard lightly. For this reason we will give a brief account of the background which lead up to the Reformed confessions and how they came about. In this connection we shall publish, as previously promised, some of the Reformed confessions.

As all know, two separate movements of reformation started at the very same time; the one in Germany with Luther, and the other in Switzerland with Zwingli. Both men worked independently: they did not know each other at first; neither did the one know anything about the writings of the other.

Zwingli was born in 1484. He began his work at Einsiedeln in 1516, and at Zurich, since 1519, he began to preach Christ more effectively from the pure fountain of the New Testament, and set him forth as the only Mediator and all-sufficient Saviour. The great historian, Dr. Schaff, compares Zwingli with Luther as follows:

"Zwingli was scarcely two months younger than Luther. Both were educated and ordained in the Roman Church. Both were men of strong mind, heroic character, fervent piety, and commanding influence over the people. Both were good scholars, great divines, and fond of poetry and music. Both labored independently for the same great cause of evangelical Protestantism-the one on a smaller, the other on a larger field. But their endowment, training, and conversion were different. Zwingli had less prejudice, more practical commonsense, clear discrimination, sober judgment, self-control, courtesy, and polish-Luther more productive genius, poetic imagination, overpowering eloquence, mystic depth, fire, and passion; and was in every way a richer and stronger, though rougher and wilder nature. Zwingli's eyes were opened by the reading of the Greek Testament, which he carefully copied with his own hand, and the humanistic learning of his friend Erasmus; while Luther passed through the ascetic struggles of monastic life, till he found peace of conscience in the doctrine of justification by faith alone. Zwingli broke more rapidly and more radically with the Roman Church than Luther. He boldly abolished all doctrines and usages not taught in the Scriptures; Luther piously retained what was not clearly forbidden. He aimed at a reformation of government and discipine as well as theology; Luther confined himself to such changes as were directly connected with doctrine. He was a Swiss and a republican; Luther, a German and a monarchist. He was a statesman as well as a theologian; Luther kept aloof from all political complications, and preached the doctrine of passive obedience to established authority. They met but once in this world, and then as antagonists, at Marburg, two years before Zwingli's death. They could not but respect each other personally, though Luther approached the Swiss with the strongest prejudice, looking upon him as a fanatic and semi-infidel. They came to an agreement on every article of faith except the real presence in the eucharist (Lord's Supper). Zwingli proposed, with tears, peace and union, notwithstanding this difference, but Luther refused the hand of Christian fellowship, because he made doctrinal agreement the boundary-line of brotherhood."

What we are interested in here, however, is not so much the history of the Reformation, but the progress of the truth and the statement of faith in the creeds of the Reformed Churches. It is wonderful how the truth came to light again by men whom God chose to proclaim it. The wonders wrought by the preaching of the Gospel, blessed by the Spirit's efficacy, can be seen in the progress which truth made among the nations when the Reformation began. When we look at what men like Zwingli, Beza, Calvin, Peter Martyr Vermigli, Ecolampadius, Melanchthon, Olevianus, Ursinus, Guy de Brés, Bullinger, Farel, Lasco, Cranmer, Knox, etc., did in their lifetime, we begin to see how mightily God wrought during the first part of the sixteenth century. There were also other people affected by evangelical preaching, but it resulted only in a kind of moral improvement of life, and in reforming some evils. These did not openly break with the Church of Rome, nor were they willing to suffer the consequences of accepting the full Gospel truth and the only way of salvation. In this respect that age was no different from ours.

It is to be remembered that nearly all the early reformers grew up in the Roman Church, under its teachings, superstitions, idolatry, and evil practices. Most of them came to the light by reading and studying the Scriptures, especially the New Testament in the original language. At first they preached the pure Gospel in the Church, and sought to reform it to its original or apostolic purity; but the Church did not suffer them very long. Being excommunicated, they did not refrain from preaching the truth. It is natural that their preaching had to deal with many evils to which the people had accustomed themselves: such as, the mass, penance, invocation of saints, works of merit, fasts, devotion to priests and Pope, the latter claiming to be the vicar of Christ on earth, etc. For this reason, too, we find that the Ninety-Five Theses of Luther and Sixty-Seven Articles of Zwingli deal in part with these evils.

In order to acquaint our readers with the first steps in the formation of our Reformed creeds, we shall present in full the Sixty-Seven Articles of Ulrich Zwingli, which were publically discussed and successfully defended by him at the religious conference in Zurich on January 29, 1523. They prepared the way for the introduction of the Reformation in Switzerland. They exhibit the first creed of the Reformed Churches. Their form, consisting of short, concise propositions, is much better adapted for a creed than the lengthy discussions of many later and more authoritative confessions. These were victoriously defended by Zwingli in the presence of the civil magistrate and about 600 persons, against Dr. Faber, the General Vicar of the Bishop of Constance, who appeared to superintend the meeting rather than to defend the old doctrines, and was unwilling or unable to answer the arguments of a learned and powerful opponent. The magistrate passed a resolution on the same day approving of Zwingli's position, and requiring all the ministers of the canton to preach nothing but what they could prove from the Holy Gospel. The second disputation followed in October, on the use of images and the mass, before about nine hundred persons, including three hundred priests and delegates from different cantons; a third disputation took place in January 1524. The result was the emancipation from popery, and the orderly and permanent establishment of the Reformed Church in the city and canton of Zurich.

These Articles resemble the Ninety-five Theses of Luther, which opened the drama of the Reformation in Germany, October 31, 1517, but they mark a considerable advance in Protestant conviction. They are full of Christ, as the only Savior and Mediator, and clearly recognize the Word of God as the only rule of faith. They attack the primacy of the Pope, the mass, the invocation of saints, the meritoriousness of human works, fasts, pilgrimages, celibacy and purgatory, as unscriptural traditions of men. (Schaff)

These Articles may be found in Schaff's Creeds of Christendom, Vol. III, pp. 199-207, but there they are given in High-German together with the Latin translation. Schaff gives a few specimens in English in Vol. I. p. 364. It was necessary for me to translate these Articles into English for our readers. This was not an easy task, for the German and Latin did not always agree. (Articles 29 and 30 were not translated by Rev. Buehrer as he found it difficult to determine it from either the German or Latin, but what I included below was taken from a translation provided by "Christian History," Module 305. -Ed.)

THE SIXTY-SEVEN ARTICLES

1. All who say that the Gospel is nothing without the approbation of the Church, err and cast reproach upon God.

2. The sum of the Gospel is, that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, has made known to us the will of his heavenly Father, and redeemed us by his innocence from eternal death, and reconciled us to God.

3.  Therefore, Christ is the only way to salvation for all who were, who are and who shall be.

4.  Whoever seeks or shows another door, errs-yea is a murderer of souls and a robber.

5.  Therefore all those who liken any other doctrines to or judge them higher than the Gospel, err, and know not what the Gospel is.

6.  For Christ Jesus is the Guide and Captain, promised and given by God to the whole human race;

7.  That He might be an eternal salvation and head of all believers, who are his body, which without him is dead and can do nothing.

8.  From this it follows: first, that all who live in this Head are members and children of God, and this is the Church or communion of saints, a mistress of Christ, ecclesia catholica.

9.  Secondly, that, just as the members of the body can do nothing without the head, so likewise no one, belonging to the body of Christ, is capable of anything without the Head, namely, Christ.

10.  Just as a foolish person, when the members of his body act without the head, lacerates and wounds himself; so likewise, when the members of Christ undertake something without the Head, namely, Christ, are most foolish, and burden and destroy themselves with the most imprudent laws.

11.  Hence we gather, that the so-called traditions and laws of the churchmen, because of pride, wealth, position, titles and traditions, which they uphold and defend, are the cause of all follies; since they are not consistent with the Head, Christ.

12.  Therefore they still rage, not because of the Head (whom by the grace of God all the godly diligently endeavor to establish), but because men will no longer suffer them to rage in fury. The upright desire to hear only the Head, Christ.

13.  When men listen to the Word of God, they truly and sincerely learn the will of God. Hence men are drawn to God by his Spirit, and so transformed.

14.  Therefore all Christians should be willing to do their utmost to see that the Gospel of Christ be sincerely preached everywhere.

15.  Whoso believes the Gospel shall be saved; whoso believes not the Gospel is damned. For in the Gospel the whole truth is clear.

16.  In the Gospel we learn that the doctrines and traditions of men are of no use unto salvation.

17.  Christ is the only eternal High Priest. Therefore, do they, who appropriate to themselves the high office of priesthood, oppose the glory and power of Christ and reject Christ.

18.  Christ who offered himself once on the cross is the sufficient and perpetual sacrifice for the sins of all believers. Therefore, the mass is no sacrifice, but a commemoration of the sacrifice of the cross and a seal of the redemption through Christ.

19.  Christ is the only Mediator between God and us.

20.  God gives us all things through Christ and in Christ's name. Therefore it follows, that except for this life we need no Mediator other than Christ.

21.  When we pray for one another here on earth, we do it because we trust that all things will be given us alone through Christ.

22.  Christ is our righteousness. From this it follows that our works are good so far as they are Christ's, but not good so far as they are our own.

23. Because Christ despised the riches and pride of the world, it follows, that they who gain riches unto themselves under the label of Christ, do greatly dishonor him, when they use him as a protector of their avarice and wantonness.

24.  Christians are not bound to any works which Christ has not commanded; they may at all times eat every kind of food. From this it follows, that the letters of the pontiff, which are sent for cheese and butter, are a Roman fraud.

25.  Time and place are subjected to man, and man is not subjected to them. Therefore, they who bind men to time and place, rob and strip Christians of their rightful liberty.

26.  Nothing is more displeasing to God than hypocrisy. Hence we learn that hypocrisy is a grave and shameful audacity whereby men pretend to be holy before men. Here fall cowls, signs and shaved crowns, etc.

27. All Christians are brothers in Christ, and brethren among themselves, and no one on earth should be called father. Here fall the parties and sects.

28.  What God allows, and has not forbidden, is good. From this we learn that marriage is equally proper to all persons.

29.  That all who are known as clergy sin when they do not protect themselves by marriage after they have become conscious that God has not enabled them to remain chaste.

30. That those who promise chastity [outside of matrimony] take foolishly or childishly too much upon themselves, from which is learned that those who make such vows do wrong to the pious being.

31.  No person shall be excommunicated by any private person, but only by the Church together with her shepherd, namely, the pastor, that is, the communion of those among whom he, who deserves the ban, dwells.

32.  Only he, who has become a public scandal, shall be excommunicated.

33.  Unlawful goods, such as are not returnable to its rightful owner, shall not be given to the temples, cloisters, monasteries, priests or nuns, but to the needy.

34.  The power of the Pope and the bishops has no foundation in the Holy Scriptures and the doctrines of Christ.

35.  But the power of civil magistrates is confirmed by the teachings and acts of Christ.

36.  Civil authority and the right to rule, which the spiritual order claims for itself, belongs altogether to the present rulers, if at all it wants to be Christian.

37.  All Christians, without exception, are duty bound to obey the public rulers;

38.  Providing they do not command any thing contrary to God.

39.  The laws of the rulers should be conformable to the rule of the divine will, to defend the oppressed as much as possible, even if they do not complain.

40.  Rulers may punish only lawfully, if they are not restrained by God, or if God commands something else; but only those who offend publically.

41.  When they (the rulers) serve those for whom they must give an account to God with counsel and help, they in return are indebted to the rulers for material aid.

42.  But if they become unfaithful and reign not according to the rule of Christ, they may be deposed (with God?).

43.  His kingdom is the very best and the firmest, who rules according to God and with God; his the most wicked and most uncertain, who rules according to his own fancy.

44.  One who truly prays, calls upon God in spirit and in truth, praying from the heart, and not making a loud cry before the people.

45.  Hypocrites perform all their works that they might be seen of men; therefore they accept wages in this world.

46.  Therefore it follows, that singing in temples and incantations made without devotion are merely for wages, seeks either honor or advantage from the people.

47.  Men should rather be willing to die, than to offend a Christian or to bring him to shame.

48.   He who without cause is offended through infirmity or ignorance, should not be left weak or small, but should be made strong, that he might not regard as sin that which is no sin.

49.  I know of no greater scandal than the prohibition of lawful marriage to priests, while they are permitted for money to have concubines.

50.  God alone forgives sins only through Jesus Christ our Lord.

51.  Those who attribute to creatures the power to forgive sins, rob God of his glory: this is idolatry.

52.  Therefore confessions, which are made to a priest, should not be regarded as remissions of sins, but merely as consultations.

53.  Works of penance, imposed by priests according to human traditions (except excommunication), do not remove sins, but are imposed on others for a terror.

54.  Christ bore all our grief and distress: whosoever really attributes to the works of penance what belongs to Christ alone, errs and blaphemes God.

55.  Who, therefore, refuses to forgive any penitent persons any kind of sin, acts not the part of God or of Peter, but of the devil.

56.  Who remits alone some sins for wages and money, is a partner with Simon and Balaam and is Satan's true ambassador.

57.  The Scriptures know nothing of a purgatory after this life.

58.  The judgment concerning the departed is known only to God.

59.  The less God has reveled to us about this, the less we should try to know about it.

60.  When a person, concerned about those that died, calls upon God that He may have mercy on them, this I do not condemn; but to determine the time of it (seven years for a sin unto death) and to lie for the sake of gain, is not human but devilish.

61.  Of the character of consecration, lately invented by the priests, the divine Scriptures know nothing.

62.  The Scriptures know no other presbyters or priests except those who preach the Word of God.

63.  Those presbyters, of which we speak, which preach the Word of God, the divine Scriptures commend that they should be supplied with their bodily necessities.

64.  Those who confess their sins, should not be asked to pay a penalty, but be left to die in peace, and whatever effects he wills to the Church, should afterwards be dealt with in a Christian way.

65.  Those who do not acknowledge their error, God will indeed deal with them; therefore no bodily harm should be inflicted on them, unless their condition is so abusive, that such punishment becomes necessary.

66.  Those who hold positions in the Church should immediately humble themselves, bear the cross of Christ (not a chest), or their perdition is sure-the axe is laid unto the root.

67.   If any one desires to discuss with me-interest, thithes, unbaptized children, confirmation, -I am most willing to give an answer.

No one should here undertake a controversy by resorting to sophistry and relying on human wisdom; but let him come, having the Scriptures (for they breathe the spirit of God) as his judge, that the truth may either be found, or, if it has been found, as I hope, may be maintained.