So much on the chief and essential point of the Christian religion; for I think this, such as it is, is enough to enable the pious to see where they should fix their hopes and from what keep them away.
[12]. The Keys
Since the subject of the Keys is not only closely related to the Gospel but is really nothing else than the Gospel itself, in no other place than this can it be more suitably treated. In my “Conclusions,” written in German, I said a thing absurd in the judgment of certain persons who think nothing right except what they themselves do. But I do not repent of that view; for it did not originate with me, but was sent from heaven. For I asserted nothing about the Keys that had not been put forth by the Son of God Himself, the Mouth of truth, Knowledge unchangeable. Now let the Pontifical erowd rage; let the creatures of vainglory concoct any device they please. I shall cling to my view so tenaciously that I can no more be torn from it than from God.
False religion is not consistent with itself in explaining either what the Keys are or when they were given. Some think the Keys are the authority given to the priest? by which he can loose and bind according to his own free-will; and therefore they introduce the formula of absolution, as it is called, with the distinet words: “The Lord Jesus Christ absolve you, and I by virtue of the authority from Him which I exercise absolve you, ete.” Others attribute all the power to the word of God, administered by the priest merely as an instrument or organ. And it was well for these that they put forth this view of theirs before the sway of the Roman Pontiff attained its present dimensions. For today they could not say these things with impunity—albeit their view is not correct, as will be clearly shown. And as to when the Keys were given, they are so at variance with each other that it is strange the Roman Pontiff (since he alone, as they dream, has the right to judge the Seriptures) has not pronounced in some bull when they were given, that there might not be such divergence in a matter of such moment—or rather emolument. And he could easily have done so, for he has made a decree that the soul shall not
[His Auslegen und Gründe der Schlussreden, 1523. TFrom early in the thirteenth century the view prevailed that the]
[priest forgives sin in God’s stead. Accordingly, the precative form of abso-]
[lution, “May God (or, the Lord) absolve thee,” was finally superseded by]
[the indicative form, “I absolve thee.”]
die when the body is destroyed. But let us not laugh when piety hears shameless impiety speaking so wantonly. This, then, I once said of the Keys: “The word keys, in the sense it has here, was transferred from keys that unlock to the setting free of the mind, because things that are hidden away and fastened keys open and uncover. In the same way one’s consciousness is closed and unknown to all but one’s self. As, therefore, things that are locked up cannot be got at without the proper key, so one’s consciousness cannot be released and made free unless it be done with the appropriate key.” This would be clear from the mere fact that God alone can release the mind, if we had to treat the matter by argument and illustration. But let us hear what the mouth of the Lord our God says. When, as we read in Matthew 16: 15-19, Christ asked of the disciples who they thought He was, Peter answered in the name of all, as also all had been asked: “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Christ said to him: “Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jonah: for flesh and blood hath not “evealed it unto thee, but my Father who is in heaven. And I say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Here the first thing is to examine the way in which they who trot out false and counterfeit keys, wondrously and artfully wrought, defend themselves with a sort of Hercules’ club. It is, indeed, just this: “We see,” they say, “more plainly than day that Peter alone made answer to Christ, and that Christ spoke to Peter alone. Hence the Keys can belong to no one but Peter and him with whom he may have shared them.” We must observe, therefore, that as Christ had asked the question of all the disciples, so also Peter answered in the name of all, although the Evangelist makes no mention here of any other. But John, 6: 67-69, makes mention of all twelve when he records the same reply, thus: “Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Would ye also go away? Simon
[Under Leo X, the Fifth Lateran Council, in December, 1513, con-]