Part 2 (2/2)

St Sebastian was a martyr of the fourteenth century His day is January 20 Comp Arts _Anna_, _Sebastian_ and _Bruderschaten_ in _Prot Realencyk_, I, SS2; II, 534 l

[33] A trades' guild brotherhood

[34] Douay Version, based on Vulgate, from which Luther quotes

[35] See above, p 10

[36] I e, in e

A TREATISE CONCERNING THE BAN

1520

INTRODUCTION

The ban, or excommunication, is the correlative of communion Our conception of excommunication depends then, of course, upon our viehat constitutes coives us his view of co the Blessed Sacrament_ From the premise there laid down it follows that excommunication, or the ban, excludes only from external membershi+p in the Church, but cannot really separate a man from the Church if he is in personal fellowshi+p with his Lord[1] Sin and unbelief cause this separation from Him, and the real ban, therefore, is put into effect not by the Church, but by the ainst God The ban of the Church cannot even deprive one of the Sacrament, but only of the outward use of it, for it can still be partaken of spiritually This whole position, of course, is fatal to the Roman Catholic conception of the Church, and we do not wonder that it was vigorously opposed by the hierarchy

Of like significance is Luther's advocacy of the separation of the temporal and spiritual powers, practically of Church and State,--the position which he develops later in the _Open Letter to the nobility_

But in this treatise, again, Luther shows hi but the immoral ain the man of conscience--will his critics say, ”of oversensitive conscience”? Thank God that there were soe! Luther fears sin more than the ban, and sin has for hi Sin is not priainst God This the ban is to teach; it is to be the syainst sin and it is to be used by the Church only re rod of the dear Mother Church, provided it be accepted and borne in this spirit

Why, then, did not Luther bear his own ban in this way? The justification for his subsequent conduct is to be found in two brief but important conditional clauses in this treatise ”God,” he says, ”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 coain he says, ”When unjustly put under the ban we should be very careful not to 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_”[3] God and his neighbor were for Luther the actors which made it necessary for him to speak and act, when for selfish reasons he would often rather have remained passive

The inception of our treatise is to be found in a ser of 1518 Luther's pastoral concern for his people made it necessary for him to speak on this subject in order to quiet the consciences both embittered and distressed by the wanton and unjust use of the power of excommunication Added to this must have been his own personal interest in the ban certain to fall on him In a letter to Link[4], dated July 10, 1518, he speaks of having preached a sereneral consternation and fear that the ire enkindled by the XCV Theses would start afresh

He had desired a public disputation on the subject, but the Bishop of Brandenburg persuaded him to defer the matter Under date of September 1st, Luther writes Staupitz[5] that because his sermon had been misrepresented and spread by unfriendly spies it becaust after Luther's summons to Rome, under the title _De Virtute Excommunicationis_ Our treatise is an elaboration in popular foriven in Clemen, Vol I, which we have followed in inal edition at the end of 1519 or the beginning of 1520

The text of the treatise is found in the following editions: Weien Ed, vol xxvii, 51; Walch Ed, vol xix, 1089; St Louis Ed, vol xix, 884; Clemen, vol i, 213; Berlin Ed, vol iii, 291

J J SCHINDEL

Allentown, PA

FOOTNOTES

[1] See below, p 37

[2] See below, p 50

[3] See below, p 51

[4] See Enders, I, No 84 Smith _Luther's Correspondence_, I, No

69

[5] See Enders, I, No 90 Smith, _Luther's Correspondence_, I, No