But we beg every Christian reader to consider for God’s sake: If we can be justified before God and become Christians through such works, I would like to hear, (and we pray all of you to make every effort to reply,) what the difference would be between the doctrines of the philosophers and of Christ; if we can obtain the remission of sins through such works of ours, what benefit, then, is Christ to us? If we can become holy and pious in the sight of God, by natural reason and our own good works, what need have we then of the blood and death of Christ, or to be born anew through him? as Peter says in his first Epistle 1:3. This dangerous error (taught publicly in the schools and from the pulpit) has, alas, led even eminent theologians at Lyons, Paris, and other places, to recognise no Christian piety or righteousness, but that taught in philosophy; although every letter and syllable of Paul teaches differently; yet, while this ought reasonably to surprise us, and we could justly deride their views, they laugh at us, yea, ridicule Paul himself.

So greatly has this shameful, abominable error prevailed! I myself heard a reputable minister, who did not mention Christ and the Gospel, but preached the ethics of Aristotle, (Aristotelis ethicos). Is not such preaching puerile and foolish among Christians? If, however, the doctrine of our adversaries be true, then are these ethics (ethici,) an invaluable collection of sermons, and a fine new bible. For it is not easy for any one to write better than Aristotle, with regard to an external, honorable life.

We see, that some learned men have written books, in which they endeavour to show, that the words of Christ and the sayings of Socrates and Zeno harmonize beautifully, as if Christ had come to give us good laws and commandments, through which to merit the remission of our sins; instead of proclaiming to us the grace and peace of God and imparting the Holy Spirit, through his own merits and blood.

Hence, if we receive the doctrine of our adversaries, that we can merit the forgiveness of our sins, by the powers of natural reason and our own works, we are Aristotelians and not Christians, and there is no difference between an honorable Heathen, a Pharisaic, and a Christian life, between philosophy and the Gospel. (Henkel Translation, p. 158-159).

Here the scholastics have followed the philosophers; and when they attempt to define, how man is justified before God, they teach only the righteousness and piety, of a correct external deportment before the world, and of good works, and in addition devise the dream, that human reason is able without the aid of the Holy Ghost, to love God above all things. For it is true, undoubtedly, that when the human heart is at ease and free from trouble and temptation, and does not feel the wrath and judgement of God, it may imagine that it loves God above all things and does much good and many works for God’s sake; but this is mere hypocrisy. Yet in this manner our adversaries have taught, that men merit the remission of sins, if they do as much as lies in their power; that is, if reason regrets sin, and elicits also a willingness to love God.

Since men are naturally inclined to the idea, that their merits and works are of some value in the sight of God, this false principle has bought forth innumerable, perverted methods of worship in the church: for example, monastic vows, the abuse of masses, and the like, without number; new modes of worship being constantly devised out of this error. And in order that such confidence in our merits and works might be still farther disseminated, they impudently maintained, that the Lord God must of necessity give grace unto those who do such good works; not indeed, that he is compelled, but because this is the order, which God will not transgress or alter.

In these opinions, in this very doctrine, many other gross, pernicious errors, and horrid blasphemies against God are embraced and hidden; to state all of which now, would require too much time. (Henkel Translation, p. 158).

All the Scriptures, both of the Old and New testaments, are divided into, and teach, these two parts, namely, the law and the divine promises. In some places they present to us the law, and in others they offer us grace through the glorious promises of Christ; for example, the Old Testament, when it promises the coming Christ, and through him offers eternal blessings, eternal salvation, righteousness, and eternal life; or the New, when Christ, after his advent, promises in the Gospel, the remission of sins, eternal righteousness and life.

In this place, however, we call the law the Ten Commandments of God, wherever they appear in the Scriptures. It is not our purpose here to speak of the ceremonies and judicial laws.

Now, of these two parts our adversaries choose the law. For since the natural law, which agrees with the law of Moses or the Ten Commandments, is inborn and written in the hearts of all men, and human reason is therefore able, in some measure, to comprehend and understand the Ten Commandments, it imagines that the law is sufficient, and that remission of sin can be obtained through it.

But the Ten Commandments require not only an honorable life, or good works, externally, which reason can to some extent produce; they demand much higher things, beyond all human power and the reach of reason: namely, the law requires us to fear and love God with all sincerity, and from the bottom of our hearts; to call upon him in every time of need, and place our trust in nothing else.

Again, the law demands, that we neither doubt nor waver, but conclude with the utmost certainty in our hearts, that God is with us, hears our prayers, and grants our petitions; it demands, that in the midst of death we expect life and all manner of consolation from God; that in all our troubles we conform entirely to his will; that we shall not flee from him in death and affliction, but be obedient to him, and bear and suffer willingly, whatever may befall us. (This text is from The Henkel Translation of the Book of Concord, which is the only English translation based on the authoritative German Dresden Edition of 1580, p. 157-158).