Translating the Augsburg Confession Part LXVI (Epilogus)
Posted: December 2, 2022 Filed under: Augsburg Confession, Latin Translation | Tags: Augsburg Confession, Latin, Lutheranism, Translation Leave a commentEpilogus.
Hi sunt praecipui articuli, qui videntur habere controversiam. Quamquam enim de pluribus abusibus dici poterat[1], tamen, ut[2] fugeremus prolixitatem, praecipua complexi sumus, ex quibus cetera facile iudicari possunt. Magnae querelae fuerunt de indulgentiis, de peregrinationibus, de abusu excommunicationis. Parochiae multipliciter vexabantur per stationarios.[3] Infinitae contentiones erant pastoribus cum monachis de iure parochiali, de confessionibus, de sepulturis, de extraordinariis concionibus et de aliis innumerabilibus rebus.
Huiusmodi negotia praetermisimus, ut[4] illa, quae sunt in hac causa praecipua, breviter proposita facilius cognosci possent. Neque hic quidquam[5] ad ullius contumeliam dictum aut collectum est. Tantum ea recitata sunt, quae videbantur necessario dicenda esse,[6] ut[7] intelligi possit, in[8] doctrina ac ceremoniis apud nos nihil esse receptum contra Scripturam aut ecclesiam catholicam, quia manifestum est, nos[9] diligentissime cavisse, ne[10] qua nova et impia dogmata in ecclesias nostras serperent.
Hos articulos supra scriptos voluimus exhibere iuxta edictum Caesareae Maiestatis, in quibus confession nostra exstaret et eorum, qui apud nos docent, doctrinae summa cerneretur. Si quid[11] in hac confessione desiderabitur, parati sumus latiorem informationem, Deo volente, iuxta Scripturas exbibere.
Caesareae Maiestatis Vestrae fideles et subditi:[12]
Ioannes, Dux Saxoniae, Elector.
Georgius, Marchio Brandenburgensis.
Ernestus, Dux Luneburgensis.
Philippus, Landgravius Hessorum.
Ioannes Fridericus, Dux Saxoniae.
Franciscus, Dux Luneburgensis.
Volfgangus, Princeps ab Anhalt.
Senatus Magistratusque Nurnbergensis.
Senatus Reutlingensis.
[1] Dici poterat: an impersonal construction: there can be said
[2] Ut…prolixitatem: a purpose clause
[3] Stationarios: Stationarii
[4] Ut…possent: a purpose clause
[5] Neque hic quidquam: And nothing here…
[6] Dicenda esse: a passive periphrastic
[7] Ut intelligi possit: a purpose clause
[8] In…catholicam: an indirect statement where nihil is the accusative subject and esse receptum is the infinitive main verb
[9] Nos…cavisse: an indirect statement
[10] Ne…serperent: a negative purpose clause
[11] Si quid: Si [ali]quid
[12] Fideles et subditi: description of the signatories: your faithful and obedient
These are the principal articles which seem to hold controversy. For although there can be much said about the many abuses, nevertheless, in order to avoid prolonged discourse, we have covered the foremost from which the others easily can be judged. There were great quarrels about indulgences, pilgrimages, and about the abuse of excommunication. Parishes in many different ways were annoyed by the Stations. There were endless disputes for the pastors with the monks about the right of a parish, about confessions, about burials and about special preachers and innumerable other things.
We have overlooked trouble of this sort so that those things, which are foremost in this cause, and have been briefly related, are able to more easily be understood. And nothing here has been said or assembled to insult anyone. Only those things have been recited which seemed necessarily must be said so that it could be understood that in the doctrine and ceremonies among us nothing has been received contrary to the Scripture or the church catholic because it is clear that we have been cautious lest any new and impious teachings creep into our churches.
We wish to display those articles which have been written before in accordance with the edict of Your Imperial Majesty in which our confession is on the record and summary of the doctrine of those who teach among us is seen. If anything is desired in this confession, we are prepared to present more information in accordance with the Scriptures if God wills it.
Check out my newest book: The Augsburg Confession: A Latin Reader
Translating the Augsburg Confession Part LXV (Article VII.x)
Posted: December 1, 2022 Filed under: Augsburg Confession, Latin Translation | Tags: Augsburg Confession, Latin, Lutheranism, Translation Leave a commentVII. De Potestate Ecclesiastica. (x.)
Petrus vetat episcopos dominari et ecclesiis imperare, 1 Petr. 5, 3. 77 Nunc non id agitur, ut[1] domination eripiatur episcopis, sed hoc unum[2] petitur, ut[3] patiantur evangelium pure doceri, et relaxent paucas quasdam observationes, quae sine peccato servari non possunt. Quodsi nihil remiserint, ipsi viderint, quomodo[4] Deo rationem reddituri sint, quod[5] pertinacia[6] sua causam schismati praebent.
[1] Ut…episcopis: a purpose clause
[2] Hoc unum: the adjectives are used substantively: this one thing
[3] Ut…observationes: an indirect command
[4] Quomodo sint: How they wil deliver to God an account
[5] Quod…praebent: a quod substantive clause
[6] Pertinacia sua: an ablative of cause
Peter forbids bishops to be lords and to command the churchs in 1 Peter 5, 3. 77. Now this is not done in order to snatch power from the bishops but this one thing is asked that they suffer the gospel to be taught purely and that they relax a few certain observances which are not able to be kept without sin. But if they relax nothing, they themselves see how they will deliver to God an account that reveals the reason for the schism is their obstinacy.
Check out my newest book: The Augsburg Confession: A Latin Reader
Translating the Augsburg Confession Part LXIV (Article VII.ix)
Posted: November 30, 2022 Filed under: Augsburg Confession, Latin Translation | Tags: Augsburg Confession, Latin, Lutheranism, Translation Leave a commentVII. De Potestate Ecclesiastica. (ix.)
Apostoli iusserunt, Act. 15, 20, abstinere a sanguine. Quis nunc observat? Neque tamen peccant, qui non observant, quia ne[1] ipsi quidem apostoli voluerunt onerare conscientias tali servitute, sed ad tempus[2] prohibuerunt propter scandalum. Est[3] enim perpetuo voluntas evangelii consideranda in decreto. Vix ulli canones servantur accurate et multi quotidie exolescunt apud illos etiam, qui diligentissime defendunt traditiones. Nec potest conscientiis consuli, nisi haec aequitas servetur, ut[4] sciamus eos[5] sine opinione necessitatis servari nec laedi conscientias, etiamsi traditiones exolescant.
Facile autem possent episcopi legitimam obedientiam retinere, si non urgerent servare[6] traditiones, quae bona conscientia servari non possunt. Nunc imperant coelibatum, nullos recipiunt, nisi iurent se[7] puram evangelii doctrinam nolle docere. Non petunt [8]ecclesiae, ut[9] episcopi honoris sui iactura sarciant concordiam; quod[10] tamen decebat bonos pastores facere. Tantum petunt, ut[11] iniusta onera remittant, quae nova sunt[12] et praeter consuetudinem ecclesiae catholicae recepta. Fortassis initio quaedam constitutiones habuerunt probabiles causas; quae tamen posterioribus temporibus non congruunt. Apparet[13] etiam quasdam errore receptas esse.
Quare[14] pontificiae clementiae esset illas nunc mitigare, quia talis mutatio non labefacit ecclesiae unitatem. Multae enim traditiones humanae tempore[15] mutatae sunt, ut ostendunt ipsi canones. Quodsi non potest impetrari, ut[16] relaxentur observationes, quae sine peccato non possunt praestari, oportet nos[17] regulam apostolicam, Act. 5, 29, sequi, quae praecipit, Deo magis obedire, quam hominibus.
[1] Ne quidem: not even
[2] Ad tempus: at the time
[3] Est…consideranda: a passive periphrastic
[4] Ut…sciamus: a purpose clause
[5] Eos…conscientias: an indirect statement
[6] Servare: keeping
[7] Se…docere: an indirect statement
[8] Non petunt ecclesiae: The churches do not ask
[9] Ut…concordiam: an indirect command
[10] Quod…facere: which, nevertheless, it is proper for good pastors to do
[11] Ut…remittent: an indirect command
[12] Sunt: also governs recepta
[13] Apparet: an impersonal verb which introduces an indirect statement: it appears that
[14] Quare…mitigare: Wherefore now to soften those things belongs to papal clemency
[15] Tempore: an ablative of time
[16] Ut…observationes: a purpose clause
[17] Nos…sequi: an indirect statement where sequi is the infinitive main verb
The apostles ordered in Acts 15, 20 to abstain from blood? Who now observes this? Nevertheless, they do not sin who do not observe it because not even the apostles themselves wanted to burden consciences with such slavery, but at that time they forbade it on account of scandal. For the will of the gospel must always be considered in a decree.Scarcely any of the canons are preserved accurate, and many daily are forgotten even among those who most diligently defend the traditions. And it is not possible to advise consciences unless this mildness is preserved so that we know that they are kept without the opinion of necessity and that consciences are not harmed even if the traditions are forgotten.
Moreover, the bishops are easily able to keep legitimate obedience if they do not urge obeying traditions which are not able to be kept with a good conscience. Now they order celibacy, and they receive none unless they have sworn that they do not wish to teach the pure doctrine of the gospel. The churches do not ask that the bishops restore harmony with the loss of their honor; nevertheless, it is fitting that good pastors do this. They ask only that they release unjust burdens which are new and received contrary to the custom of the church catholic. Perhaps in the beginning the ordinances had justifiable causes; nevertheless, these are not suited to later times. It appears that even certain things were received in error.
Wherefore to alleviate those things now is papal mercy because such change does not weaken the unity of the church. For many human traditions have changed in time as the canons themselves show. But if it is not able to be achieved so that the observances are relaxed which cannot be met without sin, it is necessary that we follow the rule of Apostles in Acts 5, 29 which commands that we obey God more than men.
Check out my newest book: The Augsburg Confession: A Latin Reader
Translating the Augsburg Confession Part LXIII (Article VII.viii)
Posted: November 30, 2022 Filed under: Augsburg Confession, Latin Translation | Tags: Augsburg Confession, Latin, Lutheranism, Translation Leave a commentVII. De Potestate Ecclesiastica. (viii.)
Talis est observatio diei dominici, paschatis, pentecostes et similium feriarum et rituum. Nam qui[1]iudicant ecclesiae[2] auctoritate pro sabbato institutam esse diei dominici observationem tamquam necessariam, longe errant. Scriptura abrogavit sabbatum, quae docet omnes[3] ceremonias Mosaicas post revelatum[4] evangelium emitti posse. Et tamen quia opus erat constituere certum diem, ut[5] sciret populus, quando[6] convenire deberet, apparet[7] ecclesiam[8] ei rei destinasse diem dominicum, qui ob hanc quoque causam videtur magis placuisse, ut[9] haberent homines exemplum Christianae libertatis, et scirent nec[10] sabbati nec alterius diei observationem necessariam esse. Exstant prodigiosae disputationes de mutatione legis, de ceremoniis novae legis, de mutatione sabbati, quae omnes ortae sunt ex falsa persuasione, quod[11] oporteat in ecclesia cultum esse similem Levitico, et quod Christus commiserit apostolis et episcopis excogitare novas ceremonias, quae sint ad salutem necessariae.
Hi errores serpserunt in ecclesiam, quum iustitia fidei non satis clare doceretur. Aliqui disputant diei dominici observationem non quidem iuris divini esse, sed quasi iuris divini; praescribunt[12] de feriis, quatenus liceat operari. Huiusmodi disputationes quid sunt aliud nisi laquei conscientiarum? Quamquam enim conentur epiikeizare[13] traditiones, tamen nunquam potest aequitas deprehendi, donec[14] manet opinio necessitatis, quam manere necesse est, ubi ignorantur iustitia fidei et libertas Christiana.
[1] Qui: modifies the implied they which is the subject of errant
[2] Eccelisae…necessarium: an indirect statement where observationem is the accusative subject
[3] Omnes…posse: an indirect statement
[4] Revelatum: a perfect passive participle modifying evangelium
[5] Ut…populous: a purpose clause
[6] Quando…deberet: an indirect question
[7] Apparet: an impersonal verb: it appears
[8] Ecclesiam…dominicum: an indirect statement
[9] Ut haberent and scirent: purpose clauses
[10] Nec…esse: an indirect statement
[11] Quod…ceremonias: quod substantive clauses
[12] Praescribun…operari: They prescribe how long it is permissible to work on holy days.
[13] Epiikeizare: A Greek noun transliterated into Latin: to moderate
[14] Donec: as long as or while
Such is the observation of the day of the Lord, Easter, Pentecost and similar holy days and rites. For those who think that the observation of the day of the Lord has been instituted by the authority of the church in place of the Sabbath as necessary, err greatly. Scripture, which teaches that all the Mosaic ceremonies, after the gospel had been revealed, can be dismissed, annuls the Sabbath. And nevertheless, because it is useful to determine a certain day so that the people known when they ought to assemble, it appears that the church determined the Lord’s Day, which for this reason also seems to have been pleasing, for this thing so that men have the example of Christian liberty and know that neither an observation of the Sabbath nor of another day is necessary. Certain amazing disputes about the changing of the law, about the ceremonies of new laws, about the changing of the Sabbath, which all arose from a false opinion that it is necessary in the church that worship be similar to Levitus and that Christ entrusted the Apostles and bishops to devise new ceremonies which were necessary for salvation.
These errors crept into the church when the righteousness of faith were not taught clearly enough. Some argue that the observation of the Lord’s Day was not indeed of the divine law but similar to the divine law; concerning holy days they prescribe how long it is allowed to work. What are other disputations of this sort except snares of consciences? For although they try to moderate the traditions, mildness, nevertheless, is never able to be grasped while the opinion of the necessity remains which must remain when the righteousness of faith and Christian liberty are unknown.
Check out my newest book: The Augsburg Confession: A Latin Reader
Translating the Augsburg Confession Part LXII (Article VII.vii)
Posted: November 29, 2022 Filed under: Augsburg Confession, Latin Translation | Tags: Augsburg Confession, Latin, Lutheranism, Translation Leave a commentVII. De Potestate Ecclesiastica. (vii.)
Relinquitur[1] igitur, quum ordinationes, institutae[2] tamquam necessariae aut cum opinione promerendae[3] gratiae, pugnent cum evangelio, quod[4] non liceat ullis episcopis tales cultus instituere aut exigere. Necesse est enim in ecclesiis retineri doctrinam de libertate Christiana, quod[5] non sit necessaria servitus legis ad iustificationem, sicut in Galatis, 5, 1, scriptum est: Nolite iterum iugo servitutis subiici. Necesse est retineri praecipuum evangelii locum, quod[6] gratiam per fidem in Christum gratis consequamur, non propter certas observationes aut propter cultus ab hominibus institutos.[7]
Quid igitur sentiendum est[8] de die Dominico et similibus ritibus templorum? Ad haec respondent, quod[9] liceat episcopis seu pastoribus facere ordinationes, ut[10] res ordine gerantur in ecclesia, non ut per illas mereamur gratiam, aut satisfaciamus pro peccatis, aut obligentur conscientiae, ut[11] iudicent esse[12] necessarios cultus, ac sentiant se[13] peccare, quum sine offensione aliorum violant. Sic Paulus 1 Cor. 11, 5. 6 ordinat, ut[14] in congregatione mulieres velent capita, 1 Cor. 14, 30, ut ordine audiantur in ecclesia interpretes etc.
Tales ordinationes convenit[15] ecclesias propter caritatem et tranquillitatem servare eatenus, ne[16] alius alium offendat, ut[17] ordine et sine tumultu omnia fiant in ecclesiis, 1 Cor. 14, 40; cf. Phil. 2, 14; verum ita, ne[18] conscientiae onerentur, ut[19] ducant res esse necessarias ad salutem, ac judicent se[20] peccare, quum violant eas sine aliorum offensione; sicut nemo dixerit peccare[21] mulierem, quae in publicum non velato[22] capite procedit sine offensione hominum.
[1] Relinquitur: It remains
[2] Institutae: a perfect passive participle modifying ordinationes
[3] Promerendae: a gerundive
[4] Quod…exigere: a quod substantive clause introduced by relinquitur
[5] Quod…iustificationem: a quod substantive clause
[6] Quod…institutos: a quod substantive clause
[7] Institutos: a perfect passive participle modifying cultus
[8] Sentiendum est: a passive periphrastic: What, therefore, must be thought
[9] Quod…ordinations: a quod substantive clause
[10] Ut…conscientiae: four purpose clauses
[11] Ut…iudicent and sentiant: an indirect command
[12] Esse…cultus: an indirect command
[13] Se peccare: an indirect command
[14] Ut…etc.: indirect commands
[15] Convenit: It is appropriate; this introduces an indirect statement where ecclesias is the accusative subject and servare is the infinitive main verb
[16] Ne…offendat: a negative purpose clause
[17] Ut…ecclesiis: a purpose clause
[18] Ne… onerentur: a result clause
[19] Ut…iudicent: two purpose clauses
[20] Se peccare: an indirect statement
[21] Peccare mulierem: an indirect statement
[22] Velato: a perfect passive participle modifying capite
Therefore, it remains that when orders, instituted as necessary or with the belief of meriting grace, are in conflict with the gospel, no bishops are allowed to institute or value such worship. For it is necessary in the churches to retain the doctrine of Christian liberty that the slavery of the law is not necessary for justification as in Galatians 5, 1 it is written: Do not be placed under a yoke of slavery again. It is necessary to retain the special place of the gospel: that we acquire grace freely through faith in Christ, not on account of observances or on account of worship instituted by men.
Therefore, what must be thought about the Lord’s days and similar rites of the church? To these they respond that bishops or pastors are allowed to make orders in order to maintain order in the church not so that we merit grace through them or we make satisfaction for sins or so consciences are bound to declare publicly that they are necessary worship and think that they sin when they violate them without offense to others. In 1 Corinthians 11, 5. 6 Paul orders that in the church women cover their heads, and in 1 Corinthians 14, 30 he orders that interpreters are listened to in an orderly manner in the church, etc.
It is appropriate that the churches preserve such customs on account of charity and tranquility so far lest anyone offend another so that everything happens in the churches in an ordered manner without confusion as it is written in 1 Corinthians 14, 40 and Philippians 2, 14. But in such a way that consciences are not burdened so that they think that things are necessary for salvation and judge that they sin, when they violate them without offense to others; thus no one has said that women sin, who proceed into public with an uncovered head without offense to people.
Check out my newest book: The Augsburg Confession: A Latin Reader
Translating the Augsburg Confession Part LXI (Article VII.vi)
Posted: November 28, 2022 Filed under: Augsburg Confession, Latin Translation | Tags: Augsburg Confession, Latin, Lutheranism, Translation Leave a commentVII. De Potestate Ecclesiastica. (vi.)
Unde habent ius episcopi has traditiones imponendi[1] ecclesiis ad illaqueandas[2] conscientias, quum Petrus vetet Act. 15, 10 imponere[3] iugum discipulis, quum Paulus dicat 2 Cor. 13, 10, potestatem[4] ipsis datam esse ad aedificationem, non ad destructionem. Cur igitur augent peccata per has traditiones?
Verum exstant clara testimonia, quae prohibent condere[5] tales traditiones ad promerendam[6] gratiam, aut tamquam necessarias ad salutem. Paulus Col. 2, 16.20: Nemo vos iudicet[7] in cibo, potu, parte diei festi, novilunio aut sabbatis. Item: Si mortui estis cum Christo ab elementis mundi, quare tamquam viventes[8] in mundo decreta facitis: Non attingas, non gustes, non contrectes? Quae omnia pereunt usu et sunt mandata et doctrinae hominum, quae habent speciem sapientiae. Item ad Titum 1, 14, aperte prohibet traditiones: Non attendentes[9] Iudaicis fabulis et mandatis hominum, aversantium[10] veritatem.
Et Christus Matth. 15, 14.13 inquit de his, qui exigunt traditiones: Sinite illos; caeci sunt et duces
caecorum; et improbat tales cultus: Omnis plantatio, quam non plantavit Pater meus coelestis, eradicabitur. Si ius habent episcopi, onerandi[11] ecclesias infinitis traditionibus et illaqueandi conscientias, cur toties prohibet Scriptura condere et audire traditiones? Cur vocat eas doctrinas daemoniorum, 1 Tim. 4, 1? Num frustra haec praemonuit Spiritus Sanctus?
[1] Imponendi: a gerund
[2] Illaquendas: the gerundive with ad to indicate purpose
[3] Imponere: best taken in a progressive sense: imposing
[4] Potestatem…destructionem: an indirect statement
[5] Condere: best taken in a progressive sense: establishing
[6] Promerendam: a gerundive with ad to indicate purpose
[7] Iudicet: the iussive subjunctive: let no one judge
[8] Viventes: a present active participle modifying the implied subject of facitis
[9] Attendentes: a present active participle
[10] Aversantium: a present active participle modifying hominum
[11] Onerandi and illaqueandi: a gerunds
Whence do the bishops have this right of imposing these traditions in churches in order to entrap consciences. when in Acts 15, 10 Peter forbids imposing a yoke on the disciples and in 2 Corinthians 13, 10 Paul says that power has been given to them for building not for destruction. Why, therefore, do they increase sins through these traditions.
Truly clear testimonies, which prohibit establishing such traditions in order to merit grace or as necessary for salvation, are on the record. In 2 Corinthians 2, 16:20 Paul says Let no one judge you in food, drink, part of a holy day, a new moon, or Sabbaths. Also: If you are dead with Christ from the elements of the world, why are you following commandments in the world as if you are living: do not touch, do not taste, do not handle? All of those things, which are perishing and are commands and doctrines of men, have an appearance of wisdom. Likewise in Titus 1, 14 he openly forbids traditions: Not attending Jewish stories and the commands of men who have turned from the truth.
And Christ in Matthew 15, 14: 13 says about those who value traditions: Allow them: they are the blind leaders of the blind; and he disapproves of such worship: Every plant, which my heavenly Father did not plant, will be rooted out. If the bishops have this right of burdening the churches with endless traditions and ensnaring consciences, why does so much of the Scripture prohibit founding and hearing traditions? Why does it call these doctrines of demons in 1 Timothy 4, 1? Surely the Holy Spirit does not warn about these things in vain?
Check out my newest book: The Augsburg Confession: A Latin Reader
Translating the Augsburg Confession Part LX (Article VII.v)
Posted: November 27, 2022 Filed under: Augsburg Confession, Latin Translation | Tags: Augsburg Confession, Latin, Lutheranism, Translation Leave a commentVII. De Potestate Ecclesiastica. (v.)
Constat autem, propter hanc persuasionem in ecclesia paene in infinitum crevisse traditiones, oppressa interim doctrina de fide et iustitia fidei, quia subinde plures feriae factae sunt, ieiunia indicta, ceremoniae novae, novi honores sanctorum instituti sunt, quia arbitrabantur se auctores talium rerum his operibus mereri gratiam. Sic olim creverunt canones poenitentiales, quorum adhuc in satisfactionibus vestigia quaedam videmus.
Item auctores traditionum faciunt contra mandatum Dei, quum collocant peccatum in cibis, in diebus et similibus rebus, et onerant ecclesiam servitute legis, quasi oporteat apud Christianos ad promerendam iustificationem cultum esse similem Levitico, cuius ordinationem commiserit Deus apostolis et episcopis.
Sic enim scribunt quidam, et videntur pontifices aliqua ex parte exemplo legis Mosaicae decepti esse. Hinc sunt illa onera, quod peccatum mortale sit etiam sine offensione aliorum in feriis laborare manibus, quod sit peccatum mortale emittere horas canonicas, quod certi cibi polluant conscientiam, quod ieiunia sint opera placantia Deum, quod peccatum in casu reservato non possit remitti, nisi accesserit auctoritas reservantis; quum quidem ipsi canones non de reservatione culpae, sed de reservatione poenae ecclesiasticae loquantur.
It is agreed, moreover, that this argument in the church has grown traditions nearly endlessly endlessly, and at the same time the doctrine of faith and the righteousness of faith has been suppressed because constantly many holy days are made, fasts are appointed, and new ceremonies and honors to the saints have been instituted because they have decided that the authors of such things merit grace with these works. For at one time the penitential canons, certain traces of which we see still in the satisfactions. grew thusly.
Likewise the authors of tradition act contrary to the command of God when they locate sin in foods, in days and in similar things and when they burden the church with a slavery of laws as if it is fitting among Christians that worship in order to merit justification is similar to Leviticus whose ordination God entrusted to the apostles and bishops.
For certain people write thusly, and the popes are seen in some places to have been misled by the example of the law of Moses. From here are those burdens: that it is a mortal sin, even without an offense to others, to work with your hands on holy days, that it is a mortal sin to let go the canonical hours, that certain foods pollute the conscience, that fasts are works which please God, that a sin in a reserved case cannot be forgiven unless the authority of the retainer is added; although certain canons themselves do not speak about the retention of fault but about retaining the ecclesiastical punishment.
Check out my newest book: The Augsburg Confession: A Latin Reader
Translating the Augsburg Confession Part LIX (Article VII.iv)
Posted: November 26, 2022 Filed under: Augsburg Confession, Latin Translation | Tags: Augsburg Confession, Latin, Lutheranism, Translation Leave a commentVII. De Potestate Ecclesiastica. (iv.)
Si quam[1] habent aliam vel potestatem vel iurisdictionem in cognoscendis[2] certis causis, videlicet matrimonii aut decimarum etc., hanc[3] habent humano iure: ubi[4] cessantibus ordinariis coguntur principes vel inviti suis subditis[5] ius dicere, ut[6] pax retineatur.
Praeter haec disputatur, utrum episcopi seu pastores habeant ius instituendi[7] ceremonias in ecclesia et leges de cibis, feriis, gradibus ministrorum seu ordinibus etc. condendi.[8] Hoc ius, qui tribuunt episcopis, allegant testimonium Ioh. 16, 12: Adhuc multa habeo vobis dicere, sed non potestis portare modo. Quum autem venerit ille Spiritus veritatis, docebit vos omnem veritatem. Allegant etiam exemplum apostolorum Act. 15, 20, qui prohibuerunt[9] abstinere a sanguine et suffocato. Allegant sabbatum, mutatum[10] in diem dominicum contra Decalogum, ut videtur. Nec ullum exemplum magis iactatur quam mutatio sabbati. Magnam contendunt
ecclesiae[11] potestatem esse, quod[12] dispensaverit de praecepta Decalogi.
Sed de hac quaestione nostri sic docent, quod[13] episcopi non habent potestatem statuendi[14] aliquid contra evangelium, ut supra ostensum est. Docent idem canones 9. distinct. Porro contra Scripturam est[15] traditiones condere aut exigere, ut[16] per eam observationem satisfaciamus pro peccatis, aut mereamur gratiam et iustitiam. Laeditur enim gloria meriti Christi, quum talibus observationibus conamur mereri iustificationem.
[1] Si quam: Si [ali]quam
[2] Cognoscendis certis causis: a gerundive
[3] Hanc: potestatem vel iurisdictionem
[4] Ubi cessantibus ordinariis: an ablative absolute where cessantibus is the main verb and ordinariis, a substantive adjective which functions as the subject; with ubi clause should be translated temporally
[5] Subditis: a perfect passive participle used substantively: their subjects
[6] Ut…retineatur: a purpose clause
[7] Instuendi: a gerund which takes ceremonias as its direct object
[8] Condendi: a gerund which takes leges as its direct object; condendi depends upon ius as the previous gerund did
[9] Prohibuerunt: takes an implied others as its direct object
[10] Mutatum: a perfect passive participle modifying Sabbatum
[11] Ecclesiae…esse: an indirect statement
[12] Quod…Decalogi: a quod substantive clause
[13] Quod….evangelium: a quod substantive caluse
[14] Statuendi: a gerund which takes aliquid as its direct object
[15] Est: an impersonal verb: Again it is contrary to the Scripture to
[16] Ut…iustitiam: a purpose clause
If they have any other power or jurisdiction in examining certain cases, such as, of marriage and of tithes etc., they have this by human law; when the ordinary people are idle in these things, princes are compelled, even unwillingly, to declare the law to those under them in order to retain the peace.
Besides this is disputed: whether bishops or pastors have the right of instituting ceremonies in the church and establishing laws about food, holy days, positions of the ministry or orders, etc. This right, which they bestow on bishops, they allege in the testimony of John 16, 12: I have many things to say to you stil, but you are not able to bear them just now. However, when the Spirit of truth comes, he will teach you all the truth. They allege also the example of the Apostles in Acts 15, 20 who demand abstaining from blood and strangled animals. They allege that the Sabbath was changed into the day of the Lord contrary, as it seems, to the Decalogue. And no example is boasted more than the alteration of the Sabbath. They argue that it is a great power of the church that it dispensed with a command of the Decalogue.
But our teachers teach thus concerning this question: that bishops do not have the power of establishing something contrary to the Gospel as it was shown above. In Distinction 9 the Canons teach the same thing. Again it is against the Scripture to found traditions or value them so that we make satisfaction for sins through that observation or we merit grace and righteousness. For the glory of the merit of Christ is harmed when we try to merit justification with such rites.
Check out my newest book: The Augsburg Confession: A Latin Reader
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BKMY96T9/ref=cm_sw_r_apa_i_M32F7T4C4AHR5X2R5CFR_0
Translating the Augsburg Confession Part LVIII (Article VIII.iii)
Posted: November 25, 2022 Filed under: Augsburg Confession, Latin Translation | Tags: Augsburg Confession, Latin, Lutheranism, Translation Leave a commentVII. De Potestate Ecclesiastica. (iii.)
Ad hunc modum[1] discernunt nostri utriusque potestatis officia, et iubent[2] utramque honore afficere et agnoscere, utramque[3] Dei donum et beneficium esse. Si quam[4] habent episcopi potestatem gladii, hanc non habent episcopi ex mandato evangelii, sed iure humano, donatam[5] a regibus et imperatoribus ad administrationem civilem suorum bonorum. Haec interim alia functio est quam[6] ministerium evangelii.
Quum igitur de iurisdictione episcoporum quaeritur,[7] discerni debet imperium ab ecclesiastica
iurisdictione. Porro secundum evangelium seu, ut loquuntur, de iure divino nulla iurisdictio competit episcopis ut episcopis, hoc est,[8] his,[9] quibus est commissum ministerium Verbi et sacramentorum, nisi remittere peccata, item cognoscere doctrinam et doctrinam ab evangelio dissentientem[10] reiicere et impios, quorum nota est impietas, excludere a communione ecclesiae sine vi humana, sed Verbo. Hic necessario et de iure divino debent eis[11] ecclesiae praestare obedientiam, iuxta illud Luc. 10, 16: Qui vos audit, me audit. Verum quum aliquid contra evangelium docent aut statuunt, tunc habent ecclesiae mandatum Dei, quod obedientiam prohibet, Matth. 7, 15: Cavete a pseudoprophetis! Gal. 1, 8: Si angelus de coelo aliud evangelium evangelizaverit, anathema sit![12] 2 Cor. 13, 8: Non possumus[13] aliquid contra veritatem, sed pro veritate. Item: Data est nobis potestas ad aedificationem, non ad destructionem. Sic et canones praecipiunt, 2, q. 7, cap. Sacerdotes, et cap. Oves. Et Augustinus contra Petiliani epistolam inquit: Nec catholicis episcopis consentiendum est,[14] sicubi forte falluntur, aut contra canonicas Dei Scripturas aliquid sentiunt.
[1] Ad…modum: In this way
[2] Iubent: understand iubent as taking an implied others as a direct object
[3] Utramque…esse: an indirect statement
[4] Si quam: Si [ali]quam: If the bishops have any power of the sword
[5] Donatam: a perfect passive participle modifying hanc
[6] Haec…quam: This meanwhile is a function other than
[7] Quaeritur: there is an inquiry
[8] Hoc est: that is
[9] His: apposition to episcopis
[10] Dissentientem: a present active participle modifying doctrinam
[11] Eis: episcopis
[12] Sit: the iussive subjunctive: let him be anathema
[13] Non possumus: Non possumus [facere]
[14] Consentiendum est: the passive periphrastic: there must not be agreement
In this way our teachers distinguish the duties of each power, and they order others to impress each with honor and to recognize that each is a gift and kindness of God. If the bishops have any power of the sword, they do not have this from the command of the gospel but from human human law: it has been given by kings and emperors for the public administration of their goods. Meanwhile these other things are a function other than the ministry of the gospel.
When, therefore, there is an inquiry about the jurisdiction of bishops, the empire must be distinguished from the church. Again according to the gospel, or as they say, according to the divine law, no jurisdiction entrusts to bishops, as bishops–that is those, to whom the ministry of the Word and sacraments is entrusted, except to forgive sins, also to examine doctrine and reject doctrine which dissents from the Gospel and to exclude the impious, whose impiety is well-known, from the communion of the church without human might but with the Word. And here the churches necessarily ought to provide obedience to them according to the divine law. Concerning that Luke 10, 16 says, He who hears you, hears me. But when they teach or establish something contrary to the gospel, then the churches have the command of God, which prohibits obedience. In Matthew 7, 15, it says Beware the false prophets. And in Galatians 1, 8: If an angel from heaven declares another gospel, let him be accursed. And in 2 Corinthians 13, 8 We are not capable of anything against the truth but for the truth. Likewise, Power has been given to us for building not destroying. And the canons teach thus in II. Quaest. 7, Cap. Sacerdotes and Cap. Oves. Augustine also declares against Petilian’s epistle: There must not be agreement with the catholic bishops if anywhere by chance they are mistaken or they think something contrary to the canonical writings of God.
Check out my newest book: The Augsburg Confession: A Latin Reader
Translating the Augsburg Confession Part LVII (Article VII.ii)
Posted: November 24, 2022 Filed under: Augsburg Confession, Latin Translation | Tags: Augsburg Confession, Latin, Lutheranism, Translation Leave a commentVII. De Potestate Ecclesiastica. (ii.)
Haec potestas tantum exercetur docendo[1] seu praedicando Verbum et porrigendo sacramenta vel[2] multis, vel singulis iuxta vocationem, quia conceduntur non res corporales, sed res aeternae, iustitia aeterna, Spiritus Sanctus, vita aeterna. Haec non possunt contingere nisi per ministerium Verbi et sacramentorum, sicut Paulus dicit Rom. 1, 16: Evangelium est potentia Dei ad salutem omni credenti.[3] Itaque quum potestas ecclesiastica concedat res aeternas et tantum exerceatur per ministerium Verbi, non impedit politicam administrationem, sicut ars canendi[4] nihil impedit politicam administrationem. Nam politica administratio versatur circa[5] alias res quam evangelium. Magistratus defendit non mentes, sed corpora et res corporales adversus manifestas iniurias, et coercet homines gladio[6] et corporalibus poenis, ut[7] iustitiam civilem et pacem retineat.
Non igitur commiscendae sunt[8] potestates ecclesiastica et civilis. Ecclesiastica[9] suum mandatum habet evangelii docendi[10] et administrandi[11] sacramenta. Non irrumpat[12] in alienum officium, non transferat regna mundi, non abroget leges magistratuum, non tollat legitimam obedientiam, non impediat iudicia de ullis civilibus ordinationibus aut contractibus, non praescribat leges magistratibus de forma reipublicae; sicut dicit Christus Ioh. 18, 36: Regnum meum non est de hoc mundo. Item Luc. 12, 14: Quis constituit me iudicem aut divisorem super vos? Et Paulus ait Phil. 3, 2: Nostra politia in coelis est. 2 Cor. 10, 4: Arma militiae nostrae non sunt carnalia, sed potentia Deo ad destruendas cogitationes etc.
[1] Docendo, praedicando, porrigendo: gerunds in the ablative
[2] Ve…vel: either…or
[3] Credenti: a present active participle
[4] Canendi: a gerund in the genitive
[5] Versatur circa: concerns
[6] Gladio…poenis: an ablative of means
[7] Ut…retineat: a purpose clause
[8] Commiscendae sunt: a passive periphrastic
[9] Ecclesiastic: Ecclesiastica potestas
[10] Evangelii docendi: a gerundive
[11] Administrandi: a gerund
[12] Irrumpat, transferat, abroget, tollat, impediat, praescribat: these uses of the subjunctive should be translated with should
This power is exercised only in teaching or proclaiming the Word and offering the sacraments either to many or to individuals according to their call because not bodily things but eternal things, eternal righteousness, the Holy Spirit, and eternal life are offered. These things are not able to be granted except through the ministry of the word and the sacraments as Paul says in Romans 1, 16: The gospel is the power of God for salvation to every believer. And so when ecclesiastical power grants only eternal things and only is exercised through the ministry of the Word and sacraments, it does not impede political administration just as the art of singing does not hinder political administration. For political administration concerns other matters than the gospel. A magistrate defends not minds but bodies or bodily things against manifest injuries, and he restrains men with the sword and bodily punishments so that he maintains civil righteousness and peace.
Therefore, ecclesiastical and civil power must not be intermingled. Ecclesiastical power has the task of teaching the gospel and administering the sacraments. It should not intrude on another office; it should not transfer the kingdoms of the world; it should not abolish the laws of magistrates; it should not destroy legitimate obedience; it should not impede judgments about any civil orders or contracts; it should not prescribe laws to magistrates about the structure of the state; just as in John 18, 36 Christ says: My kingdom is not from this world. Likewise in Luke 12, 14: Who decided that I was a judge or divider over you all? And Paul says in Philippians 3, 2: Our government is from heaven. And in 2 Corinthians 10, 4: Our weapons are not carnal, but the power from God to destroy arguments etc.
Check out my newest book: The Augsburg Confession: A Latin Reader
lexsemperaccusat 