Translating the Apology of the Augsburg Confession: Art. IV De Iustificatione (xiv)
Posted: September 25, 2023 Filed under: Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Book of Concord, Justification, Latin Translation, Lutheranism, Melancthon | Tags: Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Book of Concord, Justification, Latin, Lutheranism, Melancthon, Translation Leave a commentQuum autem de tali fide loquamur, quae non est otiosa cogitatio, sed quae a morte liberat, et novam vitam in cordibus parit et est opus Spiritus Sancti: non stat cum peccato mortali, sed tantisper, dum adest, bonos fructus parit, ut postea dicemus. Quid potest dici de conversione impii seu de modo regenerationis simplicius et clarius? Proferant unum commentarium in Sententias [Petri Lombardi] ex tanto scriptorum agmine, qui de modo regenerationis dixerit. Quum loquuntur de habitu dilectionis, fingunt[1] eum homines per opera mereri, non docent[2] per Verbum accipi, sicut et hoc tempore Anabaptistae docent. At cum Deo non potest[3] agi, Deus non potest apprehendi nisi per Verbum. Ideo iustificatio fit per Verbum, sicut Paulus inquit Rom. 1, 16: Evangelium est potentia Dei ad salutem omni credenti.[4] Item 10, 17: Fides est ex auditu. Et vel hinc argumentum sumi potest, quod[5] fides iustificet, quia, si tantum fit iustificatio per Verbum et Verbum tantum fide apprehenditur, sequitur, quod[6] fides iustificet. Sed sunt aliae maiores rationes. Haec diximus hactenus, ut[7] modum regenerationis ostenderemus, et ut intelligi posset, qualis[8] sit fides, de qua loquimur.
Nunc ostendemus, quod[9] fides iustificet. Ubi primum hoc monendi sunt lectores, quod[10], sicut necesse est hanc sententiam tueri, quod Christus sit mediator, ita necesse sit defendere, quod fides iustificet. Quomodo enim erit Christus mediator, si in iustificatione non utimur eo mediatore,[11] si non sentimus, quod propter ipsum iusti reputemur? Id autem est credere, confidere meritis Christi, quod[12] propter ipsum certo velit nobis Deus placatus esse. Item sicut oportet defendere, quod[13] praeter legem necessaria sit promissio Christi, ita necesse est defendere, quod[14] fides iustificet. Lex enim non potest fieri, nisi prius accepto[15] Spiritu Sancto. Necesse est igitur defendere, quod[16] promissio Christi necessaria sit. At haec non potest accipi nisi fide. Itaque qui negant[17] fidem iustificare, nihil nisi legem abolito evangelio et abolito Christo[18] docent.
[1] Introduces an indirect statement where homines is the accusative subject
[2] Introduces an indirect statement where an implied eum is the accusative subject
[3] An impersonal construction: it cannot be done
[4] A present active participle used substantially: who believe
[5] A quod substantive clause
[6] A quod substantive clause
[7] This ut and the following introduce purpose clauses
[8] Introduces an indirect question
[9] A quod substantive clause
[10] This quod and the following ones are quod substantive clauses
[11] Apposition to the personal pronoun eo
[12] A quod substantive clause
[13] A quod substantive clause
[14] A quod substantive clause
[15] A perfect passive participle
[16] A quod substantive clause
[17] Introduces an indirect statement
[18] Ablative absolutes which are best construed casually: because the Gospel and Christ have been abolished.
| Vocabulary | |
| Agmen, agminis, n.- crowd, troop; herd | Scriptor, scriptoris, m.- writer |
| Auditus, us, m.- hearing; hearsay | Stō, āre, stetī, status- to stand |
| Clarus, a, um- clear | Tantisper (adv.)- for such time (as); for so long (as); meantime |
| Commentarium, i, n.- commentary, treatis | Tueor, eri, tutus sum- to see, ook at; protect, watch; uphold |
| Profero, proferre, protuli, prolatus- to bring forward, advance; defer | Vel (adv.)- even, actually |
| Salus, salutis, f.- salvation | |
When, however, we speak about such faith which is not idle reflection but which frees from death and produces new life in hearts and is the work of the Holy Spirit: it does not stand with mortal sin, but in the meantime, white it exists, it produces good fruits as afterwards we will speak. What can be said more simply and clearly about the conversion of the impious or about the manner of regeneration? Let them bring forward one commentary in the Sentences from such a crowd of writers which spoke in this manner about regeneration. When they speak about the habit of love, they imagine that men merit it through works, they do not teach that it is received through the Word just as the Anabaptists at this time teach. But with God it cannot be done, God is not able to be grasped except through the Word. In this way justification happens through the Word just as Paul says in Romans 1:16: “The Gospel is the power of God for the salvation for all who believe. Likewise in Romans 10:17, “Faith is from hearing.” And here even the argument is able to be taken up that faith justifies because, if justification occurs through the Word and the Word only is grasped through faith, it follows that faith justifies. But there are other greater reasons. Hitherto, we have said these things so that we would show the manner of regeneration and so that it could be known of what sort is this faith about which we are speaking.
Now we will show that faith justifies. When at first our readers must be warned about this: that just as it is necessary to protect this teaching, that Christ is our mediator, it is so necessary to defend this, that faith justifies. For how will Christ be our mediator if in justification we do not use him as our mediator and if we do not think that on account of him we are considered just. However, to believe this is to trust the merits of Christ that on account of him God certainly wants to be pacified to be placed with us. Likewise it is fitting to defend that besides the law the promise of Christ is necessary, thus it is necessary to defend that faith justifies. For the law is not able to be done except the Holy Spirit has first been accepted. Therefore, it is necessary to defend that the promise of Christ is necessary. And this cannot be accepted except by faith. And so those, who deny that faith does justify, teach nothing except the law because the gospel and Christ have been abolished.
CAVE EMPTOR, SELF PROMOTION: Check out my author page: https://www.amazon.com/stores/author/B09F3PXYJY
Translating the Apology of the Augsburg Confession: Art. IV De Iustificatione (xiii)
Posted: September 24, 2023 Filed under: Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Book of Concord, Justification, Latin Translation, Lutheranism, Melancthon | Tags: Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Book of Concord, Justification, Latin, Lutheranism, Melancthon, Translation Leave a commentIta vult innotescere Deus, ita vult se coli, ut[1] ab ipso accipiamus beneficia, et quidem accipiamus propter ipsius misericordiam, non propter merita nostra. Haec est amplissima consolatio in omnibus afflictionibus. Et huiusmodi consolations abolent adversarii, quum fidem extenuant et vituperant, et tantum docent[2] homines per opera et merita cum Deo agere.
Quod[3] Fides in Christum Iustificet.
Primum, ne[4] quis putet[5] nos de otiosa notitia historiae loqui, dicendum est,[6] quomodo[7] contingat fides. Postea ostendemus, et quod[8] iustificet et quomodo[9] hoc intelligi debeat, et diluemus ea, quae adversarii obiiciunt. Christus Lucae ultimo[10], 24, 47, iubet praedicare poenitentiam in nomine suo et remissionem peccatorum. Evangelium enim arguit omnes homines, quod[11] sint sub peccato, quod omnes sint rei aeternae irae ac mortis, et offert propter Christum remissionem peccatorum et iustificationem, quae fide accipitur. Praedicatio poenitentiae, quae arguit nos, perterrefacit conscientias veris et seriis terroribus. In his corda rursus debent concipere consolationem. Id fit, si credant promissioni Christi, quod[12] propter ipsum habeamus remissionem peccatorum. Haec fides in illis pavoribus erigens et consolans[13] accipit remissionem peccatorum, iustificat et vivificat. Nam illa consolatio est nova et spiritualis 63] vita. Haec[14] plana et perspicua sunt, et a piis intelligi possunt, et habent ecclesiae testimonia. Adversarii nusquam possunt dicere, quomodo[15] detur Spiritus Sanctus.
Fingunt[16] sacramenta conferre Spiritum Sanctum ex opere operato[17] sine bono motu accipientis,[18] quasi vero otiose res sit donatio Spiritus Sancti.
[1] Introduces a result clause
[2] Introduces an indirect statement
[3] A quod substantive clause
[4] Introduces a negative purpose clause
[5] Introduces an indirect statement
[6] The passive periphrastic: it must be said
[7] Introduces an indirect question
[8] A quod substantive clause
[9] Introduces an indirect question
[10] An ablative of location: in the last chapter
[11] This quod and the following are quod substantive clauses
[12] A quod substantive clause
[13] Present active participles
[14] A neuter substantive use of the adjective: these things
[15] Introduces an indirect question
[16] Introduces an indirect statement
[17] A perfect passive participle
[18] A present active participle used substantially: the recipient
| Vocabulary | |
| Agō, ere, ēgī, actus- to urge; do, act, make; express | Otiose (adv.)- idly |
| Arguō, ere, arguī, argutus- to convict | Pavor, pavoris, m.- fear, panic |
| Concipio, ere, concēpī, conceptus- to conceive, form; take up, receive | Perspicuus, a, um- clear, |
| Consolo, are, avi, atus- to console | Planus, a, um- plain, obvious, evident |
| Donatio, donationis, f.- gift, donation | Praedicatio, praedicationis, f.- proclamation; announcement |
| Innotesco, ere, innotui- to become known, be made conspicuous | Serius, a, um- serious, grave |
| Nusquam (adv.)- nowhere; on no occasion | Ultimus, a, um- last |
| Opero, are, operavi, operatus- to work | Vivifico, are, avi, atus- to restore to life, quicken |
God wants to be known in such a way; he wants himself to be worshiped in such a way that we receive benefits from him and indeed we receive them on account of his mercy not on account of our merits. This is the most important consolation in all afflictions. And the adversaries destroy consolations of this sort when they diminish and find fault with faith, and they only teach that men relate with God through works and merits.
That Faith in Christ Justifies
First, so that no one thinks that we are speaking about an idle knowledge of history, it must be said how faith is granted. Afterwards, we will show both that it justifies and how this ought to be known, and we will refute those thing which the adversaries object. Christ, in the final chapter of Luke 24:47, orders us to proclaim repentance in his name and the forgiveness of sins. For the Gospel convicts all men that they are under sin, that everyone is liable to eternal wrath and death, and it offers on account of Christ the forgiveness of sins and justification which is accepted by faith. The proclamation of repentance, which convicts us, terrifies consciences with true and serious terrors. In this hearts again ought to receive consolation. That is, if they believe the promise of Christ that on account of Him we have the forgiveness of sins. This faith, as it raises us in our terrors and consoles us, also receives the forgiveness of sins, justifies and restores life. For that consolation is a new and spiritual life. These things are plane and clear, and they are able to be understood by the pious, and they have the testimonies of the church. Nowhere are the adversaries able to say how the Holy Spirit is given.
They pretend that the sacraments confer the Holy Spirit through a work, which has been done without a good intention of the recipient, as if the gift of the Holy Spirit is an idle matter.
CAVE, SELF PROMOTION: Check out my author page: https://www.amazon.com/stores/author/B09F3PXYJY
Translating the Apology of the Augsburg Confession: Art. IV De Iustificatione (xii)
Posted: September 23, 2023 Filed under: Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Book of Concord, Justification, Latin Translation, Lutheranism, Melancthon | Tags: Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Book of Concord, Justification, Latin, Lutheranism, Melancthon, Translation Leave a commentQuoties igitur de fide iustificante loquimur, sciendum est[1] haec tria obiecta concurrere: promissionem, et quidem gratuitam, et merita Christi tamquam pretium et propitiationem. Promissio accipitur fide; gratuitum[2] excludit nostra merita et significat[3] tantum per misericordiam offerri beneficium; Christi merita sunt pretium, quia oportet[4] esse aliquam certam propitiationem pro peccatis nostris. Scriptura crebro misericordiam implorat. Et sancti patres saepe dicunt[5] nos per misericordiam salvari. Quoties igitur fit mentio misericordiae, sciendum est, quod[6] fides ibi requiratur, quae promissionem misericordiae accipit. Et rursus, quoties nos de fide loquimur, intelligi volumus obiectum, scilicet misericordiam promissam. Nam fides non ideo iustificat aut salvat, quia ipsa sit opus per sese dignum, sed tantum, quia accipit misericordiam promissam.[7]
Et hic cultus, haec λατρειία, in prophetis et psalmis passim praecipue laudatur, quum tamen lex non doceat gratuitam remissionem peccatorum. Sed patres norant[8] promissionem de Christo, quod[9] Deus propter Christum vellet remittere peccata. Igitur quum intelligerent[10] Christum fore[11] pretium pro nostris peccatis, sciebant[12] opera nostra non esse pretium rei tantae. Ideo gratuitam misericordiam et remissionem peccatorum fide accipiebant, sicut sancti in novo testamento.
Huc pertinent illae crebrae repetitiones misericordiae et fidei in psalmis et prophetis ut hic, Ps. 130, 3 sq.: Si iniquitates observaveris, Domine, Domine, quis sustinebit? Hic[13] confitetur peccata, nec allegat merita sua. Addit: Quia apud te propitiatio est. Hic erigit se fiducia misericordiae Dei. Et citat promissionem: Sustinuit anima mea in verbo eius, speravit anima mea in Domino, id est, quia promisisti remissionem peccatorum, hac tua promissione sustentor. Itaque et patres iustificabantur, non per legem, sed per promissionem et fidem. Ac mirum est[14] adversarios adeo extenuare fidem, quum videant ubique pro praecipuo cultu laudari, ut Ps. 50, 15: Invoca[15] me in die tribulationis et eripiam te.
[1] A passive periphrastic which introduces an indirect statement: it must be known that…
[2] A substantive use of the adjective: a free thing
[3] Introduces an indirect statement
[4] Introduces an indirect statement
[5] Introduces an indirect statement
[6] A quod substantive clause
[7] A perfect passive participle
[8] A syncopated form of noverant
[9] A quod substantive clause
[10] Introduces an indirect statement
[11] Futurum esse
[12] Introduces an indirect statement
[13] This man
[14] An impersonal construction which introduces an indirect statement
[15] A positive imperative
| Vocabulary | |
| Allego, are, avi, allegatus- to allege; commission; admit | Pretium, i, n.- price, worth; reward |
| Concurro, ere, concucurri, concursus- to assemble; agree; make a claim | Propitiatio, propitiationis, f.- atonement, propitation |
| Creber, crebra, um- thick, crowded; frequently, repeated, constant | Psalmus, ī, m.- psalm |
| Crebro (adv.)- frequently, repeatedly | Quoties (adv.)- how often; as often as |
| Dies, ei, m.- day | Repetitio, repetitionis, f.- repetition |
| Dominus, i, m.- lord | Rursus (adv.)- in turn; on the contrary; again |
| Excludo, ere, exclusi, exclusus- to exclude | Salvo, are, avi, atus- to save |
| Implorō, āre, āvī, ātus-to ask for, beg; invoke | Sustento, are, avi, atus- to endure, hold out |
| Invocō, āre, āvī, ātus- to call upon, invoke | Tamquam (conj,)- as if, just as if |
| Obiectum, i, n.- object; accusation, charge | Testamentum, ī, n.- testament, will, covenant |
| Observō, āre, āvī, ātus- to observe, heed | Tribulatio, tribulationis, f.- distress, tribulation |
| Praecipue (adv.)- particularly, chiefly | Ubique (adv.)- everywhere |
As often as we spoke about justifying faith, it must be known that there are these three objections concur: a promise and indeed free, and the merit of Christ as if a price and atonement. The promise is received by faith; a free thing excludes sour merits and signifies that only through mercy is the benefit offered; the merits of Christ are the reward because it is fitting that there is some other propitiation for sins. Scripture repeatedly invokes mercy. And the holy fathers often say that they are saved through mercy. As often as a mention of mercy happens, it must be known that there faith, which accepts the promise of mercy, is required. And again, as often as we speak about faith, we want its object to be be known: such as the promise of mercy. For such faith does not justify or save because the faith itself is necessary through its own worth but only because it accepts the promised mercy.
And this worship, this latreiia, is especially praised everywhere in the prophets and Psalms since the law, nevertheless, does not teach the free forgiveness of sins. But the fathers knew the promise of Christ that God on account of Christ wants to forgive sins. Therefore, when they understood that Christ would be the price for our sins, they knew that our works for not the price of such a thing. They received such free mercy and forgiveness of sins by faith just as the saints in the New Testament.
Here those repetitions of mercy and faith in the Psalms and prophets pertain as here in Psalms 130:3 and following, “If you observe iniquity, Lord, Lord, who will stand? This man confesses sins and does not admit his merits. He adds: “Because with there is atonement.” This man raises himself with trust in the mercy of God. And he cites the promise: “My spirit sustains itself in His word, my spirit hopes in the Lord” that is because you promised the forgiveness of sins, with this your promise I am sustained. And so the fathers were justified, not through the law but through the promise and faith. And it is a marvel that adversaries so diminish faith although they see that everywhere it is praised for particular worship as Psalm 50:15 says, “Call on me in the day of tribulation, and I will rescue you.”
CAVE EMPTOR, SELF PROMOTION: Check out my author page: https://www.amazon.com/stores/author/B09F3PXYJY
Translating the Apology of the Augsburg Confession: Art. IV De Iustificatione (xi)
Posted: September 22, 2023 Filed under: Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Book of Concord, Justification, Latin Translation, Lutheranism, Melancthon | Tags: Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Book of Concord, Justification, Latin, Lutheranism, Melancthon, Translation Leave a commentQuid Sit Fides Iustificans.
Adversarii tantum fingunt fidem esse notitiam historiae, ideoque docent eam cum peccato mortali posse existere. Nihil igitur loquuntur de fide, qua Paulus toties dicit homines iustificari, quia, qui reputantur iusti coram Deo, non versantur in peccato mortali. Sed illa fides, quae iustificat, non est[1] tantum notitia historiae, sed est assentiri promissioni Dei, in qua gratis propter Christum offertur remissio peccatorum et iustificatio. Et ne quis[2] suspicetur tantum notitiam esse, addemus amplius: est velle et accipere oblatam[3] promissionem remissionis peccatorum et iustificationis.
Ac facile potest cerni discrimen inter hanc fidem et inter iustitiam legis. Fides est λατρειία,[4] quae accipit a Deo oblata[5] beneficia; iustitia legis est λατρειία, quae offert Deo nostra merita. Fide sic vult coli Deus, ut ab ipso accipiamus ea, quae promittit et offert.
Quod [6]autem fides significet non tantum historiae notitiam, sed illam fidem, quae assentitur promissioni, aperte testatur Paulus, qui ait Rom. 4, 16, iustitiam ideo ex fide esse, ut[7] sit firma promissio. Sentit[8] enim promissionem non posse accipi nisi fide. Quare inter se[9] correlative comparat et connectit promissionem et fidem. Quamquam facile erit iudicare, quid[10] sit fides, si Symbolum consideremus, ubi certe ponitur hic articulus: Remissionem peccatorum. Itaque non satis est[11] credere, quod[12] Christus natus, passus, resuscitatus sit, nisi addimus et hunc articulum, qui est causa finalis historiae: Remissionem peccatorum. Ad hunc articulum referri cetera oportet, quod[13] videlicet propter Christum, non propter nostra merita, donetur, nobis remissio peccatorum. Quid enim opus erat Christum dari pro peccatis nostris, si nostra merita pro peccatis nostris possunt satisfacere?
[1] An impersonal use of est which is common in this paragraph: it is…
[2] Introduces a negative purpose clause: ne (ali)quis: so that no one
[3] A perfect passive participle
[4] Divine service
[5] A perfect passive participle
[6] A quod substantive clause introduced by testatur
[7] A purpose clause
[8] Introduces an indirect statement
[9] Inter se: to each other
[10] Introduces an indirect question
[11] An impersonal construction: it is not enough…
[12] A quod substantive clause
[13] A quod substantive clause
| Vocabulary | |
| Cerno, ere, crevi, cretus- to see; determine; examine; discern | Dono, are, avi, atus- to give, donate |
| Ceterus, a, um- other | Finalis, e- final |
| Colo, ere, colui, cultus- to maintain; cultivate; honor; worship | Mortalis, mortale- deadly |
| Comparo, are, avi ,atus- to obey | Oportet- it is fitting, necessary, proper |
| Connecto, ere, connexi, connexus- to connect, associate, join | Suspicor, ari, suspicatus sum- to suspect; suppose |
| Considerō, āre, āvī, ātus- to consider, examine | Toties (adv.)- so many times |
| Correlative (adv.)- correspondingly | Versor, ari, versatus sum- to live; move about |
What is justifying faith?
The adversaries only pretend that faith is a knowledge of history, and they teach such is able to exist with mortal sins. Therefore, nothing they say concerning faith, by which Paul so many times says that men are justified, because, those who are considered just before God, do not live in mortal sin. But that faith, which justifies, is not only a knowledge of history, but it is to assent to the promise of God in which the forgiveness of sins and justification is offered freely on account of Christ. And so that no one suspects that it is only knowledge, we will add more: it is to want and to receive the offered promise of the forgiveness of sins and justification.
And the distinction can easily be discerned between this faith and the righteousness of the law. Faith is a latreiia which accepts from God the offered benefits; the righteousness of the law is a latreiia which offers to God our merits. In this way God wants to be worshiped by faith so that we receive these things, which he promises and offers, from him himself.
Moreover, that faith signifies not only a knowledge of history but that faith, which assents to the promise, Paul openly testifies when he says in Romans 4:16, “Such righteousness is from faith so that the promise is strong.” For he knows that the promise is not able to be accepted unless by faith. Wherefore, he correspondingly compares and connects the promise and faith to each other. Although it will be easy to determine what faith is, if we consider the Creed where certainly this article is stated: “the forgiveness of sins.” And so it is not enough to believe that Christ was born, suffered, and resurrected unless we add also this article which is the final cause of history: the forgiveness of sins. For this article it is fitting that other things be recalled: that clearly the forgiveness of sins is given on account of Christ not because of our merits. For why was it necessary for Christ to be given for our sins if our merits are able to make satisfaction for our sins?
Translating the Apology of the Augsburg Confession: Art. IV De Iustificatione (x)
Posted: September 21, 2023 Filed under: Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Book of Concord, Justification, Latin Translation, Lutheranism, Melancthon | Tags: Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Book of Concord, Justification, Latin, Lutheranism, Melancthon, Translation Leave a commentQuum autem iustificatio continget per gratuitam promissionem, sequitur, quod[1] non possimus nos ipsi iustificare. Alioqui quorsum opus erat promittere? Quumque promissio non possit accipi nisi fide, evangelium, quod est proprie promissio remissionis peccatorum et iustificationis propter Christum, praedicat iustitiam fidei in Christum, quam non docet lex; neque haec est iustitia legis.
Lex enim requirit a nobis opera nostra et perfectionem nostram. Sed promissio offert nobis, oppressis[2] peccato et morte, gratis reconciliationem propter Christum, quae accipitur non operibus, sed sola fide. Haec fides non affert ad Deum fiduciam propriorum meritorum, sed tantum fiduciam promissionis seu promissae[3] misericordiae in Christo. Haec igitur fides specialis, qua credit[4] unusquisque sibi remitti peccata propter Christum, et Deum placatum et propitium esse propter Christum, consequitur remissionem peccatorum et iustificat nos. Et quia in poenitentia, hoc est, in terroribus, consolatur et erigit corda, regenerat nos et affert Spiritum Sanctum, ut[5] deinde legem Dei facere possimus, videlicet diligere Deum, vere timere Deum, vere statuere, quod[6] Deus exaudiat, obedire Deo in omnibus afflictionibus, mortificat concupiscentiam etc.
Ita fides, quae gratis accipit remissionem peccatorum, quia opponit mediatorem et propitiatorem[7] Christum irae Dei, non opponit nostra merita aut dilectionem nostram, quae[8] fides est vera cognitio Christi, et utitur beneficiis Christi et regenerat corda et praecedit legis impletionem. Et de hac fide nulla syllaba exstat in doctrina adversariorum nostrorum.
Proinde reprehendimus adversarios, quod tantum tradunt iustitiam legis, non tradunt iustitiam evangelii, quod praedicat iustitiam fidei in Christum.
[1] A quod substantive clause
[2] A perfect passive participle
[3] A perfect passive participle
[4] Introduces an indirect statement which includes the rest of the sentence
[5] A purpose clause
[6] A quod substantive clause
[7] Apposition for Christum
[8] A relative conjunction: this faith
| Vocabulary | |
| Alioqui (adv)- otherwise, in some respects; besides | Propitius, a, um- favorably inclined, well disposed, propitius |
| Consolor, ārī, ātus sum- to console, comfort | Regenero, are, avi, atus- to regenerate, recreate, renew |
| Misericordia, ae, f.- compassion, mercy | Solus, a, um- alone |
| Oppono, ere, opposui, oppositus- to oppose | Specialis, e- special |
| Poenitentia, ae, f.- repentence, contrition | Syllaba, ae, f.- syllable |
| Praedicō, āre, āvī, ātus- to proclaim, declare | Unusquisque, uniuscuiusque- each one |
| Proinde (adv.)- hence | |
Since, moreover, justification will be granted through the free promise, it follows that we are not able to justify ourselves. Otherwise, why was it necessary to promise? And since the promise is not able to be accepted except by faith, the Gospel, which is properly the promise of the forgiveness of sins and justification on account of Christ, declares the righteousness of faith in Christ which the law does not teach; and this is not the righteousness of the law.
For the law requires from us our own works and our perfection, but the promise offers to us, oppressed by sin and death, freely reconciliation, which is received not by works but by faith alone, on account of Christ. This faith does not present trust in our own merits to God but only trust in the promises or in the promised mercy in Christ. Therefore, this special faith, by which each person believes that sins are forgiven him on account of Christ and that God is placated and favorably inclined on account of Christ, obtains the forgiveness of sins and justifies us. And because in repentance, that is in terrors, it consoles and raises hearts, it regenerates us and offers the Holy Spirit so that then we are able to do the law such: such as loving God, truly fearing God, truly thinking that God clearly hears us, obeying God in all afflictions, and it mortifies concupiscence, etc.
In this way, faith, which receives freely the forgiveness of sins, because it opposes the mediator and propitiator Christ to the wrath of God, not only opposes our merits or our love–this faith is a true knowledge of Christ, and it uses the benefits of Christ and regenerates hearts and surpasses the fulfillment of the law. And no syllable about this faith is evident in the doctrine of our adversaries.
Hence we blame the adversaries: that they offer only the righteousness of the law; they do not offer the righteousness of the Gospel which declares the righteousness of faith in Christ.
Translating the Apology of the Augsburg Confession: Art. IV De Iustificatione (ix)
Posted: September 20, 2023 Filed under: Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Book of Concord, Justification, Latin Translation, Lutheranism, Melancthon | Tags: Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Book of Concord, Justification, Latin, Lutheranism, Melancthon, Translation Leave a commentFacile est[1] otiosis fingere ista somnia de dilectione, quod[2] reus peccati mortalis possit Deum diligere super omnia, quia non sentiunt, quid[3] sit ira aut iudicium Dei. At in agone conscientiae et in acie experitur conscientia vanitatem illarum speculationum philosophicarum. Paulus ait Rom. 4, 15: Lex iram operatur. Non dicit,[4] per legem mereri homines remissionem peccatorum. Lex enim semper accusat conscientias et perterrefacit. Non igitur iustificat, quia conscientia perterrefacta[5] lege fugit iudicium Dei.
Errant igitur, qui per legem, per opera sua mereri se remissionem peccatorum confidunt.[6] Haec[7] de iustitia rationis aut legis, quam adversarii docent, satis sit dixisse. Nam paulo post, quum nostram sententiam de iustitia fidei dicemus, res ipsa coget[8] plura testimonia ponere; quae etiam proderunt ad illos errores adversariorum, quos hactenus recensuimus, evertendos.[9]
Quia igitur non possunt homines viribus suis legem Dei facere, et omnes sunt sub peccato et rei aeternae irae ac mortis: ideo non possumus per legem a peccato liberari ac iustificari, sed data est promissio remissionis peccatorum et iustificationis propter Christum, qui datus est pro nobis, ut[10] satisfaceret pro peccatis mundi, et positus est mediator ac propitiator.[11] Et haec promissio non habet conditionem meritorum nostrorum, sed gratis offert remissionem peccatorum et iustificationem, sicut Paulus ait Rom. 11, 6: Si ex operibus, iam non est gratia. Et alibi, Rom. 3, 21: Iustitia Dei iam manifestatur sine lege, id est, gratis offertur remissio peccatorum.
Nec pendet reconciliatio ex nostris meritis. Quodsi ex nostris meritis penderet remissio peccatorum et reconciliatio esset ex lege, esset inutilis. Quia enim legem non facimus, sequeretur[12] etiam promissionem reconciliationis nunquam nobis contingere. Sic argumentatur Paulus Rom. 4, 14: Si ex lege esset hereditas, inanis esset fides et abolita promissio. Si enim promissio requireret conditionem meritorum nostrorum ac legem, quum legem nunquam faciamus, sequeretur promissionem inutilem esse.
[1] An impersonal construction: it is easy
[2] A quod substantive clause
[3] Introduce an indirect question
[4] Introduces an indirect statement
[5] A perfect passive participle
[6] Introduces an indirect statement
[7] A substantive adjective used as the direct object of the impersonal construction satis sit dixisse: it is enough to have said these things…
[8] Its object is an implied nos
[9] A gerundive modifying the object of the preposition ad to indicate purpose: for overturning those errors…
[10] A purpose clause
[11] Apposition
[12] Introduces an indirect statement
| Vocabulary | |
| Aboleo, ere, abolevi, abolitus- to abolish; destroy | Manifesto, are, avi, atus- to reveal, make known |
| Accuso, are, avi, atus- to accuse | Pendeo, ere, pependi- to depend; hang, hang down |
| Acies, ei, f.- sharpness, sharp edge; point; sight, eye; battle | Perterrefacio, ere, perterrefeci, perterrefactus- to terrify thoroughly |
| Agon, agonis, m.- struggle; agony | Propitiator, propitiatoris, m.- atoner, propitiator |
| Argumentor, ari, argumentatus sum- to support, prove by argument, reason, discuss | Reconciliatio, reconciliationis, f.- reconciliation |
| Cogō, ere, coēgī, coactus- to collect, gather; force | Somnium, i, n.- dream |
| Hactenus (adv.)- as far as this, thus far, til now | Speculatio, speculationis, f.- speculation; consideration |
| Hereditas, hereditatis, f.- inheritance | Vanitas, vanitatis, f.- vanity, emptiness; futility, foolishness |
| Inutilis, e- useless; harmful | |
It is easy for those at ease to create these dreams about love, that a man guilty of mortal sin is able to love God above all things, because they do not understand what the wrath or judgment of God is. But in the agony of conscience and in battle, a conscience experiences the foolishness of those philosophical speculations. Paul says in Romans 4:15: “The works wrath.” He does not say that through the law men merit the forgiveness of sins. For the law always accuses and terrifies consciences. Therefore, it does not justify because a conscience terrified by the law flees the judgment of God.
Therefore, they are wrong, who trust that they merit the forgiveness of sins through the law and through their own works. It is enough to have said these things concerning the righteousness of reason or the law which the adversaries teach. For in short time, when we will declare our teaching on the righteousness of faith, the matter itself will compel us to cite several testimonies; these things also will be beneficial for overturning those errors of the adversaries which we till now have examined.
Therefore, because men are not able to do the law of God through their own power, and everyone is under sin and is liable to eternal anger and death: in such a way we are not able through the law to be freed from sin and justified, but the promise of the forgiveness of sins and justification on account of Christ, who was given for us to make satisfaction for the sins of the world, has been given and placed as our mediator and propitiator. And this promise does not hold the condition of our merit, but freely offers the forgiveness of sins and justification just as Paul says in Romans 11:6, “If it is from works, it is no longer grace.” And elsewhere in Romans 3:21, “The righteousness of God now has been revealed without the law” that is the forgiveness of sins is offered freely.
And reconciliation does not depend upon our merits. But if the forgiveness of sins depends upon our merits and reconciliation is from the law, it is useless. For, since we do not do the law, let it follow that the promise of reconciliation will never reach us. Paul thusly argues in Romans 4:14, “If the inheritance should be from the law, faith would be futile and the promise destroyed. For if the promise requires the condition of our merits and the law, since we never do the law, it would follow that the promise is useless.
Translating the Apology of the Augsburg Confession: Art. IV De Iustificatione (viii)
Posted: September 19, 2023 Filed under: Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Book of Concord, Justification, Latin Translation, Lutheranism, Melancthon | Tags: Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Book of Concord, Justification, Latin, Lutheranism, Melancthon, Translation Leave a commentHaec adeo sunt aperta testimonia, ut[1] non desiderent acutum intellectorem, sed attentum auditorem, ut Augustini verbis utamur, quibus ille in eadem causa usus est. Si sensus carnis est inimicitia adversus Deum, certe caro non diligit Deum; si non potest legi Dei subiici, non potest Deum diligere. Si sensus carnis est inimicitia adversus Deum, peccat caro etiam, quum externa civilia opera facimus. Si non potest subiici legi Dei, certe peccat, etiamsi egregia facta et digna laude iuxta humanum iudicium habet.
Adversarii intuentur praecepta secundae tabulae, quae iustitiam civilem continent, quam intelligit ratio. Hac content[2]i putant[3] se legi Dei satisfacere. Interim primam tabuIam non vident, quae praecipit, ut[4] diligamus Deum, ut vere statuamus, quod[5] Deus irascatur peccato, ut vere timeamus Deum, ut vere, statuamus, quod[6] Deus exaudiat. At humanus animus sine Spiritu Sancto aut securus contemnit iudicium Dei, aut in poena fugit et odit iudicantem[7] Deum.
Itaque non obtemperat primas tabulae. Quum igitur haereant in natura hominis contemptus Dei, dubitatio de Verbo Dei, de minis et promissionibus, vere peccant homines etiam, quum honesta opera faciunt sine Spiritu Sancto, quia faciunt ea impio corde, iuxta illud Rom. 14, 23: Quidquid non est ex fide, peccatum est. Tales enim operantur cum contemptu Dei, sicut Epicurus non sentit se Deo curae esse, respici aut exaudiri a Deo. Hic contemptus vitiat opera in speciem[8] honesta, quia Deus iudicat corda.
Postremo hoc imprudentissime scribitur ab adversariis, quod[9] homines, rei aeternae irae, mereantur remissionem peccatorum per actum elicitum[10] dilectionis, quum impossibile sit diligere Deum, nisi prius fide apprehendatur remissio peccatorum. Non enim potest cor, vere sentiens[11] Deum irasci, diligere Deum, nisi ostendatur placatus. Donec terret et videtur[12] nos abiicere in aeternam mortem, non potest se erigere natura humana, ut diligat iratum, iudicantem et punientem.[13]
[1] Introduces a result clause
[2] A perfect passive participle
[3] Introduces an indirect statement
[4] Introduces a series of indirect commands
[5] A quod substantive clause
[6] A quod substantive clause
[7] A present active participle
[8] The prepositional phrase is working with honesta
[9] A quod substantive clause
[10] A perfect passive participle
[11] A present active participle
[12] Introduces an indirect statement: it seems that we are cast into…
[13] Present active participle modifying the implied Deum
| Vocabulary | |
| Acutus, a, um- sharp, keen | Imprudens, imprudentis- foolishly, imprudently |
| Adeo (adv.)- so, to such a degree; truly | Intellector, intellectoris, m.- intellect; one who understands |
| Attentus, a, um- attentive | Iratus, a, um- angry |
| Auditor, auditōris, m.- listeners; student | Minae, ārum, f. pl.- threats |
| Desiderō, āre, āvī, ātus- to desire, long for | Obtempero, are, avi, atus+ dat.- to obey; be submissive to |
| Egregius, a, um- distinguished, exceptional; extraordinary | Placo, are, avi, atus- to appease; placate; reconcile |
| Erigo, ere, erexi, erectus- to raise, rouse | Postremo (adv.)- finally |
| Factum, ī, n.- deed, act | Reus, a, um- liable to; guilty |
| Impossibilis, e- impossible | Vitio, are, avi, atus- to spoil, damage |
These testimonies were so clear that they don’t require a sharp intellect but an attentive hearer and that we use the words of Augustine which he used in the same cause. If the feeling of the sense of the flesh is hostile towards God, certainly the flesh does not love God; if it is not able to be subjected to the law of God, it is not able to love God. If the feeling of the flesh is hostile towards God, the flesh also sins when we do external civil works. If it is not able to be subjected to the law of God, it certainly sins even if it has extraordinary works worthy of praise concerning human judgment.
The adversaries are considering the commands of the second table which contains civil righteousness and which reason understands. Content with this they think that they are satisfying the law of God. Meanwhile, they do not see the first table which commands that we love God, that we truly think that God becomes angry with sin, that we truly fear God, that we truly think that God hears us clearly. But the human mind without the Holy Spirit or secure despises the judgment of God, or it flees from punishment and hates God while He is judging.
And so they do not obey the first table. Therefore, when contempt of God and doubt concerning the Word of God and its threats and promises remain in the human nature, men truly sin even when they do honest works without the Holy the Spirit because they do those things with an impious heart; concerning this Romans 14: 23 says, “Whatever is not from faith, is sin.” For they do such things with contempt for God, just as Epicureans did not know that he was a concern for God, cared for by God, provided for and heard clearly by God. This contempt spoils works honest in their appearance because God judges hearts.
Finally this is written very foolishly by the adversaries that men liable to eternal anger, merit the forgiveness of sins through a coaxed act of love when it is impossible to love God unless the forgiveness of sins is first grasped by faith. For the heart is not able, while it truly feels that God is angry, to love God unless he is first shown to be placated. As long as he terrifies us and it seems that we are to be cast into eternal death, human nature is not able to raise itself so that it loves him while he is angry, judging and punishing us.
Translating the Apology of the Augsburg Confession: Art. IV De Iustificatione (v)
Posted: September 18, 2023 Filed under: Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Book of Concord, Justification, Latin Translation, Lutheranism, Melancthon | Tags: Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Book of Concord, Justification, Latin, Lutheranism, Melancthon, Translation Leave a commentFalsum est enim, quod[1] per opera nostra mereamur remissionem peccatorum.
Falsum est et hoc, quod homines reputentur[2] esse iusti coram Deo propter iustitiam rationis.
Falsum est et hoc, quod ratio propriis viribus possit Deum supra omnia diligere et legem Dei facere, videlicet vere timere Deum, vere statuere, quod Deus exaudiat,[3] velle obedire Deo in morte et aliis ordinationibus Dei, non concupiscere aliena etc., etsi civilia opera efficere ratio potest.
Falsum est et hoc et contumeliosum in Christum, quod non peccent homines facientes[4] praecepta Dei
sine gratia.
Huius nostrae sententiae testimonia habemus non solum ex Scripturis, sed etiam ex patribus. Nam Augustinus copiosissime disputat[5] contra Pelagianos, gratiam non dari propter merita nostra. Et De Natura et Gratia inquit: Si possibilitas naturalis per liberum arbitrium et ad cognoscendum,[6] quomodo vivere debeat, et ad bene vivendum[7] sufficit sibi, ergo Christus gratis mortuus est, ergo evacuatum est scandalum crucis. Cur non etiam ego hic exclamem? Imo exclamabo et istos increpabo dolore Christiano: Evacuati estis a Christo, qui in natura iustificamini; a gratia excidistis, Gal. 5, 4; cf. 2, 21. Ignorantes[8] enim iustitiam Dei et vestram volentes constituere, iustitiae Dei non estis subiecti. Sicut enim finis legis, ita etiam naturae humanae vitiosae salvator Christus est ad iustitiam omni credenti.[9] Rom. 10, 3. 4.
Et Ioh. 8, 36: Si vos Filius liberaverit, vere liberi eritis. Non igitur possumus per rationem liberari a peccatis et mereri remissionem peccatorum. Et Ioh. 3, 5 scriptum est: Nisi quis[10] renatus fuerit ex aqua et Spiritu, non potest introire in regnum Dei. Quodsi opus est[11] renasci per Spiritum Sanctum, iustitia rationis non iustificat nos coram Deo, non facit legem. Rom. 3, 23: Omnes carent gloria Dei, id est, carent sapientia et iustitia Dei, quae Deum agnoscit et glorificat. Item Rom. 8, 7. 8: Sensus carnis inimicitia est adversus Deum. Legi enim Dei non est subiectus ac ne[12] potest quidem ei subiici. Qui autem in carne sunt, Deo placere non possunt.
[1] This quod and the following quods in the falsum clauses introduce quod substantive clauses
[2] Introduces an indirect statement
[3] A quod substantive clause
[4] A present active participle
[5] Introduces an indirect statement
[6] Ad+gerund to indicate purpose; it also introduces an indirect question
[7] Ad+gerund indicates purpose
[8] Ignorantes and volentes are present active participles modifying the implied subject of subiecti estis
[9] A present active participle modifying omni
[10] Aliquis
[11] It is necessary
[12] Ne…quidem: not even
| Vocabulary | |
| Agnosco, ere, agnovi, agnotus- to recognize, acknowledge | Falsus, a, um-false |
| Alienus, a, um- strange, foreign; other; averse | Glorifico, are, avi, atus- to glorify, magnify, honor, worship |
| Aqua, ae, f.- water | Ignoro, are, avi, atus- to not know |
| Bene (adv.)- well | Increpo, are, avi, atus- to rebuke, reprove; protest |
| Careō, ēre, uī, caritus- to lack, be without | Introeo, introire, introivi(ii), introitus- to enter, go into |
| Carō, carnis, f.- flesh; body | Liberō, āre, āvī, ātus- to liberate, free |
| Concupisco, ere, concupivi, concupitus- to desire eagerly, covet, long for | Obediō, īre, īvī, ītus- to obey; listen to; be subject to |
| Constituō, ere, constituī, constitutus- to establish; decide; order, decree | Ordinatiō, ordinatiōnis, f.- ordinance, decree; ordination |
| Contumeliosus, a, um- insulting, outrageous, humiliating, abusive | Peccō, āre, āvī, ātus- to sin |
| Copiose (adv.)- abundantly | Possibilitas, possibilitatis, f.- possibility |
| Crux, crucis, f.- cross; torment | Salvator, salvatoris, m.- savior |
| Dolor, doloris, m.- pain, grief, sorrow, suffering | Scandalum, i, n.- scandal, stumbling block |
| Evacuo, ere, evacuavi, evacuatus- to make void; lay aside | Sensus, ūs, m.- sense, feeling |
| Excido, ere, excidi- to fall from | Sufficio, ere, suffeci, suffectus- to be sufficient; suffice |
| Exclamo, are, avi, atus- to exclaim, shout, cry out | Vivō, ere, vixī, victus- to be alive, live |
It is false that through works we merit the forgiveness of sins.
It is false that men are considered to be just before God on account of the righteousness of reason.
It is false that reason through its own powers is able to love God above all things and to do the law of God such as to truly fear God, to think rightly that God hears him clearly, to wish to obey God in death and other decrees of God, to not desire eagerly strange things, etc. although reason is able to accomplish civil works.
It is a false insulting thing towards Christ that men do not sin as they do the commands of God without grace.
Our teachings of this have testimonies not only from the Scriptures also from the fathers. For Augustine very abundantly argues against the Pelagians that grace is not given an account of our merit. And in Concerning Nature and Grace, he says this: If the capacity of nature through the free will both for understanding how we ought to live and for living well is sufficient for itself, Christ, therefore, died for nothing, and, therefore, the scandal of the cross has been made void. Why should we not cry out about this here? Rather I will cry out, and I will rebuke these men with Christian grief: You are missing Christ who you are justified by in your nature; you have fallen from grace according to Galatians 5:4 and 2:21. For you all, who are ignorant of the righteousness of God and who want to establish their own righteousness, are not subject to the righteousness of God. For the end of the law, even for the vicious human nature, is Christ the savior for righteousness for everyone who believes.
And in John 8:36, If the Son frees you, you will be truly free. Therefore, we are not able through reason to be freed from sins and to merit the forgiveness of sins. And in John 3:5 it is written: unless someone has been born again from water and the spirit, he is not able to enter into the kingdom of God. But if it is necessary to be born again through the Holy Spirit, the righteousness of reason does not justify us before God, it does not do the law. Romans 3:23 says, Everyone lacks the glory of God, that is they lack the wisdom and righteousness of God which acknowledges and glorifies God. Likewise Romans 8:7 says, The sense of the flesh is hostile towards God. For it has not been subjected to the law of God and is not even able to be subjected to it. Moreover, those, who are in the flesh, are not able to please God.
Translating the Apology of the Augsburg Confession: Art. IV De Iustificatione (iv)
Posted: September 17, 2023 Filed under: Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Book of Concord, Justification, Latin Translation, Lutheranism, Melancthon | Tags: Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Book of Concord, Justification, Latin, Lutheranism, Melancthon, Translation Leave a commentSed tota haec res conficta est ab otiosis hominibus, qui non norant, quomodo[1] contingat remissio peccatorum, et quomodo in iudicio Dei et terroribus conscientiae fiducia operum nobis excutiatur. Securi hypocritae semper iudicant[2] se de condigno mereri, sive adsit habitus ille, sive non adsit, quia naturaliter confidunt homines propria iustitia; sed conscientiae: perterrefactae ambigunt et dubitant, et subinde alia opera quaerunt et cumulant, ut[3] acquiescant. Hae nunquam sentiunt[4] se de condigno mereri, et ruunt in desperationem nisi audiant praeter doctrinam legis evangelium de gratuita remissione peccatorum et iustitia fidei.
Ita nihil docent adversarii nisi iustitiam rationis aut certe legis, in quam intuentur sicut Iudaei in velatam Mosis faciem, et in securis hypocritis, qui putant[5] se legi satisfacere, excitant praesumptionem et inanem fiduciam operum et contemptum gratiae Christi. Econtra pavidas conscientias adigunt ad desperationem, quae sperantes[6] cum dubitatione nunquam possunt experiri, quid[7] sit fides et quam sit efficax; ita ad extremum penitus desperant.
Nos autem de iustitia rationis sic sentimus, quod[8] Deus requirat eam, et quod propter mandatum Dei necessario sint facienda[9] honesta opera, quae Decalogus praecipit, iuxta illud Gal. 3, 24: Lex est paedagogus; item 1 Tim. 1, 9: Lex est iniustis posita. Vult[10] enim Deus coerceri carnales illa civili disciplina, et ad hanc conservandam[11] dedit leges, litteras, doctrinam, magistratus, poenas. Et potest hanc iustitiam utcunque ratio suis viribus efficere, quamquam saepe vincitur imbecillitate naturali et impellente[12] diabolo ad manifesta flagitia.
Quamquam autem huic iustitiae rationis libenter tribuimus suas laudes; nullum enim maius bonum habet haec natura corrupta, et recte inquit Aristoteles: Neque hesperum neque luciferum formosiorem esse iustitia,[13] ac Deus etiam ornat eam corporalibus praemiis: tamen non debet cum contumelia Christi laudari.
[1] Introduces an indirect statement
[2] Introduces an indirect statement
[3] A purpose clause
[4] Introduces an indirect statement
[5] Introduces an indirect statement
[6] A present active participle
[7] Quid and quam introduce indirect questions
[8] Quod substantive clauses
[9] The passive periphrastic: honest works necessarily must be done
[10] Introduces an indirect statement
[11] The gerundive with ad to indicate purpose: to conserve this
[12] A present active participle modifying diabolo
[13] An ablative of comparison
| Vocabulary | |
| Acquiesco, ere, acquiei, acquietus- to acquiesce, assent; relax | Inanis, e- empty, hollow; vain |
| Adigo, ere, adegi, adactus- to drive in, force; cast | Iniustus, a, um- unjust |
| Ambigo, ere- to hesitate, be in doubt | Intueor, eri, intuitus sum- to consider, regard; look at |
| Coerceo, ere, coercui, coercitus- to restrain; punish | Iudaeus, i, m.- Jew |
| Confingo, ere, confinxi, confictus- to fashion, construct; invent | Laus, laudis, f.- praise |
| Conservō, āre, āvī, ātus- to preserve | Littera, ae, f.- literature, writing; letter |
| Contingo, ere, contigi, contactus- to be granted to | Lucifer, luciferi- morning star |
| Corporalis, e- physical, corporeal | Magistratus, ūs, m.- magistracy; office |
| Desperatiō, desperatiōnis, f.- desperation | Nosco, ere, novi, notus- to learn, get to know, know |
| Disciplina, ae, f.- discipline, training | Orno, are, avi, atus- to honor |
| Dubitatio, dubitationis, f.- doubt | Paedagogus, i, m.- tutor |
| Econtra (adv.)- on the contrary | Pavidus, a, um- terrified, panicstruck |
| Excitō, āre, āvī, ātus- to rouse, excite, to wake | Penitus (adv.)- inwardly; inside, deep within; thoroughly |
| Experior, iri, expertus sum- to experience | Praemium, ī, n.- prize, reward; gift |
| Faciēs, eī, f.- appearance, sight | Praesumptio, praesumptionis, f.- boldness, confidence |
| Flagitium, ī, n.- shame, disgrace | Puto, are, avi, atus- to think |
| Formosus, a, um- beautiful | Ruo, ere, rui, rutus- to destroy, ruin, overthrow; be ruined |
| Gratuitus, a, um- free, gratuitous | Securus, a, um- secure, safe, untroubled |
| Hesperus, i, m.- evening-star | Terror, terroris, m.- terror |
| Honestus, a, um- honest | Utcunque (adv.)- to some extent; in whatever manner |
| Hypocrites, ae, m.- hypocrite | Velo, are, avi, atus- to veil, cover; conceal |
| Imbecillitas, imbecillitatis, f.- weakness, feebleness | |
But this whole matter is invented by idle men who do not know how the forgiveness of sins is attained and how in the judgment of God and terrors of the conscience, trust in works is shaken for us. Secure hypocrites always think that they are meritorious on account of worth whether that the habit is present or it is not present because men naturally trust in their own righteousness. But terrified consciences hesitate and doubt, and they constantly search for other works, and they accumulate them so that they are relaxed. These never think that they are meritorious on account of worth, and they are ruined in their desperation unless they hear alongside the doctrine of the law the gospel of free forgiveness of sins and the righteousness of faith.
Thusly the adversaries teach nothing except the righteousness of reason or certainly the law which they regard just as the Jews regarded the veiled face of Moses, and in secure hypocrites, who think that they satisfy the law, they excite confidence and vain trust of works and contempt for the grace of Christ. On the contrary they drive terrified consciences to desperation which hoping with doubt are never able to experience what faith is and how it is effective; thusly they despair inwardly at the end.
We, however, think thusly about the righteousness of reason: that God requires it and that on account of the command of God honest works, which the Decalogue teaches, necessarily must be done, and concerning that Galatians 3:24 says, The law is our tutor; likewise 1 Timothy 1:9 says, The law has been set up for the unjust. For God wishes that carnal people to be coerced by that civil discipline, and to conserve this he gave laws, writings, doctrine, magistrates and punishments. And reason is able to affect this righteousness by its power to some extent although often it is defeated by natural weakness and by the devil driving it to manifest disgraces.
However, although we gladly attribute some praise to this righteousness of reason; for this corrupt nature has no greater good, and Aristotle rightly says, “Neither the evening-star nor the morning star is more beautiful than righteousness,” and God also decorates it with bodily rewards: nevertheless, it should not be praised with the scorning of Christ.
Translating the Apology of the Augsburg Confession: Art. IV De Iustificatione (iii)
Posted: September 16, 2023 Filed under: Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Book of Concord, Justification, Latin Translation, Lutheranism, Melancthon | Tags: Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Book of Concord, Justification, Latin, Lutheranism, Melancthon, Translation Leave a commentQuamquam adversarii, ne[1] Christum omnino praetereant, requirunt notitiam historiae de Christo et tribuunt ei[2], quod[3] meruerit nobis dari quendum habitum,[4] sive, ut ipsi vocant, primam gratiam,[5] quam intelligent habitum esse inclinantem[6], ut[7] facilius diligamus Deum, exiguum tamen est, quod huic habitui tribuunt, quia fingunt[8] actus voluntatis ante habitum illum et post illum habitum eiusdem speciei esse. Fingunt voluntatem posse diligere Deum; sed habitus ille tamen exstimulat, ut idem faciat libentius. Et iubent[9] mereri hunc habitum primum per praecedentia[10] merita; deinde iubent mereri operibus legis incrementum illius habitus et vitam aeternam.
Ita sepeliunt Christum, ne[11] eo mediatore utantur homines, et propter ipsum sentiant[12] se gratis accipere remissionem peccatorum et reconciliationem, sed somnient[13] se propria impletione legis mereri remissionem peccatorum et propria impletione legis coram Deo iustos reputari; quum tamen legi nunquam satisfiat, quum ratio nihil faciat nisi quaedam civilia opera, interim neque timeat Deum, neque vere credat[14] se Deo curae esse. Et quamquam de habitu illo loquuntur, tamen sine iustitia fidei neque existere dilectio Dei in hominibus, neque quid[15] sit dilectio Dei, intelligi potest.[16] Et quod fingunt discrimen inter meritum congrui et meritum condigni, ludunt tantum, ne videantur[17] aperte πελαγιανιί ζειν.[18] Nam si Deus necessario dat gratiam pro merito congrui, iam non est meritum congrui, sed meritum condigni. Quamquam quid[19] dicant, non vident. Post habitum illum dilectionis fingunt[20] hominem de condigno mereri. Et tamen iubent dubitare,[21] utrum adsit habitus. Quomodo igitur sciunt,[22] utrum de congruo an de condigno mereantur?
[1] A negative purpose clause
[2] Christo
[3] A quod substantive clause
[4] The direct object of meruerit
[5] Apposition for quendam habitum
[6] To be inclinded
[7] A purpose clause
[8] Introduces an indirect statement
[9] Introduces an indirect statement in both instances; take the subject as an implied us or people
[10] A present active participle
[11] Introduces a series of result clauses which continue until reputari
[12] Introduces an indirect statement
[13] Introduces an indirect statement
[14] Introduces an indirect statement
[15] An indirect question
[16] Potest serves as the main verb for both dilectio and quid
[17] Videantur (esse)– seem to be
[18] Pelagians
[19] An indirect question
[20] Introduces an indirect statement
[21] Introdcues an indirect question
[22] Introduces an indirect question
| Vocabulary | |
| Adsum, adesse, adfuī, adfuturus- to be present, near; to aid (with the dat.) | Ludo, ere, lusi, lusus- to play |
| Aperte (adv.)- openly | Mediator, mediatoris, m.- mediator |
| Condignus, a, um- wholly deserving, very worthy | Nunquam (adv.)- at no time; never |
| Congruus, a, um- fit, suitable, agreeing | Omnino (adv.)- entirely, altogether |
| Discrimen, discriminis, n.- distinction | Praecedo, ere, praecessi, praecessus- to go before, precede |
| Exiguus, a, um- small; meager; scanty | Reputō, āre, āvī, ātus- to think, think over |
| Exstimulo, are, avi, atus- to stimulate; goad | Satisfio, satisfieri, satisfactus sum- to be satisfied |
| Impletio, impletionis, f.- fulfillment | Sepeliō, īre, īvī, sepultus- to bury |
| Inclino, are, avi, atus- to incline, bend; lower; decay | Sive (conj.)-or |
| Incrementum, ī, n.- growth, development, increase | Sive…sive (conj.)-whether…or |
| Iustus, a, um- just; right | Somnio, are, avi, atus- to dream |
| Libenter (adv.)- gladly, willingly, with pleasure | Speciēs, eī, f.- appearance, show; type, kind |
Although the adversaries, so that they do not entirely omit Christ, require a knowledge of the history of Christ and attribute to him that he merits a certain habit to be given to us or, as they call it, the first grace, which they understand to be a habit inclined so that we more easily love God; and, nevertheless, it is a meager thing which they attribute to this habit because the imagine that acts of the will before this habit and after this habit are of the same kind. They imagine that the will is able to love God; but that habit, nevertheless, stimulates it so that it does the same thing more gladly. And they command men to merit this first habit through preceding merits; then they order men to merit increases of this habit and eternal life through works of the law.
And so they bury Christ so that men do not use him as their mediator and on account of him think that they freely receive the forgiveness of sins and reconciliation but they dream that they merit the forgiveness of sins through their own fulfillment of the law and that they are considered just before God because of their own fulfillment of the law; while, nevertheless, there is no satisfaction for the law, while reason does nothing except certain civil works and meanwhile it neither fears God nor truly believes that it is cared for by God. And, although they talk about that habit; nevertheless, without the righteousness of faith neither the love of God can exist in men nor can it be known what the love of God is.
And because they pretend a distinction between meritum congrui and meritum condigni, they play only so that they do not openly appear to be Pelagians. For if God necessarily gives merit for meritum congrui, it is not only meritum congrui but meritum condigni. Although they do not see what they say. After that habit of love, they pretend that men are meritorious on account of their complete worthiness. And, nevertheless, they command that people doubt whether that habit is present. How, therefore, do they know whether they are worthy on account of meritum congrui or meritum condigni?
lexsemperaccusat 