Friday after Trinity XV - Devotion in semi-Exile
Friday after Trinity XV - Devotion in semi-Exile
Malachi 1:1-14 Matthew 3:1-17STATUS
CONTROVERSIAE.
The Principal Question in This Controversy.
1] Whether
original sin is properly and without any distinction man's corrupt nature,
substance, and essence, or at any rate the principal and best part of his
essence [substance], namely, the rational soul itself in its highest state and
powers; or whether, even after the Fall, there is a distinction between man's
substance, nature, essence, body, soul, and original sin, so that the nature
[itself] is one thing, and original sin, which inheres in the corrupt nature
and corrupts the nature, another.
Affirmative
Theses.
The Pure Doctrine, Faith, and Confession according to the Aforesaid Standard
and Summary Declaration.
2] 1.
We believe, teach, and confess that there is a distinction between man's
nature, not only as he was originally created by God pure and holy and without
sin, but also as we have it [that nature] now after the Fall, namely, between
the nature [itself], which even after the Fall is and remains a creature of
God, and original sin, and that this distinction is as great as the distinction
between a work of God and a work of the devil.
3] 2.
We believe, teach, and confess also that this distinction should be maintained
with the greatest care, because this doctrine, that no distinction is to be
made between our corrupt human nature and original sin, conflicts with the
chief articles of our Christian faith concerning creation, redemption,
sanctification, and the resurrection of our body, and cannot coexist therewith.
4] For
God created not only the body and soul of Adam and Eve before the Fall, but also
our bodies and souls after the Fall, notwithstanding that they are corrupt,
which God also still acknowledges as His work, as it is written Job 10:8: Thine hands have made me and
fashioned me together round about. Deut. 32:18; Is. 45:9ff; 54:5; 64:8; Acts 17:28; Job 10:8; Ps. 100:3; 139:14; Eccl. 12:1.
5] Moreover,
the Son of God has assumed this human nature, however, without sin, and
therefore not a foreign, but our own flesh, into the unity of His person, and
according to it is become our true Brother. Heb. 2:14: Forasmuch, then, as the children
were partakers of flesh and blood, He also Himself likewise took part of the
same. Again, 16; 4:15: He took not on Him the nature of angels, but He took on
Him the seed of Abraham. Wherefore in all things it behooved Him to be made
like unto His brethren, yet without sin. 6] In
like manner Christ has also redeemed it as His work, sanctifies it as His work,
raises it from the dead, and gloriously adorns it as His work. But original sin
He has not created, assumed, redeemed, sanctified; nor will He raise it, will
neither adorn nor save it in the elect, but in the [blessed] resurrection it
will be entirely destroyed.
7] Hence
the distinction between the corrupt nature and the corruption which infects the
nature and by which the nature became corrupt, can easily be discerned.
8] 3.
But, on the other hand, we believe, teach, and confess that original sin is not
a slight, but so deep a corruption of human nature that nothing healthy or
uncorrupt has remained in man's body or soul, in his inner or outward powers,
but, as the Church sings:
Through Adam's
fall is all corrupt,
Nature and essence human.
9] This
damage is unspeakable, and cannot be discerned by reason, but only from God's
Word. 10] And
[we affirm] that no one but God alone can separate from one another the nature
and this corruption of the nature, which will fully come to pass through death,
in the [blessed] resurrection, where our nature which we now bear will rise and
live eternally without original sin and separated and sundered from it, as it
is written Job 19:26: I shall be
compassed again with this my skin, and in my flesh shall I see God, whom I
shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold.
Negative Theses.
Rejection of the False Opposite Dogmas.
11] 1.
Therefore we reject and condemn the teaching that original sin is only a reatus
or debt on account of what has been committed by another [diverted to us]
without any corruption of our nature.
12] 2.
Also, that evil lusts are not sin, but con-created, essential properties of the
nature, or, as though the above-mentioned defect and damage were not truly sin,
because of which man without Christ [not ingrafted into Christ] would be a child
of wrath.
13] 3.
We likewise reject the Pelagian error, by which it is alleged that man's nature
even after the Fall is incorrupt, and especially with respect to spiritual
things has remained entirely good and pure in naturalibus, i. e., in its
natural powers.
14] 4.
Also, that original sin is only a slight, insignificant spot on the outside,
dashed upon the nature, or a blemish that has been blown upon it, beneath which
[nevertheless] the nature has retained its good powers even in spiritual
things.
15] 5.
Also, that original sin is only an external impediment to the good spiritual
powers, and not a despoliation or want of the same, as when a magnet is smeared
with garlic-juice, its natural power is not thereby removed, but only impeded;
or that this stain can be easily wiped away like a spot from the face or pigment
from the wall.
16] 6.
Also, that in man the human nature and essence are not entirely corrupt, but
that man still has something good in him, even in spiritual things, namely,
capacity, skill, aptness, or ability in spiritual things to begin, to work, or
to help working for something [good].
17] 7.
On the other hand, we also reject the false dogma of the Manicheans, when it is
taught that original sin, as something essential and self-subsisting, has been
infused by Satan into the nature, and intermingled with it, as poison and wine
are mixed.
18] 8.
Also, that not the natural man, but something else and extraneous to man, sins,
on account of which not the nature, but only original sin in the nature, is
accused.
19] 9.
We reject and condemn also as a Manichean error the doctrine that original sin
is properly and without any distinction the substance, nature, and essence
itself of the corrupt man, so that a distinction between the corrupt nature, as
such, after the Fall and original sin should not even be conceived of, nor that
they could be distinguished from one another [even] in thought.
20] 10.
Now, this original sin is called by Dr. Luther nature-sin, person-sin,
essential sin, not because the nature, person, or essence of man is, without
any distinction, itself original sin, but in order to indicate by such words
the distinction between original sin, which inheres in human nature, and other
sins, which are called actual sins.
21] 11.
For original sin is not a sin which is committed, but it inheres in the nature,
substance, and essence of man, so that, though no wicked thought ever should
arise in the heart of corrupt man, no idle word were spoken, no wicked deed
were done, yet the nature is nevertheless corrupted through original sin, which
is born in us by reason of the sinful seed, and is a fountainhead of all other
actual sins, as wicked thoughts, words, and works, as it is written Matt. 15:19: Out of the heart proceed evil
thoughts. Also Gen. 6:5; 8:21: The imagination of man's heart is
evil from his youth.
22] 12.
Thus there is also to be noted well the diverse signification of the word
nature, whereby the Manicheans cover their error and lead astray many simple
men. For sometimes it means the essence [the very substance] of man, as when it
is said: God created human nature. But at other times it means the disposition
and the vicious quality [disposition, condition, defect, or vice] of a thing,
which inheres in the nature or essence, as when it is said: The nature of the
serpent is to bite, and the nature and disposition of man is to sin, and is
sin; here the word nature does not mean the substance of man, but something
that inheres in the nature or substance.
23] 13.
But as to the Latin terms substantia and accidens,
because they are not words of Holy Scripture, and besides unknown to the
ordinary man, they should not be used in sermons before ordinary, uninstructed
people, but simple people should be spared them.
24] But
in the schools, among the learned, these words are rightly retained in
disputations concerning original sin, because they are well known and used
without any misunderstanding, to distinguish exactly between the essence of a
thing and what attaches to it in an accidental way.
25] For
the distinction between God's work and that of the devil is thereby designated
in the clearest way, because the devil can create no substance, but can only,
in an accidental way, by the providence of God [God permitting], corrupt the
substance created by God.
Comments