4. The subject of the hereditary corruption.
That all men who are naturally descended from Adam are subjects of the hereditary perdition has already been stated according to its various relations. Only Christ is excepted among men, because, according to His human nature, He did not take upon Himself human nature naturally, but through the action of the Holy Spirit. Matt. 1:20: Το εν avτή (Mary) γεννηϋεν εκ πνεύματός εστιν αγίου. Conceptus est de Spiritu Sancto. Natus ex Maria virgine. Therefore Christ is expressly called γεννώμενον άγιον according to His human nature (Luke 1:35).1608) As for the Virgin Mary, she is exempt from hereditary perdition not by Holy Scriptures, but by a decree of Pius IX of 1854 in the interest of Mariolatry.1609)
corrigere voluisset, nunquam tantas turbas dedisset et concordare cum eo facile potuissent orthodoxi. Flacius himself called the original sin corms substanbialls, but he still distinguished from the forma substantialis the forma materialis. Forma materialis was not the original sin. It seems that Flacius understood by forma materialis what other men call substance, and by forma substantialis what we call accidence. Carpzov says a. op. cit. further on Flacius: Non enim hominem absolute seu in absoluta sua substantia considerabat, sed concrete et cum statu suo, atque per essentiam et formam essentialem non intelligebat substantiam ipsam, prout significat rem per se subsistentem et opponitur accidentali praedicamento, sed essentiam illam, quae homini, non qua homo est, sed qua talis sive corruptus est, competit, nempe formam accidentariam, quae cum subiecto absoluto constituit ens concretum et homini corrupto essentialis est, ita ut, quamdiu et quantum corruptus est, ne quidem cogitatione possit separari ab eo corruptio seu vitiositas. Cf. the very detailed and thorough exposition by F. Bente in Historical Introductions to the Symbolical Books, XV: “The Flacian Controversy." Triglotta I, 144 ff. [BookOfConord here]. Also G. Plitt in RE. 2 IV, 563 ff. Plitt's remark that Flacius was "habitually and out of ignorance" condemned beyond measure is correct.
1608) Cf. the section "Peculiarities of the Human Nature of Christ," Vol. II. 77 ff.
1609) In Baier-Walther II, 294: Declaramus, pronuntiamus et definimus: doctrinam, quae tenet, beatissimam virginem Mariam in primo instanti suae conceptionis fuisse singulari omnipotentis Dei gratia et privilegio, intuitu meritorum Christi Iesu, Salvatoris humani generis, ab omni originalis culpae labe praeservatam immunem, esse a Deo revelatam atque idcirco ab omnibus fidelibus firmiter constanterque credendam. Quapropter si qui secus, ac a nobis definitum est, quod Deus avertat, praesumpserint corde sentire, ii noverint ac porro sciant, se proprio iudicio condemnatos, naufragium circa fidem passos esse et ab unitate ecclesiae defecisse. [Google]
660 ><w:t xml:space="preserve"> Original sin. [English ed. 550-1]
In describing the subject of original sin, it must also be carefully noted where in man the corruptio hereditaria, the hereditary corruption, has its proper seat (subiectum quo peccati originalis, subiectum proprium, πρώτον δεκτικόν). The dogmatists express themselves thus: The soul of man is the primary, the body the secondary seat of hereditary corruption, because the body is the organ of the soul. Baier:1610) Subiectum quo peccati originalis primarium est anima cum suis facultatibus, intellectu, voluntate et appetitu sensitivo; secundario tamen et consequenter etiam membra corporis huc recte referuntur. [Google] For a more detailed explanation the dogmatists add: As before the Fall the body participated in the original righteousness by being the organ of the righteous soul and serving it for works of righteousness and holiness, so now after the fall the body also participates in unrighteousness, because it stands in an organ relation to the soul, which is corrupt in all its powers, and therefore is put with all its members into the service of unrighteousness. The Scripture points this out explicitly when it speaks of "eyes full of adultery" in 2 Petr. 2:14 and Rom. 3:13-15 catalogs the members of the body as it were and says: "Their throat (λάρνγξ, throat) is an open sepulchre, with their tongues they act deceitfully, the poison of asps is under their lips. Their mouth is full of cursing and bitterness; their feet are hastening to shed blood; destruction and misery are in their ways." And when in this passage v. 17-18 is added: "The way of peace they know not; there is no fear of God before their eyes," the sinful activity is thereby led back by means of the members of the body from the primary seat of original sinful corruption, namely from the soul, and that from the soul according to understanding and will, thus according to the highest powers of the soul. If papists etc. and also newer theologians transfer the actual seat of sin to the lower forces ("sensuality", appetitus sensitivus), this happens in contradiction with the Scriptures. The Formula of Concord confesses the scriptural truth when it says,1611) ) "that we all inherit by nature such a heart, mind and thought from Adam, which, according to its highest powers and light of reason, is naturally straight against God and his highest commandments, and is even an enmity against God, which especially concerns divine, spiritual things”.
1610) Comp., ed. Walther II, 295<w:t>. 1611) M. 576, 11. [Trigl. 863, 11 🔗]
661 ><w:t xml:space="preserve"> Original sin. [English ed. 551-2]