Original Sin原罪

General Information 一般資料

In Christian theology, original sin refers both to the sin of Adam and Eve by which humankind fell from divine grace and to the state of sin into which humans since the fall have been born. The scriptural foundation for original sin is found in the epistles of Saint Paul. 在基督教神學,原罪既指的罪,亞當和夏娃,使人類從神的恩典和國家的罪過到人類垮台以來,已誕生了。聖經基礎原罪被發現在該教會聖保羅。 Christian theologians have argued a wide variety of positions on the nature of original sin and its transmission and on the efficacy of Baptism in restoring grace.基督教神學家辯稱各種各樣的陣地就什麼性質的原罪及其傳輸和對療效的洗禮,在恢復恩典。

BELIEVE Religious Information Source web-site相信宗教信息來源
Our List of 2,300 Religious Subjects我們所列出的2300名宗教科目
E-mail電子郵件

Original Sin原罪

Advanced Information 先進的信息

From: Home Bible Study Commentary by James M. Gray 來自:主頁聖經研究評論詹姆斯米灰色

Genesis Chapter 3成因第3章

Introduction of Sin採用單

The Temptation誘惑

Gen. 3:vv.將軍3 :維維。 1-5 That more than the serpent was present is suggested by the speech and reasoning powers displayed, but is rendered certain by a comparison of Rev. 12:9 and 20:2, where the serpent is identified with Satan. 1-5以上的毒蛇是,目前是由講話和推理權力展示,而且是提供某些由一個比較牧師12時09分和20時02分,而蛇是確定與撒旦。 Some think the serpent originally stood upright and was very beautiful to look upon, which, if true, would contribute to its power over the woman and further explain why Satan employed it as his instrument.有人認為蛇原本直立放置,並且非常漂亮的眼光來看待,如果這是真的,將有助於其功率超過該名女子,並進一步解釋為什麼撒旦將它做為自己的工具。 Nevertheless, that Satan was the real tempter is additionally assured by John 8:44; 2 Cor.儘管如此,撒旦是真正的tempter此外保證約翰8:44 ; 2 ,肺心病。 11:3; 1 John 3:8 and 1 Tim. 11時03分;約翰一3時08分和1個添。 2:14. 2時14分。 Read Satan's inquiry of the woman in the Revised Version, and perceive how it differs from the words of the prohibition (2:16).閱讀撒旦的調查,該名女子在修訂版本,並察覺到它如何有別於從前的話,禁止( 2:16 ) 。 How does it prove Satan "a liar from the beginning," and how does it impugn God's wisdom and love?它有什麼證明撒旦"的一個騙子,從一開始就"與它有什麼懷疑上帝的智慧和愛嗎? Do you think the woman made a mistake in parleying with Satan?你認為該女子犯了一個錯誤,在parleying與撒旦?

And how does her language (v. 3) deflect from the truth?我們又如何她的語言(五3 )偏轉,從道理嗎? Does she also make God a harder master than He is, and thus has sin already entered her soul?難道她也使上帝更難掌握比他的是,因此,單已經進入了她的靈魂嗎? Notice that "gods" (v. 5) is translated "God" in the Revised Version.公告說, "神" (五5 ) ,是翻譯的"神" ,在修訂後的版本。 It was in seeking to be as God that Satan fell (1 Tim. 3:6), and he tries to drag man down by the same means.這是在尋求被視為上帝撒旦下跌( 1添。 3時06分) ,以及他試圖拖曳男子下跌同樣手段。 Compare the history of the Anti-Christ, Thess.比較歷史上的反基督帖。 2:4. 2時04分。

The Fall秋天

Gen. 3:vv.將軍3 :維維。 6, 7 What three steps led to the open act of sin? 6 , 7什麼三步導致公開法的孽? How does 1 John 2:16 characterize these steps?如何約翰一2時16分表徵這些步驟? Compare the temptation of Jesus for the use of the same method (Luke 4:1-13).比較誘惑耶穌,為使用同樣的方法(路加福音4:1-13 ) 。 How does the further conduct of the woman illustrate the progress and propagation of sin?如何進一步進行的女子,說明進步和繁殖的孽? Did any part of Satan's promise come true?沒有任何部分撒旦的諾言成真嗎? What part failed? Our first parents came into the knowledge of good and evil by coming to know evil to which they had been strangers before, the moral effect on them being shame (compare 2:25). To quote another: "What the man and woman immediately acquired was the now predominant trait of self-consciousness. God-consciousness has been lost, and henceforth self-contemplation is to be the characteristic and bane of mankind, laying the foundation for those inner feelings or mental states comprehended under the term 'unhappiness,' and for all the external strivings whereby effort is made to attain a better condition."哪些部分失敗了嗎? 第一次家長前來走進知識的善和惡來知道邪惡,他們已被陌生人面前,道德的影響,他們被恥辱(比較2時25分) 。引述另一項: "這有什麼,該名男子和女子立即後天是現在佔主導特質的自我意識。上帝意識已經喪失,並從此自我沉思是成為特性及戰後人類奠定了基礎,這些內心或精神狀態的理解下任期'不愉快' ,並為所有外部strivings據此作出努力,達到一個更好的條件" 。

What was the first of these efforts they made (v. 7, last clause)?什麼是第一家的這些努力,他們作出了(五7 ,最後條款) ? And (to quote the same author again) "is not this act the germ of all subsequent human activities? Conscious of self and feeling the pressure of need, and no longer having a God to supply that need, man begins to invent and contrive" (Eccl. 7:29). (引用同一作者又) " ,這不正是法胚芽所有以後的人類活動?意識到自我和感情壓力的需要,並不再擁有上帝,以供應需要,男子就開始發明和contrive " (傳道書7時29分) 。 Nor are these inventions of a material kind merely, but chiefly a spiritual kind, since their effort to cover themselves illustrates the futile attempts of the race to save itself from the eternal effects of sin by works of morality, penance and the like.也不是這些發明一種材料一種純粹的,但主要是一種精神類的,因為他們的努力,以支付自己說明的企圖都是徒勞的比賽,以挽救自己從永恆的影響,單是由工程的思想道德體系,懺悔等。 What is the only covering that avails for the sinner (Ro. 3:22; 2 Cor. 5:21)?什麼是唯一涵蓋即援用為千古罪人( ro. 3時22分, 2肺心病。 5時21分) ?

The Trial審判

Gen. 3:vv.將軍3 :維維。 8-13 "Voice" might be rendered by sound, and "cool" by wind. 8-13的"聲音" ,甚至可能會變成由健全的, "酷" ,由風。 How does verse 8 indicate the character and degree of their shame?如何韻文八日表明性質和程度,他們的恥辱嗎? Do God's words (v. 9) express judgment only, or may they have expressed grace?做上帝的話(五九日)表示,判決只,也可能他們紛紛表示,寬限期? If the latter, in what sense? Does Adam tell the exact truth (v. 10)? Was it merely shame or the sense of sin that drove him away? How does God's question (v. 11) suggest the kind of knowledge that had now come to Adam? Does verse 12 show a spirit of repentance or self-justification on his part?如果是後者,在何種意義上是否亞當告訴確切的真理(五10 ) ?當時它只是羞愧感,單仲偕認為,將他帶走, 怎能沒有上帝的問題(五11 )建議種知識了現在來亞當是否韻文12顯示的精神,悔過書或自我辯解是對他的部分? In the last analysis does he cast the blame on the woman or God?在最後的分析,他是否投嫁禍於女子或上帝嗎?

The Sentence on the Serpent一句關於蛇

Gen. 3:vv.將軍3 :維維。 14, 15 On which of the guilty does God first pass sentence? Has the curse of verse 14 been fulfilled? 14日, 15日對其中的有罪沒有上帝先通過一句,難道詛咒韻文14得到履行? Compare Isaiah 65:25, and notice that even in the millennium when the curse is removed from all other cattle it will still remain on the serpent.比較以賽亞書65:25 ,並通知說,即使是在千禧年時,詛咒去掉所有其他牛只,它仍然會繼續留在毒蛇。 But how does this curse suggest that previously the serpent did not crawl?但是,請問這個詛咒建議以前蛇不爬? (Naturalists describe the organism of the serpent as one of extreme degradation, and say that although it belongs to the latest creations of the animal kingdom, yet it represents a decided retrogression in the scale of being, thus corroborating the Biblical explanation of its condition.) Has the curse of verse 15 been fulfilled? (博物學家形容有機體的毒蛇之一,極端惡化,並說,雖然它屬於最新創作的動物王國,但它代表一個決定倒退的規模,從而佐證聖經解釋它的條件。 ) ,有詛咒韻文15得到履行? But we must not suppose the curse of verse 15 to be limited to the serpent, or else Satan were exempt.但我們絕不能假設詛咒韻文15至限於毒蛇,否則撒旦免除了。

See by the marginal references that the seed of the serpent is placed by metonomy for that of Satan, and is identified as the wicked and unbelieving people of all the ages (Matt. 3:7; 13:38; 23:33; John 8:44; Acts 13:10; 1 John 3:8).見由邊際參考種子的毒蛇是放在metonomy為撒旦,並鑑定為邪惡和不信的人,所有年齡。 (則為3:7 ; 13時38分; 23時33分;約翰八日: 44 ;行為13:10 1約翰3點08分) 。 In the same way the seed of the woman might be supposed to stand for the righteous and believing people in all the ages, and so it does in a certain sense, but very especially it stands for our Lord Jesus Christ, the Head and Representative of that people, the One through whom they believe and by whom they become righteous.在以同樣的方式種子的女子可能被用來主張正義,並相信人民在各個年齡,因此,它在一定意義上說,但很特別,它為我們的主耶穌基督,頭部及代表人,其中通過他們,他們認為,由誰來他們成為義。 He Himself is the seed of the woman, and they in Him (Is. 7:14; Matt. 1:18-25; Luke 1:31-35; Gal. 4:4, 5).他本人是種子的女子,也不能在他( is. 7時14分;馬特。 1:18-25 ;路加福音1:31-35 ;加爾。 4時04分, 5 ) 。 Observe how much this means to us.觀察有多少,這意味著給我們。 It is really a promise of a Redeemer and redemption, and being the first promise, it is that out of which all subsequent promises flow.這的確是一項承諾,提出了一個救世主和贖回,並成為第一個承諾,那就是出其中其後所有的承諾流。

The Bible refers to it again and again in one way and another, and we need to become well acquainted with it. 聖經指給它一次又一次地以某種方式與另一種的,我們需要成為熟悉它。 Indeed the rest of the Bible is just a history of the fulfilment of this promise. 的確,其餘的聖經只是一個歷史的履行這一承諾。 The Bible is not a history of the world or even of man, but a history of the redemption of man from the sin into which he fell in the garden of Eden. This explains why the whole story of creation is summed up in one chapter of the Bible, and why so little is said about the history of the nations of the earth except Israel. 聖經不是一個世界的歷史,甚至是人類,而是一個歷史的贖回男子從單到其中他倒地後,在伊甸園,這解釋了為什麼整個故事的創作就是總結了一章聖經中的,為什麼這麼少,是說,對於歷史上的國家地球除以色列。 But in what sense is this a promise of redemption?但是,在何種意義上這是一個承諾的救贖? On the supposition that Christ is the Seed of the woman, what will He do to Satan (v. 15)?就假設說,基督是種子的女子,會怎樣做,他向撒旦(五15 ) ? When the serpent's head is bruised is not its power destroyed?當蛇的頭部是瘀傷,是不是它的權力毀滅? (For the parallel see Heb. 2:14, 15; Rev. 20:1-3, 7-10.) But what will Satan do to Christ? (為平行見以弗所書2時14分, 15人;牧師20:1-3 , 7-10 ) ,但如何將撒旦做基督? How may Satan be said to have bruised Christ's heel?怎麼可能撒旦說是有瘀傷基督的腳跟? (For answer see Isaiah 50 and 53, Psalms 22 and 69, and the chapters of the Gospels which speak of Christ's sufferings and crucifixion.) (答案見以賽亞書50和53 ,詩篇22及69條,以及章節的福音,其中講基督的苦難和十字架上) 。

The Sentence on Adam and Eve一句關於亞當和夏娃

Gen. 3:vv.將軍3 :維維。 16-21 What is the first feature of the sentence on the woman (v. 16, first clause)? 16-21 什麼是第一個特點的句子該女子(五16 ,第一條) ? With what chiefly will her sorrow be connected (second clause)? 同什麼,主要是將她的悲傷連接(第二條) ? What second feature of her sentence is contained in the last clause? 什麼的第二個特徵是,她的判刑是包含在去年的第? For what is the man condemned? 對於什麼是該名男子的譴責嗎? Does this show him less or more guilty than his wife? 這是否表明他較少或以上犯有比他的妻子嗎? What curse precedes that on the man himself? 什麼詛咒先行,就在自己的男子? And yet how is it shown that this too is a curse on the man? "Sorrow" is rendered toil in the Revised Version, and hence the curse on the ground entails the toil on the man. 然而,它怎麼證明這也是一種詛咒,該名男子 " 悲哀" ,是提供了淚水,在修訂版本,並因此詛咒放在地上,即是指辛勞該名男子。 How does this curse on the ground express itself from the ground (v. 18)?請問這個詛咒,在地面上表達自己從地面(五18 ) ? (The necessaries of life must now be forced out of the earth which before might have spontaneously yielded them.) What will this condition of things force out of man (v. 19)? (必需的生活,現在必須被迫離開地球,才可能自發地產生了他們)會帶來什麼好處的情況東西隊出人(五19 ) ? For how long must this normally continue?時間有多長,必須這通常會繼續下去? What part of man returns to the dust (Eccl. 12:7)?那一部分人返回到塵(傳道書12時07分) ?

Naturalists corroborate the Bible testimony to the curse by explaining that thorns and thistles are an abortion in the vegetable world, the result of arrested development and imperfect growth.博物學家佐證聖經見證詛咒解釋說,荊棘與thistles是人工流產,在蔬菜的世界中,因涉嫌發展和不完善的增長。 They disappear by cultivation and are transformed into branches, thus showing what their character may have been before the curse, and what it may be when through Christ the curse will have been removed (Rev. 22:1-5). How deeply significant the crown of thorns, the sign of the curse which Jesus bore for us!他們自動消失,培育和轉化為分行,從而顯示自己的性格可能已被前詛咒,及它可能的時候,透過基督的詛咒,將已被剔除(啟示錄22:1-5 ) 。 如何具有深遠意義的荊棘王冠,象徵詛咒耶穌口徑為我們!

The Penalty罰則

Gen. 3:vv.將軍3 :維維。 22-24 To whom do you suppose the Lord God said this? 22-24人,你猜想上帝說,這? Who is meant by "us"?誰是"我們" ? Did you notice the same plural pronoun in 1:26? The use of this is one of the earliest intimations of the Trinity more fully revealed in the New Testament. Indeed the earliest intimation is in the first verse of Scripture in the name God or (Hebrew) Elohim.你的通知,同時複數代詞,在1點26分呢? 使用的,這是其中最早的intimations的三一更充分地揭示了在新約聖經,事實上最早的暗示是在第一首詩的經文,在上帝的名義或(希伯來文)耶洛因。 This is a plural noun but associated with a singular verb, thus suggesting the idea of plurality in unity.這是一個複數名詞,但與奇異動詞,從而表明的思想多元化的團結。 What reason is given for thursting Adam and Eve out of Eden (v. 22)? Has it occurred to you that there was mercy in this act?是什麼原因,是由於為thursting亞當和夏娃走出伊甸園(五22 ) ? 了,它發生在你,有憐憫,這種行為? Having obtained the knowledge of evil without the power of resisting it, would it not have added to their calamity if, by eating of the tree of life, they had rendered that condition everlasting? 在獲得知識的罪惡,沒有力量抵制它,它會不會增加他們的災難,如果所吃的生命樹,他們已使這一條件永恆?

What is the name of the mysterious beings placed on guard at the east of the garden?叫什麼名字神秘的人放在守在東花園? (v. 24) They seem to be the special guardians of God's majesty, the vindicators of God's broken law, a thought emphasized by their symbolical position over the mercy-seat in the tabernacle at a later period. (五24 ) ,他們似乎是特別監護人上帝的陛下, vindicators上帝的破碎法,以為強調其具有象徵意義,地位超過了憐憫座位在帳幕在稍後時期。 "The flaming sword" has been translated by "shekinah," the name of the visible glory of God which rested on the mercy seat. "燃燒的劍"已被譯成了"舍吉拿"的名字,可見神的榮耀,而在於對施恩座。 May it be that we have here a representation of the mode of worship now established at Eden to show God's anger at sin, and to teach the mediation of a promised Saviour as the way of access to God?可它說,我們這裡有一份代表該模式的崇拜,現在設立的伊甸,以顯示上帝的憤怒單,並教導調解一個承諾,作為救世主的方式獲得上帝嗎? As later, so now God seems to say: "I will commune with thee from between the cherubim" (Ex. 25:10-22).至於後來,所以現在上帝似乎是說: "我將公社與你來自之間基路伯" (例如: 25:10-22 ) 。

Questions 1. 問題 1 。 How would you prove that Satan and not the serpent was the real tempter in Eden?你會如何證明撒旦不是毒蛇是真正的tempter伊甸園? 2. 2 。 In what way does the temptation of the second Adam (Christ) harmonize with this of the first Adam?以何種方式是否誘惑,第二個亞當(基督)統一與這首亞當? 3. 3 。 What does the making of the aprons of fig leaves illustrate?究竟作出了圍裙的無花果樹葉預示著什麼? 4. 4 。 How does natural history throw light on the curse pronounced on the serpent?如何自然史揭示詛咒宣判毒蛇? 5. 5 。 Who especially is meant by "the Seed of the woman"?誰是誰是"種子的女人" ? 6. 6 。 What is the Bible?什麼是聖經? 7. 7 。 What do naturalists say as to the nature of thorns and thistles?什麼博物學家說,以性質的荊棘與thistles ? 8. 8 。 With what two or three suggestions of the Trinity have we met thus far in our lessons?與兩個或三個建議,研究三位一體,我們會見了迄今為止在我們的經驗教訓呢? 9. 9 。 Of what do the cherubim seem to be the vindicators, and what suggestions does this fact bring to mind?怎樣做基路伯似乎已成為vindicators ,以及有何建議,這是否事實,使我想起? 10. 10 。 How many questions in the text of our lesson have you been able satisfactorily to answer?究竟有多少問題,在文中我們的教訓,你能圓滿回答這個問題?

Genesis Chapter 2成因第2章

The Garden of Eden伊甸園

The Garden Located該園位於

vv.維維。 8-14. 8-14 。 What name is given to the locality of the garden?什麼名字,是考慮到各地的園林? In which section of that locality was it planted?在其中的一段當地是種植? What expression in verse 9 shows God's consideration for beauty as well as utility?怎樣表達韻文9顯示了上帝的考慮,美容以及公用事業? What two trees of life planted?什麼兩棵樹的生命種植? What geographical feature of verse 10 accentuates the historical character of this narrative?有什麼地域特點的韻文十凸顯歷史的特色,這敘事? Observe how this is further impressed by the facts which follow, viz: the names of the rivers, the countries through which they flow, and even the mineral deposits of the latter. Note: (a) the use of the present tense in this description, showing that the readers of Moses' period knew the location; (b) it must have been an elevated district, as the source of mighty rivers; (c) it could not have been a very luxuriant or fruitful locality, else why the need of planting a garden, and where could there have been any serious hardship in the subsequent expulsion of Adam and Eve?觀察一下,這是進一步的印象事實跟進,即:姓名,河流,國家通過這些流量,甚至礦藏的後者。 備註: (一)利用現有的緊張,在此說明,顯示該讀者的摩西'時期知道位置; (二)必須是被高架區,作為源的浩蕩江河; (三)已經不能為一個非常繁茂的或富有成果的地方,否則,為何需要的種植園,並在可能有任何嚴重的困境,在此後驅逐亞當和夏娃?

It is used to be thought that "Eden" was a Hebrew word meaning pleasure, but recent explorations in Assyria indicate that it may have been of Accadian origin meaning a plain, not a fertile plain as in a valley, but an elevated and sterile plain as a steppe or mountain desert. Putting these things together, the place that would come before the mind of an Oriental was the region of Armenia where the Euphrates and the Tigris (or Hiddekel) take their rise.它是用來被認為"伊甸園"是一個希伯來字,意思是高興,但最近的探索,在assyria表明,它可能已被亞加底亞的原產地是指平原,而不是一個肥沃的平原作為一個山谷中,但高架及無菌平原作為草原或山地沙漠, 把這些東西在一起,地點,將前心中的東方是這一地區的亞美尼亞那裡幼發拉底河和底格里斯河(或hiddekel )帶崛起。 There are two other rivers taking their rise in that region, the Kur and the Araxes, thence uniting and flowing into the Caspian Sea, but whether these are identical with the Pison and Gihon of the lesson can not yet be determined. Science now corroborates this location of Eden in so far as it teaches (a) that the human race has sprung from a common centre, and (b) that this centre is the table-land of central Asia. 還有兩條河流,以自己的崛起,在這一地區, kur和阿拉克斯,進而團結和流入里海,但究竟這些是相同的,與pison和由基紅的教訓,還不能確定。科學的,現在證實了這所在地的伊甸園中,所以對於它教導(一)表示,人類已經異軍突起,從一個共同的中心,和( b )表示,這個中心是表-中亞的大地上。


Original Sin原罪

Catholic Information 天主教資訊

I. Meaning一,意義

II.二。 Principal Adversaries主要對手

III.三。 Original Sin in Scripture原罪在經文

IV.四。 Original Sin in Tradition原罪在傳統

V. Original Sin in face of the Objections of Human Reason五原罪面對反對意見的人的理由

VI.六。 Nature of Original Sin大自然的原罪

VII.七。 How Voluntary如何志願

I. MEANING一,意義

Original sin may be taken to mean: (1) the sin that Adam committed; (2) a consequence of this first sin, the hereditary stain with which we are born on account of our origin or descent from Adam.原罪可能被詮釋為: ( 1 )單仲偕認為,亞當承諾; ( 2 )的後果,這第一單,遺傳性染色與我們生來就到我們的出身或血統從亞當。 From the earliest times the latter sense of the word was more common, as may be seen by St. Augustine's statement: "the deliberate sin of the first man is the cause of original sin" (De nupt. et concup., II, xxvi, 43).從最早的時候,後者意義上的字,是較常見的,可以看出是由聖奧古斯丁的聲明說: "蓄意單的第一人,是導致原罪" (德nupt 。等concup 。第一,二, 26 , 43 ) 。 It is the hereditary stain that is dealt with here.它是遺傳性染色是處理這裡。 As to the sin of Adam we have not to examine the circumstances in which it was committed nor make the exegesis of the third chapter of Genesis.至於罪惡的亞當,我們並沒有研究在何種情況下它承諾,也沒有使訓詁學的第三章的成因。

II.二。 PRINCIPAL ADVERSARIES主要對手

Theodorus of Mopsuestia opened this controversy by denying that the sin of Adam was the origin of death. theodorus的摩普綏提亞開這個爭議是無可否認的罪,亞當的起源死亡。 (See the "Excerpta Theodori", by Marius Mercator; cf. Smith, "A Dictionary of Christian Biography", IV, 942.) Celestius, a friend of Pelagius, was the first in the West to hold these propositions, borrowed from Theodorus: "Adam was to die in every hypothesis, whether he sinned or did not sin. His sin injured himself only and not the human race" (Mercator, "Liber Subnotationem", preface). (見" excerpta theodori " ,由marius墨卡托;比照史密斯" ,一本字典的基督教傳" ,第四, 942 ) 。 celestius一位朋友pelagius ,是首次在西部地區舉辦這些主張,是借用theodorus說: "亞當是死在每一個假說,他是否犯罪,或者沒有罪過,罪過受傷,只有自己而不是人類的" (墨卡托" , liber subnotationem " ,前言) 。 This, the first position held by the Pelagians, was also the first point condemned at Carthage (Denzinger, "Enchiridion", no 101-old no. 65).這一點,首要的位置,由pelagians ,亦是第一點,譴責在迦太基(登青格" , enchiridion " ,沒有101歲,沒有65段) 。 Against this fundamental error Catholics cited especially Romans 5:12, where Adam is shown as transmitting death with sin.針對這一根本性的錯誤引述天主教羅馬人,特別是5時12分,亞當列轉遞死亡與罪惡。

After some time the Pelagians admitted the transmission of death -- this being more easily understood as we see that parents transmit to their children hereditary diseases -- but they still violently attacked the transmission of sin (St. Augustine, "Contra duas epist. Pelag.", IV, iv, 6).經過一段時間的pelagians承認傳輸的死因-這是比較容易理解,因為我們看到父母傳遞給子女的遺傳性疾病-但他們仍猛烈抨擊傳遞單(聖奧古斯丁,成了"C o ntradu asep ist。p e lag " ,四,四,六) 。 And when St. Paul speaks of the transmission of sin they understood by this the transmission of death.當聖保祿談到傳遞單,他們理解這輸電死因。 This was their second position, condemned by the Council of Orange [Denz., n.這是他們第二位,譴責安理會的橙[ denz , 12月31日 175 (145)], and again later on with the first by the Council of Trent [Sess. 175 ( 145 ) ] ,再後來就以首由理事會的遄達[ sess 。 V, can.五,可以的。 ii; Denz., n.二; denz , 12月31日 789 (671)]. 789 ( 671 ) ] 。 To take the word sin to mean death was an evident falsification of the text, so the Pelagians soon abandoned the interpretation and admitted that Adam caused sin in us.採取一詞單指死因是一個明顯的偽造文,所以pelagians很快放棄了解釋,並承認亞當所造成的罪惡,在我們。 They did not, however, understand by sin the hereditary stain contracted at our birth, but the sin that adults commit in imitation of Adam.他們沒有,不過,了解由單世襲染色承包在我國誕生,但單仲偕認為,成年人犯下仿亞當。 This was their third position, to which is opposed the definition of Trent that sin is transmitted to all by generation (propagatione), not by imitation [Denz., n.這是他們第三的位置,這是反對的定義,遄達表示,單是轉交給所有,由代( propagatione ) ,而不是由仿製[ denz , 12月31日 790 (672)]. 790 ( 672 ) ] 。 Moreover, in the following canon are cited the words of the Council of Carthage, in which there is question of a sin contracted by generation and effaced by generation [Denz., n.此外,在下列佳能引用的話,安理會的迦太基,這就是我們的問題,一種罪過收縮一代和effaced一代[ denz , 12月31日 102 (66)]. 102 ( 66 ) ] 。

The leaders of the Reformation admitted the dogma of original sin, but at present there are many Protestants imbued with Socinian doctrines whose theory is a revival of Pelagianism.領導人的改造承認教條的原罪,但目前有許多新教徒充滿socinian學說,其理論是一個復甦的佩拉糾學派。

III.三。 ORIGINAL SIN IN SCRIPTURE原罪在經文

The classical text is Romans 5:12 sqq.經典文本是入鄉隨俗5時12 sqq 。 In the preceding part the apostle treats of justification by Jesus Christ, and to put in evidence the fact of His being the one Saviour, he contrasts with this Divine Head of mankind the human head who caused its ruin.在此之前的部分,使徒保羅對待的理由,由耶穌基督,並把作為證據的事實,他身為一個救世主,他跟這頭神人類的人體頭部的人,其造成的破壞。 The question of original sin, therefore, comes in only incidentally.問題的原罪,因此,在談到僅順便。 St. Paul supposes the idea that the faithful have of it from his oral instructions, and he speaks of it to make them understand the work of Redemption.聖保祿支撐的設想,即有忠實的,這從他的口頭指示,而且他講的,這使他們認識到工作的贖回權。 This explains the brevity of the development and the obscurity of some verses.這也解釋了簡潔的發展和隱晦的一些小詩。

We shall now show what, in the text, is opposed to the three Pelagian positions:我們現在證明什麼,在文中,反對把三個pelagian職務:

(1) The sin of Adam has injured the human race at least in the sense that it has introduced death -- "Wherefore as by one man sin entered into this world and by sin death; and so death passed upon all men". ( 1 )單亞當已經受傷,人類至少在這個意義上講,它推出了死亡-"人哪,作為一個男子單進入這個世界是由單死亡;等死通過後,所有男人" 。 Here there is question of physical death.這裡有問題的肉體死亡。 First, the literal meaning of the word ought to be presumed unless there be some reason to the contrary.首先,字面意思字應該被推定,除非有某些原因正好相反。 Second, there is an allusion in this verse to a passage in the Book of Wisdom in which, as may be seen from the context, there is question of physical death.第二,我們有一個典故,在這首詩以一個通道,在這本書的智慧在其中,可以看出從上下文中,有問題的肉體死亡。 Wisdom 2:24: "But by the envy of the devil death came into the world".智慧2點24分: "但是,由令人羨慕的魔鬼死亡來到融入世界" 。 Cf.比照。 Genesis 2:17; 3:3, 19; and another parallel passage in St. Paul himself, 1 Corinthians 15:21: "For by a man came death and by a man the resurrection of the dead".成因2:17 ; 3時03分, 19個;另一個平行通道聖保祿自己,哥林多前書15時21分: "這對於一名男子來到死亡和一名男子死中復活的" 。 Here there can be question only of physical death, since it is opposed to corporal resurrection, which is the subject of the whole chapter.在這裡可以有問題,不僅是肉體死亡,因為它是反對體罰的復活,這是受到了整個一章。

(2) Adam by his fault transmitted to us not only death but also sin, "for as by the disobedience of one man many [ie, all men] were made sinners" (Romans 5:19). ( 2 )亞當由他的錯,轉交給我們,不僅死亡,而且還單" ,因為由抗命一個人的許多[即,所有男人]發了言罪人" (羅馬書5時19分) 。 How then could the Pelagians, and at a later period Zwingli, say that St. Paul speaks only of the transmission of physical death?又如何能pelagians ,並在稍後時期zwingli ,說聖保祿只代表的傳輸肉體死亡? If according to them we must read death where the Apostle wrote sin, we should also read that the disobedience of Adam has made us mortal where the Apostle writes that it has made us sinners.如果按他們,我們必須看死如使徒寫單,我們也應該看到,不服從的亞當,使我們凡人那裡使徒寫道:它使我們的罪人。 But the word sinner has never meant mortal, nor has sin ever meant death.但這個詞罪人從來沒有意思凡人,也有單以往任何時候都意味著死亡。 Also in verse 12, which corresponds to verse 19, we see that by one man two things have been brought on all men, sin and death, the one being the consequence of the other and therefore not identical with it.此外,在韻文12個,相當於19節,我們看到,由一男兩件事得到了所有男人,罪惡和死亡,其中之一的後果,另一方面,因此不等同於它。

(3) Since Adam transmits death to his children by way of generation when he begets them mortal, it is by generation also that he transmits to them sin, for the Apostle presents these two effects as produced at the same time and by the same causality. ( 3 )自亞當傳達他的死因孩子的方式,這一代的時候,他招致他們致命的,它是由一代又表示,他傳遞給他們單,為宗徒們介紹了這兩種效應產生在同一時間和由同一因果關係。 The explanation of the Pelagians differs from that of St. Paul.該解釋的pelagians有別於聖保羅。 According to them the child who receives mortality at his birth receives sin from Adam only at a later period when he knows the sin of the first man and is inclined to imitate it.據他們說孩子接受死亡率,在其出生時接收單從亞當只有在後期的時候,他知道單的第一人,並傾向於模仿它。 The causality of Adam as regards mortality would, therefore, be completely different from his causality as regards sin.因果關係的亞當至於死亡率,因此,完全不同於他的因果至於單。 Moreover, this supposed influence of the bad example of Adam is almost chimerical; even the faithful when they sin do not sin on account of Adam's bad example, a fortiori infidels who are completely ignorant of the history of the first man.此外,這一假定的影響的壞榜樣亞當幾乎是嵌合連忠實的時候,他們單並不單是考慮到亞當的壞榜樣,更不用說異教徒的人,是完全昧於歷史上的第一人。 And yet all men are, by the influence of Adam, sinners and condemned (Romans 5:18, 19).然而,所有男人,受亞當罪人,並譴責(羅馬5點18 , 19 ) 。 The influence of Adam cannot, therefore, be the influence of his bad example which we imitate (Augustine, "Contra julian.", VI, xxiv, 75).的影響,亞當不能,因此,可以影響他的壞榜樣,我們模仿(奧古斯丁,成了" Contra朱利安" ,第六章, 24條, 75條) 。

On this account, several recent Protestants have thus modified the Pelagian explanation: "Even without being aware of it all men imitate Adam inasmuch as they merit death as the punishment of their own sins just as Adam merited it as the punishment for his sin."為此,近幾新教徒,因此,修改pelagian解釋說: "即使沒有意識到它的所有男性模仿亞當,因為它們優異死刑作為懲罰自己的罪過,正如亞當值得把它當作是懲罰他的罪過" 。 This is going farther and farther from the text of St. Paul.這是越走越遠了,從文聖保羅。 Adam would be no more than the term of a comparison, he would no longer have any influence or causality as regards original sin or death.亞當就不會再有較長遠的比較,他就不再有任何影響力或因果關係至於原罪或死亡。 Moreover, the Apostle did not affirm that all men, in imitation of Adam, are mortal on account of their actual sins; since children who die before coming to the use of reason have never committed such sins; but he expressly affirms the contrary in the fourteenth verse: "But death reigned", not only over those who imitated Adam, but "even over them also who have not sinned after the similitude of the transgression of Adam."此外,使徒保羅並沒有確認所有男人,在模仿亞當,是凡人,就到他們的實際捷聯慣導系統;以來死亡兒童來使用的原因,從來沒有犯此類罪,但他明確申明,相反,在第十四首詩: "但死亡的氣氛" ,而不是只對那些模仿亞當,但"即使他們也有沒有犯罪後,相似的海侵亞當" 。 Adam's sin, therefore, is the sole cause of death for the entire human race.亞當的罪孽,因此,這是唯一的死亡原因,為整個人類。 Moreover, we can discern no natural connexion between any sin and death.此外,我們可以看出,沒有天然Connexion公司之間的任何罪惡和死亡。 In order that a determined sin entail death there is need of a positive law, but before the Law of Moses there was no positive law of God appointing death as a punishment except the law given to Adam (Genesis 2:17).為了這是一個有決心的罪過造成的死亡有需要的是一個積極的法律,但在法律面前的摩西有沒有積極的上帝的法規任用死刑作為一種懲罰手段,除依法給予亞當(創2:17 ) 。 It is, therefore, his disobedience only that could have merited and brought it into the world (Romans 5:13, 14).因此,這是他的抗命,只可能有值得了,它融入世界(羅馬書5點13 , 14 ) 。

These Protestant writers lay much stress on the last words of the twelfth verse.這些新教徒作家奠定非常強調要在最後的話第十二屆韻文。 We know that several of the Latin Fathers understood the words "in whom all have sinned", to mean, all have sinned in Adam.我們知道,幾個拉丁美洲理解父親的話: "誰都有罪" ,意思是,所有有犯罪了,在亞當。 This interpretation would be an extra proof of the thesis of original sin, but it is not necessary.這個解釋將是一個額外的證明論文的原罪,但它是沒有必要的。 Modern exegesis, as well as the Greek Fathers, prefer to translate "and so death passed upon all men because all have sinned".現代訓詁學,以及希臘的父親,喜歡翻譯"等死通過後,所有男人,因為所有有犯罪" 。 We accept this second translation which shows us death as an effect of sin.我們接受這第二個翻譯,這表明我們的死亡作為生效的罪過。 But of what sin?但什麼孽? "The personal sins of each one", answer our adversaries, "this is the natural sense of the words 'all have sinned.'" It would be the natural sense if the context was not absolutely opposed to it. "個人罪孽的每一個" ,回答我們的對手, "這是自然意義上的字都有罪。 ' " ,這恐怕自然常識,如果背景不是絕對反對。 The words "all have sinned" of the twelfth verse, which are obscure on account of their brevity, are thus developed in the nineteenth verse: "for as by the disobedience of one man many were made sinners."改為"都有罪"的第12首詩,這是模糊不清根據其簡潔,因此,發達國家在19首詩: "作為由抗命一人,許多人發了言罪人" 。 There is no question here of personal sins, differing in species and number, committed by each one during his life, but of one first sin which was enough to transmit equally to all men a state of sin and the title of sinners.這是毫無疑問的在這裡個人的罪孽,在不同的種類和數目,由每一個在他的生命,但一首,其中單是不夠的,同樣傳遞給所有英國男人一國的罪過和職稱的罪人。 Similarly in the twelfth verse the words "all have sinned" must mean, "all have participated in the sin of Adam", "all have contracted its stain".同樣,在第十二屆韻文改為"都有罪" ,必須是指, "一切都參加了單亞當" , "所有有承包,其污點" 。 This interpretation too removes the seeming contradiction between the twelfth verse, "all have sinned", and the fourteenth, "who have not sinned", for in the former there is question of original sin, in the latter of personal sin.這種解釋太除去表面的矛盾,第十二屆新詩" ,都有罪" ,及第十四屆" ,他們有沒有犯罪" ,因為在前者有問題的原罪,在後者的個人單。 Those who say that in both cases there is question of personal sin are unable to reconcile these two verses.有些人說,在這兩種情況下有問題的個人單是無法調和這兩種小詩。

IV.四。 ORIGINAL SIN IN TRADITION原罪在傳統

On account of a superficial resemblance between the doctrine of original sin and the Manichaean theory of our nature being evil, the Pelagians accused the Catholics and St. Augustine of Manichaeism.對帳戶的表面相似性之間的中庸之道,原罪和善惡二元論,我們自然被邪惡的, pelagians指責天主教徒和聖奧古斯丁的摩尼教。 For the accusation and its answer see "Contra duas epist. Pelag.", I, II, 4; V, 10; III, IX, 25; IV, III.對於這項指控,並回答見"矛盾duas epist 。 pelag " ,一,二,四;五, 10歲;第三,第九,第25條;四,三。 In our own times this charge has been reiterated by several critics and historians of dogma who have been influenced by the fact that before his conversion St. Augustine was a Manichaean.在我們自己的時代,這項收費已重申了幾位評論家和歷史學家的教條已被事實的影響之前,他的轉換聖奧古斯丁是一個摩尼教。 They do not identify Manichaeism with the doctrine of original sin, but they say that St. Augustine, with the remains of his former Manichaean prejudices, created the doctrine of original sin unknown before his time.他們不認同與摩尼教的教義原罪,但他們說,聖奧古斯丁,與遺骸他的前摩尼教偏見,創造了中庸的原罪不明在他的時代之前。

It is not true that the doctrine of original sin does not appear in the works of the pre-Augustinian Fathers.這是不真確的學說原罪沒有出現在作品前augustinian父親。 On the contrary, their testimony is found in special works on the subject.與此相反,他們的證詞發現,在特殊工程,對這項議題。 Nor can it be said, as Harnack maintains, that St. Augustine himself acknowledges the absence of this doctrine in the writings of the Fathers.也可以說,為的Harnack保持,即聖奧古斯丁本人也承認沒有這種學說在著作的父親。 St. Augustine invokes the testimony of eleven Fathers, Greek as well as Latin (Contra Jul., II, x, 33).聖奧古斯丁引用的證詞, 11個父親,希臘語以及拉丁語( 7月合同第一,第二,第十, 33 ) 。 Baseless also is the assertion that before St. Augustine this doctrine was unknown to the Jews and to the Christians; as we have already shown, it was taught by St. Paul.毫無根據的,也就是斷言前聖奧古斯丁的這一學說是未知向猶太人和基督徒;正如我們已經表明的那樣,這是老師聖保祿。 It is found in the fourth Book of Esdras, a work written by a Jew in the first century after Christ and widely read by the Christians.它是發現,在第四本書的埃斯德拉斯,著作,由猶太人,在第一世紀後,基督教會,並廣泛閱讀的基督徒。 This book represents Adam as the author of the fall of the human race (vii, 48), as having transmitted to all his posterity the permanent infirmity, the malignity, the bad seed of sin (iii, 21, 22; iv, 30).這本書代表了亞當如作者的秋天,人類(第七章, 48條) ,具有傳送給他的所有子孫永久體弱, malignity ,壞種子的單仲偕(三, 21日, 22日;四, 30 ) 。 Protestants themselves admit the doctrine of original sin in this book and others of the same period (see Sanday, "The International Critical Commentary: Romans", 134, 137; Hastings, "A Dictionary of the Bible", I, 841).新教徒承認自己的學說原罪在這本書和其他人的同一時期(見sanday , "國際危急解說:入鄉隨俗" , 134 , 137 ;黑斯廷斯, "一本字典的聖經" ,我想, 841 ) 。

It is therefore impossible to make St. Augustine, who is of a much later date, the inventor of original sin.因此,這是不可能讓聖奧古斯丁,他是一個更晚日期,發明人的原罪。

That this doctrine existed in Christian tradition before St. Augustine's time is shown by the practice of the Church in the baptism of children.這一學說存在於基督教傳統的前聖奧古斯丁的時間呈現出來,實踐教會洗禮的兒童。 The Pelagians held that baptism was given to children, not to remit their sin, but to make them better, to give them supernatural life, to make them adoptive sons of God, and heirs to the Kingdom of Heaven (see St. Augustine, "De peccat. meritis", I, xviii).該pelagians認為洗禮給孩子,而不是免去其罪過,而是為了使他們更好地,讓他們超自然的生活,使他們過繼神的兒子,繼承人向天國王朝(見聖奧古斯丁, "德peccat 。 meritis " ,我想,十八) 。 The Catholics answered by citing the Nicene Creed, "Confiteor unum baptisma in remissiomen peccatorum".天主教徒回答為由尼西亞, " confiteor教科文組織貨幣單位baptisma在remissiomen peccatorum " 。 They reproached the Pelagians with introducing two baptisms, one for adults to remit sins, the other for children with no such purpose.紛紛予以譴責pelagians與引入兩個受洗儀式,其中一項為成年人免去罪孽外,其他兒童沒有這樣的目的。 Catholics argued, too, from the ceremonies of baptism, which suppose the child to be under the power of evil, ie, exorcisms, abjuration of Satan made by the sponsor in the name of the child [Augustine, loc.天主教辯稱,也很濃厚,從儀式的洗禮,其中,假設孩子受到權力的邪惡,即驅魔儀式, abjuration撒旦作出了由他發起的,在兒童姓名[奧古斯丁,同上。 cit., xxxiv, 63; Denz., n.引文中,三十四中,有63 ; denz , 12月31日 140 (96)]. 140 ( 96 ) ] 。

V. ORIGINAL SIN IN FACE OF THE OBJECTIONS FROM REASON五,原罪,面對反對的理由

We do not pretend to prove the existence of original sin by arguments from reason only.我們沒有假裝證明存在著原罪,由論點的理由而已。 St. Thomas makes use of a philosophical proof which proves the existence rather of some kind of decadence than of sin, and he considers his proof as probable only, satis probabiliter probari potest (Contra Gent., IV, lii).聖托馬斯利用的是一種哲學的證據,證明存在,而不是由於某種頹廢,而不是罪過,而且他認為他的證據,可能只,滿意probabiliter probari potest (矛盾根特,四, LII )號決定。 Many Protestants and Jansenists and some Catholics hold the doctrine of original sin to be necessary in philosophy, and the only means of solving the problem of the existence of evil.許多新教徒和詹森主義者和一些天主教徒舉行中庸原罪認為有必要在哲學領域,而且是唯一的手段解決這個問題的存在邪惡。 This is exaggerated and impossible to prove.這是一種誇張的,並無法證明。 It suffices to show that human reason has no serious objection against this doctrine which is founded on Revelation.這足以說明,人類理性有沒有嚴重反對這種學說是建立在啟示。 The objections of Rationalists usually spring from a false concept of our dogma.反對的理性通常春季從一個虛假的概念,我們的教條。 They attack either the transmission of a sin or the idea of an injury inflicted on his race by the first man, of a decadence of the human race.他們要么攻擊傳遞一種罪過或想法的一種傷害,對他的比賽,由第一人,一個頹廢的人類。 Here we shall answer only the second category of objections, the others will be considered under a later head (VII).在這裡,我們應答案只有第二類的反對外,其它行業將被視為下稍後頭(七) 。

(1) The law of progress is opposed to the hypothesis of a decadence. ( 1 )法律的進步是反對這一假說的一個頹廢。 Yes, if the progress was necessarily continuous, but history proves the contrary.是的,如果進展是必然連續的,但歷史證明恰恰相反。 The line representing progress has its ups and downs, there are periods of decadence and of retrogression, and such was the period, Revelation tells us, that followed the first sin.該線代表著進步有其跌宕起伏,有期的頹廢和倒退的,而這些是內,啟示告訴我們,那之後的第一單。 The human race, however, began to rise again little by little, for neither intelligence nor free will had been destroyed by original sin and, consequently, there still remained the possibility of material progress, whilst in the spiritual order God did not abandon man, to whom He had promised redemption.人的種族,不過,開始再次上升,一點點,既不情報,也沒有自由意志已被摧毀的原罪,因此,仍然存在可能性,物質進步的同時,在精神方面,為了上帝也不會放棄男子向誰他曾答應贖回權。 This theory of decadence has no connexion with our Revelation.這一理論的頹廢並沒有就此與我們的啟示。 The Bible, on the contrary, shows us even spiritual progress in the people it treats of: the vocation of Abraham, the law of Moses, the mission of the Prophets, the coming of the Messias, a revelation which becomes clearer and clearer, ending in the Gospel, its diffusion amongst all nations, its fruits of holiness, and the progress of the Church.聖經中,與此相反,我們表明,即使是精神上的進展,在人們對待:天職亞伯拉罕,摩西的律法,特派團的先知,未來的messias ,一個啟示,而逐漸明朗和清晰,從而結束在福音中,其擴散,其中所有國家,其水果的聖德和進步的教會。

(2) It is unjust, says another objection, that from the sin of one man should result the decadence of the whole human race. ( 2 ) ,這是不公正的,說,另一種反對意見,即從單的一個人應該導致頹廢的整個人類。 This would have weight if we took this decadence in the same sense that Luther took it, ie human reason incapable of understanding even moral truths, free will destroyed, the very substance of man changed into evil.這將有重量,如果我們採取了這種頹廢在同樣的意義上說,路德,又把它,即人類理性無法理解,甚至道德真理,自由意志遭到破壞,很物質的人轉變為邪惡。

But according to Catholic theology man has not lost his natural faculties: by the sin of Adam he has been deprived only of the Divine gifts to which his nature had no strict right, the complete mastery of his passions, exemption from death, sanctifying grace, the vision of God in the next life.但根據天主教神學男子並未失去其自然系:由單亞當他已被剝奪了唯一的神聖禮物,而他的本性沒有嚴格的權利,完全掌握了他的激情,免除死刑, sanctifying恩典,遠景上帝的,在未來的生活。 The Creator, whose gifts were not due to the human race, had the right to bestow them on such conditions as He wished and to make their conservation depend on the fidelity of the head of the family.造物者,他們的禮物不是因為人類,有權利賜給他們對這些條件為他祝愿,並提出對其進行保護在很大程度上依賴於富達的一家之主。 A prince can confer a hereditary dignity on condition that the recipient remains loyal, and that, in case of his rebelling, this dignity shall be taken from him and, in consequence, from his descendants.王子可以賦予世襲的尊嚴,條件是受援國依然忠心,並表示,如果他的反叛,這種尊嚴應採取從他的,因此,從他的子孫。 It is not, however, intelligible that the prince, on account of a fault committed by a father, should order the hands and feet of all the descendants of the guilty man to be cut off immediately after their birth.這是但是,不理解這王子,對帳戶的故障是由一個父親,應當責令其手和腳的所有華夏子孫,有罪的人被切斷後,立即在其出生。 This comparison represents the doctrine of Luther which we in no way defend.這比較重要思想學說路德,我們在沒有辦法維護。 The doctrine of the Church supposes no sensible or afflictive punishment in the next world for children who die with nothing but original sin on their souls, but only the privation of the sight of God [Denz., n.該學說的教會是支撐不理智或折磨處罰,在未來世界,為兒童死於不衰,但原罪對自己的靈魂,而僅是窮困的神看[ denz , 12月31日 1526 (1389)]. 1526 ( 1389 ) ] 。

VI.六。 NATURE OF ORIGINAL SIN大自然的原罪

This is a difficult point and many systems have been invented to explain it: it will suffice to give the theological explanation now commonly received.這是一個困難點,很多系統已經發明了解釋:這就夠了,讓神學解釋,現在普遍歡迎。 Original sin is the privation of sanctifying grace in consequence of the sin of Adam.原罪是窮困的sanctifying寬限期,在後果的罪,亞當。 This solution, which is that of St. Thomas, goes back to St. Anselm and even to the traditions of the early Church, as we see by the declaration of the Second Council of Orange (AD 529): one man has transmitted to the whole human race not only the death of the body, which is the punishment of sin, but even sin itself, which is the death of the soul [Denz., n.這個解決辦法,那就是聖托馬斯,可追溯到聖anselm ,甚至向傳統的早期教會的,因為我們看到,由該宣言的第二屆理事會橙(公元529 ) :一名男子已轉交給整個人類,不僅是死的屍體,這是懲罰罪惡的,但即使是罪惡本身,這是死亡的靈魂[ denz , 12月31日 175 (145)]. 175 ( 145 ) ] 。 As death is the privation of the principle of life, the death of the soul is the privation of sanctifying grace which according to all theologians is the principle of supernatural life.至於死亡是窮困的原則,生命,死亡的靈魂,是窮困的sanctifying寬限期,即根據所有神學的原則,是超自然的生命。 Therefore, if original sin is "the death of the soul", it is the privation of sanctifying grace.因此,如果原罪,是"死亡的靈魂" ,這是窮困的sanctifying恩典。

The Council of Trent, although it did not make this solution obligatory by a definition, regarded it with favour and authorized its use (cf. Pallavicini, "Istoria del Concilio di Trento", vii-ix).安理會的遄達,雖然它沒有使這個解決方案義不容辭的一個定義,把它與贊成,並授權其使用(參見帕拉維奇尼, " istoria刪除concilio迪特倫托" ,第七至第九) 。 Original sin is described not only as the death of the soul (Sess. V, can. ii), but as a "privation of justice that each child contracts at its conception" (Sess. VI, cap. iii).原罪是描述不僅隨著死亡的靈魂( sess.五,可第二節) ,但作為一個"窮困,司法部每個孩子合約在其構想" ( sess.第六章第三節) 。 But the Council calls "justice" what we call sanctifying grace (Sess. VI), and as each child should have had personally his own justice so now after the fall he suffers his own privation of justice.但安理會呼籲"正義"是什麼,我們呼籲sanctifying恩典( sess.六) ,並為每個孩子都應有個人他自己的正義,所以現在淪陷後,他患有他自己的窮困的正義。

We may add an argument based on the principle of St. Augustine already cited, "the deliberate sin of the first man is the cause of original sin".我們有可能會增加一個論點的原則基礎上的聖奧古斯丁已列舉" ,蓄意單的第一人,是導致原罪" 。 This principle is developed by St. Anselm: "the sin of Adam was one thing but the sin of children at their birth is quite another, the former was the cause, the latter is the effect" (De conceptu virginali, xxvi).這個原則是由聖anselm : "單亞當是一件事,但單仲偕子女在其出生又是另一回事,前者是原因,後者是效應" (德conceptu virginali ,二十六) 。 In a child original sin is distinct from the fault of Adam, it is one of its effects.在一個孩子的原罪,是有別於故障的亞當,這是它的一個效果。 But which of these effects is it?但這些影響是什麼呢? We shall examine the several effects of Adam's fault and reject those which cannot be original sin:我們應審查若干影響亞當的過失和拒絕那些不能原罪:

(1) Death and Suffering.- These are purely physical evils and cannot be called sin. ( 1 )死亡和痛苦.-這些都是純物理除惡務盡,不能稱之為罪過。 Moreover St. Paul, and after him the councils, regarded death and original sin as two distinct things transmitted by Adam.此外,聖保羅,他的後兩局,把死亡和原罪作為兩種截然不同的東西轉發亞當。

(2) Concupiscence.- This rebellion of the lower appetite transmitted to us by Adam is an occasion of sin and in that sense comes nearer to moral evil. ( 2 ) concupiscence .-這一反叛的低下食慾轉發給我們的亞當來說,這次罪惡的,在這個意義上開始接近道德上的邪惡。 However, the occasion of a fault is not necessarily a fault, and whilst original sin is effaced by baptism concupiscence still remains in the person baptized; therefore original sin and concupiscence cannot be one and the same thing, as was held by the early Protestants (see Council of Trent, Sess. V, can. v).然而,值此故障不一定是一個發生故障時,雖然原罪就是effaced由洗禮concupiscence仍然在人受洗,所以原罪和concupiscence不能是同一個東西,因為是由早期新教徒(見理事會的遄達, sess第五卷,可以第五節) 。

(3) The absence of sanctifying grace in the new-born child is also an effect of the first sin, for Adam, having received holiness and justice from God, lost it not only for himself but also for us (loc. cit., can. ii). ( 3 )沒有sanctifying寬限期,在新出生的孩子,也影響了第一單,為亞當,收到了聖潔與正義來自天主的愛,失去了,它不僅為自己而且也為我們( loc.引文中,可以第二節) 。 If he has lost it for us we were to have received it from him at our birth with the other prerogatives of our race.如果他已經失去了它為我們,我們並沒有得到它,從他出生時,我們與其他的特權,我們的種族。 Therefore the absence of sanctifying grace in a child is a real privation, it is the want of something that should have been in him according to the Divine plan.因此,如果沒有sanctifying寬限期,在孩子是一個真正的困苦,這是想要的東西,這應該已經在他按照神的計劃。 If this favour is not merely something physical but is something in the moral order, if it is holiness, its privation may be called a sin.如果這種有利的是不只是有形的東西,而是一些在道德秩序,如果它被聖德,其窮困可稱為一種罪過。 But sanctifying grace is holiness and is so called by the Council of Trent, because holiness consists in union with God, and grace unites us intimately with God.但sanctifying Grace是聖潔,是所謂的由理事會的遄達的,因為成聖組成,在歐盟與上帝的恩典和我們團結關係密切,與上帝。 Moral goodness consists in this, that our action is according to the moral law, but grace is a deification, as the Fathers say, a perfect conformity with God who is the first rule of all morality.道德的善存在於這一點,我們的行動是根據道德法律,但Grace是神化,作為父親說,是一個完美的整合與上帝誰是第一條規則的所有道德。 (See GRACE.) Sanctifying grace therefore enters into the moral order, not as an act that passes but as a permanent tendency which exists even when the subject who possesses it does not act; it is a turning towards God, conversio ad Deum. (見寬限期) 。 sanctifying寬限期,因此也進入了道德秩序,而不是作為一種行為及格,但作為一個永久性的傾向,甚至存在此事時,誰擁有它不採取行動,它是一個轉向神,轉換專案deum 。 Consequently the privation of this grace, even without any other act, would be a stain, a moral deformity, a turning away from God, aversio a Deo, and this character is not found in any other effect of the fault of Adam.因此窮困的恩典,即使沒有任何其他行為,將是一個污點,一個道德畸形,一個轉折遠離上帝, aversio一迪奧,這個字是沒有發現任何其他的影響,故障的亞當。 This privation, therefore, is the hereditary stain.這個窮困,因此,是遺傳性染色。

VII.七。 HOW VOLUNTARY如何志願

"There can be no sin that is not voluntary, the learned and the ignorant admit this evident truth", writes St. Augustine (De vera relig., xiv, 27). "不可能有任何罪過,這不是自願的,教訓和無知者承認,這種顯而易見的真理" ,寫道:聖奧古斯丁(德維拉relig 。 ,第十四條, 27條) 。 The Church has condemned the opposite solution given by Baius [prop.教會譴責了相反的解決方案給予baius [版權。 xlvi, xlvii, in Denz., n.四十六,四十七,在denz , 12月31日 1046 (926)]. 1046 ( 926 ) ] 。 Original sin is not an act but, as already explained, a state, a permanent privation, and this can be voluntary indirectly -- just as a drunken man is deprived of his reason and incapable of using his liberty, yet it is by his free fault that he is in this state and hence his drunkenness, his privation of reason is voluntary and can be imputed to him.原罪,是不是一種行為,但是,正如已經解釋的那樣,一個國家,一個永久窮困,這個計劃可以自願間接-正如一位醉酒的人是剝奪了他的理由,並且不能使用他的自由,但卻是他的自由錯,他是在這個國家,因此,他醉酒,他的窮困的原因是自願的,並可以歸罪於他。

But how can original sin be even indirectly voluntary for a child that has never used its personal free will?但如何才能原罪更間接自願為孩子說,從沒有使用過,其個人的自由意志? Certain Protestants hold that a child on coming to the use of reason will consent to its original sin; but in reality no one ever thought of giving this consent.某些新教徒認為,一個孩子就來使用的原因,將同意其原罪,但在現實中,沒有人想過要給予這個同意。 Besides, even before the use of reason, sin is already in the soul, according to the data of Tradition regarding the baptism of children and the sin contracted by generation.此外,即使以前使用的,因此,單是在已有的靈魂,根據數據的好傳統洗禮的兒童和單收縮的一代。 Some theosophists and spiritists admit the pre-existence of souls that have sinned in a former life which they now forget; but apart from the absurdity of this metempsychosis, it contradicts the doctrine of original sin, it substitutes a number of particular sins for the one sin of a common father transmitting sin and death to all (cf. Romans 5:12 sqq.).一些theosophists和spiritists承認預先存在的心靈去犯罪,在以前的生活,他們現在忘了,但除荒謬的,這metempsychosis ,它違背教義的原罪,它可以代替一些特別的捷聯慣導系統,為一單一個共同的父親,轉遞罪惡和死亡的所有(參見羅馬書5時12 sqq ) 。 The whole Christian religion, says St. Augustine, may be summed up in the intervention of two men, the one to ruin us, the other to save us (De pecc. orig., xxiv).整個基督教說,聖奧古斯丁的,可歸結起來就是在干預的兩名男子,一個毀滅我們,對方也救不了我們(德太平洋經濟合作理事會。 orig ,二十四) 。 The right solution is to be sought in the free will of Adam in his sin, and this free will was ours: "we were all in Adam", says St. Ambrose, cited by St. Augustine (Opus imperf., IV, civ).正確的解決辦法是,要尋求在自由意志的亞當在他的單,並免費將是我們說: "我們都在亞當" ,稱聖,劉漢銓,引用聖奧古斯丁(一部imperf ,四, civ ) 。 St. Basil attributes to us the act of the first man: "Because we did not fast (when Adam ate the forbidden fruit) we have been turned out of the garden of Paradise" (Hom. i de jejun., iv).聖羅勒屬性,讓我們採取行動的第一個男子說: "因為我們沒有快速的(當亞當吃了禁果) ,我們一直在原來的花園天堂" ( hom. i德jejun ,四) 。 Earlier still is the testimony of St. Irenæus; "In the person of the first Adam we offend God, disobeying His precept" (Haeres., V, xvi, 3).先前仍是證詞聖irenæus ; " ,在人的第一亞當我們得罪上帝,不遵守他的信條" ( haeres. ,五,十六, 3 ) 。

St. Thomas thus explains this moral unity of our will with the will of Adam.聖托馬斯從而解釋了這種道德的統一,我們的意志與意志的亞當。

"An individual can be considered either as an individual or as part of a whole, a member of a society . . . . Considered in the second way an act can be his although he has not done it himself, nor has it been done by his free will but by the rest of the society or by its head, the nation being considered as doing what the prince does. For a society is considered as a single man of whom the individuals are the different members (St. Paul, 1 Corinthians 12). Thus the multitude of men who receive their human nature from Adam is to be considered as a single community or rather as a single body . . . . If the man, whose privation of original justice is due to Adam, is considered as a private person, this privation is not his 'fault', for a fault is essentially voluntary. If, however, we consider him as a member of the family of Adam, as if all men were only one man, then his privation partakes of the nature of sin on account of its voluntary origin, which is the actual sin of Adam" (De Malo, iv, 1). "一個人可以被認為無論是作為個人還是作為一個整體的一部分,一個成員的社會… … 。考慮在第二條路的行為,可他的,雖然他沒有這樣做,它自己也從沒有做他的自由意志,而是由其餘的協會或其頭部,對民族,而被視為做什麼王子是否為一個社會被視為一個單一的人,其中個人是不同成員(聖保羅,哥林多前書12 ) ,因此,眾多的男子,他們接受自己的人性,從亞當,是被視為一個單一的社區或,而不是作為一個單一的機構… … 。如果該名男子,其窮困的原始正義,是因為亞當,被認為是一個私人的人,這個窮困是不是他的'斷層' ,為系統故障,基本上是自願的。但是,如果我們把他當作大家庭的一個成員,亞當,因為如果所有男人只有一個人的話,他的窮困的參與大性質單就考慮到它的自願性原產地,這是實際的單亞當" (德聯絡辦公室,四, 1 ) 。

It is this law of solidarity, admitted by common sentiment, which attributes to children a part of the shame resulting from the father's crime.這是這部法律的團結,承認共同的情感,這歸因於孩子的一部分,在恥辱柱上,導致來自父親的罪行。 It is not a personal crime, objected the Pelagians.它不是個人犯罪,反對該pelagians 。 "No", answered St. Augustine, " but it is paternal crime" (Op. imperf., I, cxlviii). "沒有" ,回答了聖奧古斯丁, "這畢竟是父親犯罪" (業務imperf 。來說,我cxlviii ) 。 Being a distinct person I am not strictly responsible for the crime of another; the act is not mine.作為一個獨特的人,我不是嚴格罪行負責的另一種選擇;法令是不是地雷。 Yet, as a member of the human family, I am supposed to have acted with its head who represented it with regard to the conservation or the loss of grace.然而,作為一個共產黨員的人類大家庭,我要都把它頭部的人,這方面的養護或喪失的恩典。 I am, therefore, responsible for my privation of grace, taking responsibility in the largest sense of the word.因此,我負責我窮困的寬限期,以責任在最大意義上的字。 This, however, is enough to make the state of privation of grace in a certain degree voluntary, and, therefore, "without absurdity it may be said to be voluntary" (St. Augustine, "Retract.", I, xiii).但是,這一點足以使國家的窮困的寬限期,在一定程度上自願的,因此, "如果沒有荒誕它可以說是自願的" (聖奧古斯丁, "收回" ,我和十三) 。 Thus the principal difficulties of non-believers against the transmission of sin are answered.因此,主要的困難不信教公民對傳輸的單都已得到解答。

"Free will is essentially incommunicable." "自由意志基本上是incommunicable " 。 Physically, yes; morally, no; the will of the father being considered as that of his children.身體上,肯定在道義上,沒有;意志的父親被視為是他的孩子們。 "It is unjust to make us responsible for an act committed before our birth." "這是不公正的,使我們負責的行為之前,我們的誕生" 。 Strictly responsible, yes; responsible in a wide sense of the word, no; the crime of a father brands his yet unborn children with shame, and entails upon them a share of his own responsibility.嚴格責任,是負責在廣泛意義上的字,沒有;罪的一個父親的品牌,他尚未出生的孩子感到羞恥,並需要對他們分享他自己的責任。

"Your dogma makes us strictly responsible for the fault of Adam." "你的教條,使我們嚴格負責的過錯亞當" 。 That is a misconception of our doctrine.這是一個誤解,我們的學說。 Our dogma does not attribute to the children of Adam any properly so-called responsibility for the act of their father, nor do we say that original sin is voluntary in the strict sense of the word.我們的教條,沒有屬性,向孩子們亞當任何適當的,所以所謂的責任感,為的行為,他們的父親,也不是我們說的原罪是自願的,在嚴格意義上的字。 It is true that, considered as "a moral deformity", "a separation from God", as "the death of the soul", original sin is a real sin which deprives the soul of sanctifying grace.這是事實,視為"一個道德畸形" , "分隔神" , "死亡的靈魂" ,原罪是一個真正的單剝奪了靈魂sanctifying恩典。 It has the same claim to be a sin as has habitual sin, which is the state in which an adult is placed by a grave and personal fault, the "stain" which St. Thomas defines as "the privation of grace" (I-II:109:7; III:87:2, ad 3), and it is from this point of view that baptism, putting an end to the privation of grace, "takes away all that is really and properly sin", for concupiscence which remains "is not really and properly sin", although its transmission was equally voluntary (Council of Trent, Sess. V, can. v.).它同時聲稱自己是一種罪過,因為有慣常單,這是國家,其中一個成年人是放在一個嚴重和個人發生故障時, "污點" ,在聖托馬斯界定為"窮困的恩典" (我-第二組: 109:7 ;三: 87:2 ,專案3 ) ,它是從這個角度來看,即洗禮,從而結束了窮困的恩典, "剝奪一切是真的,並妥善罪" ,為concupiscence這仍然是"這不是真的,並妥善罪"的,儘管它的傳輸同樣志願(理事會的遄達, sess第五卷,可以訴) 。 Considered precisely as voluntary, original sin is only the shadow of sin properly so-called.正是考慮自願,原罪是唯一的陰影單妥當,所以所謂的。 According to St. Thomas (In II Sent., dist. xxv, Q. i, a. 2, ad 2um), it is not called sin in the same sense, but only in an analogous sense.據聖托馬斯(二派,區二十五,問:我,甲2 ,專案2um ) ,它是不是所謂的單仲偕在同樣的意義上,但只能在一個類似的常識。

Several theologians of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, neglecting the importance of the privation of grace in the explanation of original sin, and explaining it only by the participation we are supposed to have in the act of Adam, exaggerate this participation.幾位神學家的十七世紀和十八世紀,而忽略了重要的是窮困的寬限期,在解釋原罪,並解釋,它只能由參與,我們是為了在該法的亞當,誇大這種參與。 They exaggerate the idea of voluntary in original sin, thinking that it is the only way to explain how it is a sin properly so-called.他們誇大的想法,在自願的原罪,認為這是唯一的方法來解釋它是如何一種罪過妥當,所以所謂的。 Their opinion, differing from that of St. Thomas, gave rise to uncalled-for and insoluble difficulties.他們認為,從不同的是聖托馬斯,引起了不必要的和不溶性的困難。 At present it is altogether abandoned.當前最重要的是完全放棄了。

Publication information Written by S. Harent.出版信息寫的第harent 。 Transcribed by Sean Hyland.轉錄由Sean海侖。 The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XI.天主教百科全書,體積十一。 Published 1911. 1911年出版。 New York: Robert Appleton Company.紐約:羅伯特Appleton還公司。 Nihil Obstat, February 1, 1911. nihil obstat , 1911年2月1日。 Remy Lafort, STD, Censor.人頭馬lafort ,性病,檢查員。 Imprimatur. imprimatur 。 +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York +約翰farley樞機主教,大主教紐約


Also, see:此外,見:
Adam 亞當
Eden, Eve 伊甸,夏娃

This subject presentation in the original English language本主題介紹在原來的英文


Send an e-mail question or comment to us: E-mail發送電子郵件的問題或意見給我們:電子郵箱

The main BELIEVE web-page (and the index to subjects) is at主要相信網頁(和索引科目),是在