De lege
De lege
The topic of the laws will clarify the power and reasoning of sin, since the knowledge of sin is said to be the law. So if anything seems to be lacking in the higher place, it will be supplied here, unless I’m mistaken, by what follows. Although we don't do this, as Melancthon's Loci suggests. We're not doing this to create a systematic theology like Melancthon's. Let's gather together everything that can be said about individual topics, but we will only create a common terminology for the most universal concepts, so you can see where the essence of Christian doctrine depends and how Scripture should primarily be referenced. I want you to learn from Scripture, not from my commentary. For believe me, it matters a lot whether you draw from the springs or from the depths of such great things. Here, not only are sweeter waters drawn from the fountain, as the poet said, but also purer ones. How much more certain is what the Scriptures prescribe than what is taken from commentaries! The law is a statement that prescribes good actions and prohibits bad ones. The law is the authority to act according to the law. There are many things said by the ancients both for and against the laws, which we will indicate shortly after we clarify their source. Some laws are natural, some are divine, and some are human. I have not yet seen anything worthy written about natural laws, neither by theologians nor by legal experts. For since they are called natural, it was necessary to gather their principles through the method of human reason by means of natural syllogism. I see that nothing has yet been made by anyone, and I don't know if it can ever be done, since it seems to be so completely captured and obscured by human reasoning. Moreover, the law of nature exists within us, as Paul expresses so elegantly and astutely in the second chapter. As Paul writes in his letter to the Romans, . It teaches that there is a knowledge among the nations that defends or accuses actions; therefore, it is the law. What else is conscience but the judgment of our actions, which is sought from some law or common standard? Therefore, the law of nature is a common understanding that all people agree upon, and indeed, it is inscribed by God in our hearts to shape our morals. Just as there are certain common principles in theoretical disciplines, such as mathematics, which state that the whole is greater than its parts, so too are there certain common principles and fundamental conclusions in moral matters — these terms must be used for the sake of teaching the rules of all human functions. You have rightly called them the laws of nature. Cicero, in his books on laws, imitates Plato by deriving the principles of law from human nature; and I see that this is done more gracefully than accurately. However, many impious things often occur in Cicero's discussion, which usually happens when we follow methods and summaries of our own reasoning rather than the prescriptions of divine literature. For there is a deceptive law of human reasoning that governs the whole universe, which prescribes both good and evil. . Rhetoric and mathematics are essential. Digitized by Google Loci commanes. Judgment, because of the related blindness, is such that even if certain forms of behavior are inscribed in our souls, they can hardly be recognized. What I mean is that the laws of nature, impressed by God upon human minds, should be understood as certain inherent habits, not something invented by our own intellects, but rather a rule for judging moral matters that is instilled in us by God. I don't strive for it to align with Aristotle's philosophy. What does it matter to me, what does that brawler feel? I’ll set aside those things we share in common with animals: the ability to preserve life, to reproduce, and to create something else from ourselves, which the legal experts refer to as part of natural law; I call certain natural impulses common to living beings. However, the laws that pertain specifically to humanity seem to be the principles we've outlined. God is to be worshiped. Because we are born into a certain society of life, no one should be harmed. Human society demands that we share everything in common. We have received the first commandment about honoring God from the first chapter. In Romans, where there is no doubt, the Apostle states that among natural laws, it is acknowledged. He declares to all people His majesty through the condition and governance of the universe. . But for a human syllogism to conclude that God exists, it's more curious than pious to argue about it, especially since it's not safe for human reason to speculate about such significant matters, as I pointed out at the beginning of this summary. ) Indem Mel. While Aristotle argues against it, he still seems to want to calculate it; see. Aristotle. I don't know what you're talking about. It's clear that the second law, which states that no one should be harmed, is derived from the common necessity that binds all of us together, as Scripture indicates when it says (Gen. It’s not right for a solitary person to live alone; rather, they should have help for their life. Therefore, the law commands that no one should be harmed, which means that we should love one another earnestly, so that everyone may experience our goodwill through our effort and duty. Therefore, this law includes divine commands: that we should not kill anyone, nor take what belongs to others, and similar things. If you say: why then do magistrates kill the guilty? I respond: since this is the condition of human affairs, from which Adam's fall has left us all with the mark of sin, so that often the good are harmed by the wicked, it is necessary for humanity to strive to uphold the law of not harming others in many respects; therefore, those who disturb public peace and harm the innocent must be restrained, removed, and eliminated, so that more people can be saved by removing those who have caused harm. The law remains: do not harm anyone. But if someone has been harmed, this must be done, so that more people are not hurt, and the one who caused the harm must be removed. It's more important to protect the whole community than just one or two individuals; therefore, the one who threatens the well-being of the entire community through a single act of wrongdoing should be removed. Therefore, in a republic, there are magistrates; hence, there are penalties for wrongdoers; and thus, wars, which all jurists refer to the law of nations. And in civil laws, there is no other duty than to punish and to maintain order. The third law regarding human communion arises clearly from the nature of human society. If it should hold true among a few friends that what is commonly said is valid — that is, everything should be shared among friends — then why shouldn't the same apply among all people? After all, they ought to be so united with one another that brothers are united with brothers, children with parents, and parents with children. For this is what the law commands: not to harm anyone. But because human desire does not allow us to use things in common, this higher law must be corrected, namely, that no one should be harmed. And thus things are to be shared, as long as public peace and the safety of the community allow. For indeed, the lower laws are corrected by the higher ones, and a common assembly is to be called in a certain manner. Therefore, a third law must be established, namely: that things are to be divided, since the common good of many requires it. Moreover, since this is the condition of human affairs, that there must be at least some communication of things, because things ought to be naturally common, it has been established that they should be shared in use, namely through contracts: purchases, sales, leases, and other agreements. And here you see what the origin of contracts is. He saw this whole thing. You must follow the law. Plato says in the fifth book of his Laws that the best-run city is one where people can come closest to that common saying: 'Among friends, everything is shared.' Therefore, in such a city, not only should the possessions of citizens be shared, but also their very bodies—eyes, hands, feet, and mouths—should serve the common good of all, and there should be no other model sought for a well-ordered republic than that city where this principle can be observed. Therefore, contracts have been established through which many could share their possessions, so that there would be no complete lack of community in things. And these are the general principles of the natural laws, which you can summarize in this way: I. Worship God. Since we are born into a certain common life together, let no one be harmed, but let us help one another in our duties. If it can't be done that no one is harmed at all, then let it be arranged that as few as possible are harmed, by removing those who disturb the public peace and ensuring that penalties are imposed on those who are guilty. Let resources be divided for the sake of public peace. Moreover, through contracts, others will relieve the needs of those in want. Now, whoever wishes may add particular insights from poets, orators, and historians that are commonly referred to in matters of international law, such as those concerning marriage, adultery, the obligation of gratitude, ingratitude, hospitality, the exchange of goods, and similar topics that are often read about. For me, it seemed sufficient to note the most common forms. Don't let the Reformers recognize the dangerous consequences of idealism and the moral significance of property. The reformers recognized the dangerous consequences of idealism and acknowledged the moral significance of property. Likewise, H. Wiskemann, Darstellung nalökonomisohen Ansichten. Digitized by Google Looi commones. But I won't take the opinions of any random writers as laws. For many common sayings imitate the wrong impulses of our nature, not the laws. What kind of thing is this according to Hesiod? And the day —: Tov (piXeovxa (piXelv xal xco nqocnovxi nqocreiyai. What good is it to you if you gain the whole world but lose your soul? For in these verses, friendship is measured by its usefulness. Such is the common saying, 'You reap what you sow.' This relates to what they say about repelling force with force, which is similar to what Euripides wrote in 'Ion': "If you want to escape, you must escape." They say that force must be repelled by force, as it is stated in Euripides' Ion: "Force must be met with force." In civil law, which they call such, there are many emotions that reflect more human nature than the natural laws themselves. What good is it to be further from the law of nature than the captivity of slaves? And it is not civilly justified to claim that there is no contract that matters. But about these things, elsewhere. A good man tempers civil laws fairly and justly, that is, according to both divine and natural laws; against these, whatever is established cannot help but be unjust. And regarding the laws of nature up to this point, which, if you can, analyze with a more precise and subtle reasoning. See Trendelenburg, Natural Law §. . What good is it to you if you gain the whole world but lose your soul?
Read the original Latin
Locus de legibus non paulo clarius aperiet vim rationemque peccati, siquidem peccati cognitio lex esse dicitur.
Quare si quid superiori loco deesse videbitur, sarciet hic, ni fallor, qui sequitur.
Quanquam non hoc agimus, ut Melanthons Loci.
Digilized by Google Looi communes.
omnia, quae de singulis fortasse capitibus dici queant, coacervemus, sed nomenclaturam tantum communissimorum locorum facimus, ut videas, unde summa Christianae doctrinae pendeat et quorsum Scriptura potissimum referenda BÜ Atque bos locos volo non uti me magistro, sed monitore, e Scriptura, non e meo commentario discas.
Nam crede mibi, multum refert, e fontibus petas, an ex lacunis tantarum rerum materiem ).
Hic non modo dulciores aquae e fonte, ut poeta dixit, sed et puriores hauriuntur.
Quanto certius enim est, quod Scripturae praescribunt, quam quod e commentariis decerpitur!
Est autem lex sententia, qua bona tum praecipiuntur \ tum mala prohibentur.
Jus est auctoritas agendi secundum legem ).
Pro legibus et contra leges multa sunt a veteribus dicta, quae ex quo fonte manarint, paulo post indicabimus.
Legum aliae naturales sunt, aliae divinae, aliae humaI nae.
De naturalibus legibus nondum vidi neque a theologis neque a jurisconsultis aliquid digne scriptum.
Nam cum naturales dicantur, oportebat a rationis humanae methodo earum formulas colligi per naturalem syllogismum ).
Id Digitized quod nondum video a quoquam factum et haud scio, an omnino possit fieri, nempe usque adeo capta occaecataque ratione humana.
Porro esse in nobis legem naturae, Paulus mire eleganti et arguto enthymemate in secundo cap.
ad Rom. .
docet, cum sic colligit: Est in gentibus eonscientia, factum defendens vel accusans; est igitur lex ).
Quid enim aliud est conscientia, quam facti nostri iudicium, quod a lege aliqua aut communi formula petitur?
Est itaque lex naturae sententia communis, cui omnes homines pariter adsentimur, atque adeo quam Deus insculpsit cuj usque animo, ad formandos mores accommodata.
Nam ut sunt in disciplinis theoricis, ut mathematis ), quaedam communia principia sive noivai ivvoiai ij nqoXr^eiq, quale illud est, totum esse majus partibus: ita sunt quaedam in moralibus tum principia communia tum conclusiones primae — utendum est enim docendi gratia istorum vocabulis — regulae omnium humanarum functionum.
Has recte vocaveris leges naturae.
Cicero in libris de legibus Platonem imitatus ex natura hominis formulas legum derivat; quod ut non damno, ita urbane magis quam exacte fieri video.
Incidunt autem in eam Ciceronis disputationem etiam pleraque impia id quod fere solet accidere, cum methodos potius et compendia rationis nostrae sectamur quam divinarum literarum praescriptum.
Est enim in universum fallax humani captus lex sententia est, qua bona tum praecipiuntur tum mala prohiLogik in neuer Darstellung, §. .
rhetoricis et mathematicis.
Digitized by Google Loci commanes.
judicium, propter cognatam caecitatem, ita ut, etiamsi sint in animos nostros insculptae quaedam formae morum, tamen eae deprehendi vix possint.
Quod vero dico, leges naturae a Deo impressas mentibus humanis, volo earum cognitionem esse quosdam, ut isti loquuntur, habitus concreatos, non inventam a nostris ingeniis, sed insitam nobis a Deo regulam judicandi de moribus.
Id ut conveniat cum Aristotelis philosophia, non laboro.
Quid enim ad me, quid senserit ille rixator?
Omitto autem ea, quae cum brutis communia habemus; vitam tueri gignereque et aliud ex sese procreare, quae in jus naturae referunt jurisconsulti, ego naturales quosdam adfectus animantibus communiter insitos voco.
Legum autem, quae proprie ad hominem pertinent, haec videntur esse capita, quae subiecimus ).
Deus colendus est.
Quia nascimur in quandam vitae societatem, nemo laedendus est.
Poscit humana societas, ut omnibus rebus communiter utamur.
Primam legem de colendo Deo accepimus ex,primo cap.
ad Romanos, ubi non dubium est, quin inter naturales leges eam recenseat apostolus, cum inquit v. : Deum declarasse omnibus hominibus majestatem suam conditione et administratione universitatis mundi. .
Sed ut possit syllogismo humano colligi, esse Deum, curiosi magis est quam pii disputare, maxime cum rationi humanae non sit tutum, de tantis rebus argutari, ut hujus compendii principio monui ).
) Indem Mel.
fortwöhrend den Aristoteles bekämpft, geht er doch itivoy, rechnen will; vgl.
Arist.
I,, ntpl aperije de l ntGxe nxtoy dv$Q<oniyr)s dijlor or»' xett yag t' aya&oy dv^qdmvov iCv T ^f iiy T V y evdca/uoyiay ny&QOJrtyrjy.
Digitized De lege« Secundam legem, qua cavetur, ne quis laedatur, non dubium est, colligi ex necessitudine communi, qua omnes omnibus devincti copulatique nascimur, ut Scriptura indicat, cum inquit (Gen.
II, ), non convenire, ut homo solitarius degat, sed addendum ei esse auxilium vitae.
Jubet itaque lex, ne quis laedatur, hoc est, ut certatim inter nos amemus omnes, ut benevolentiam nostram studio et officio omnes experiantur.
Itaque haec lex complectitur divinas: ne quem occidamus, ne rapiamus aliena et similes ).
Si dicas: cur igitur magistratus sontes occidunt?
respondeo: quandoquidem ea est rerum humanarum conditio, ex quo prolapsus Adam inussit nobis omnibus notam peccati, ut saepe a malis boni laedantur, adnitendum esse humano generi, ut lex de non laedendo in plurimis conservetur ideoque cohercendos, refrenandos tollendosque esse e medio, qui publicam pacem interturbant, qui innocentes laedunt, quo plures servari possint, sublatis iis, qui laeserant.
Manet lex: neminem laede.
At si laesus quispiam fuerit, jam hoc agendum est, ne plures laedantur tollendusque is, qui laesit.
Pluris est universam multitudinem servare, quam unum aut alterum; ideo tollitur is, qui malum universae multitudini uno aut altero facinore mali exempli minatur.
Hinc in republica magistratus sunt, hinc sontium poenae, hinc bella, quae omnia jurisconsulti referunt in jus gentium ).
et legum civilium, non est aliud officium, nisi punire et ar Digilized by Google Loci eotnmtnes.
Tertiä lex de rermn communione plane ex ratiöne societatis humani generis oritur.
Nam si inter pauculos amicos valere debet, quod vulgo dicitur: xa tuiv tpiXwv xocvcc, id est, ut sint inter amicos omnia communia: cur non idem valeat inter omnes homines, siquidem debebant ita inter se omnes cohaerere, ut cohaerent fratres cum fratribus, liberi cum parentibus, parentes cum liberis?
Nam hoc jubebat lex de non laedendo.
Sed quia humana cupiditas non patitur, ut communiter omnibus utamur, corrigenda est haec lex superiore, scilicet, ne quis laedatur.
Et eatenus communicandae sunt res, quatenus permittit pax publica et salus multitudinis.
Nam fere superioribus legibus corriguntur inferiores et vocanda est vulgaris communio ad modum quendam.
Proinde pro tertia lege alia supponenda est, scilicet: res dividendas esse, quandoquidem ita postulet communis multorum salus.
Porro, quia rerum humanarum ea est conditio, ut aliqua saltem communicatione rerum opus sit, cum deberent esse res natura communes: institutum est, ut usu communicentur, nempe per contractus: emptionem, venditionem, locationem, conductionem et caeteros.
Et hic cernis,,'quae sit contractuum origo ).
Vidit haec Ganze.
v* lege.
IJ Plato, cum in libro quinto de legibus inquit, eam civitatem optime administrari, in qua quam proxime accedatur ad vulgare illud dictum: amicorum omnia esse communia adeoque ubi non modo res inter se civium communes sint, sed etiam sua eujjusque membra, oculi, manus, pedes, os, omnium publicae utilitati serviant nec aliud quaerendum esse exemplar bene constitutae reipublicae, nisi eam civitatem, in qua possit illud %cc tpiXwv xoiva observari.
Sunt itaque reperti contractus, per quos suae cuj usque res communicarentur multis, ne nulla prorsus esset rerum communio.
Et haec de generalibus formulis legum naturae, quas hoc modo potes digerere: I.
Deum cole.
Quia nascimur in quandam communem vitae societatem, neminem laede, sed officiis quosvis juvato.
Si fieri nequit, ut prorsus nemo laedatur, hoc agatur, ut paucissimi laedantur, sublatis iis, qui publicam quietem interturbant et in hoc magistratus poenaeque sontibus constituantur.
Res dividunto, propter publicam pacem.
Caeterum per contractus alii aliorum inopiam sublevent.
Jam, qui volet, e poetis, oratoribus, historicis adjungat peculiares sententias, quae ad jus gentium referri solent, qualia sunt quae de connubiis, de adulteriis, de reddenda gratia, de ingratitudine, de hospitalitate, de permutatione rerum et hoc genus aliis passim leguntur.
Nam mihi satis videbatur, communissimas formas adnotare.
Ne hen die Reformatoren die gefährlichen Folgen des Idealismus, erkannten die sittliche Bedeutung des Eigenthums an.
den schaft,, ß.
Ebenso H.
Wiskemann, Darstellung nalökonomisohen Ansichten,.
Digitized by Google Looi commones.
que vero temere quasvis gentilium scriptorum sententias pro legibus habebo.
Imitantur enim pleraeque vulgares sententiae pravos adfectus naturae nostrae, non leges.
Qualis est haec apud Hesiodum opp.
et dies —: Tov (piXeovxa (piXelv xal xco nqocnovxi nqocreiyai.
Kal dopev og xev d$ xal ixr\ Sofiey og xev iir\ Sw.
Nam his versibus amicitiam prorsus utilitate metitur.
Tale est et vulgatum illud Sog xi xal Xaße xi.
Huc pertinet quod vim vi repellendam dicunt, quale illud est apud Euripidem in Jone, —: Tr { v <T evaißetav, ivzvxovfft ) piv, xaXov lifiav.
oxav Se noXefiiovg Sgacai xaxcug OeXrj zig, ovSelg ifjbnoScoy xetxat yopog.
Sunt et in jure civili, quod ita vocant, pleraque adfectus magis humanos, quam naturales leges prae se ferentia.
Quid enim est a lege naturae alienius servorum captivitate?
) Et inciviliter nullis non contractibus praetexitur id, quod interest.
Sed de his alias.
- Bonus vir attempera# bit civiles constitutiones aequo ac bono, hoc est, tum divinis tum naturalibus legibus, contra quas, quidquid constituitur, non potest non iniquum esse. * Et de legibus naturae hactenus, quas, si potes, exactiore subtilioreque ratione digerito ).
Sache siehe Trendelenburg, Naturrecht §. .
Digltized by GoogleJ
Loci Communes Rerum Theologicarum companion
Pair doctrine with daily prayer
Chosen Portion gives your study a devotional anchor: one historic prayer and reading each day, free on iOS
Melanchthon insisted doctrine should end in piety; Chosen Portion supplies the daily devotional practice that study like this is meant to feed.
- A 10-minute daily devotional rhythm to carry alongside your 5-week study
- Prayers and texts from the same centuries you're reading about
- Free install; day one's portion is waiting when you finish this plan's first reading