📘 Taasisi za Dini ya Kikristo (Mateuzi) — John Calvin

1. Aina Mbili za Kujua: Mungu na Sisi Wenyewe1. Two Kinds of Knowing: God and Ourselves

John Calvin, Taasisi za Dini ya Kikristo (toleo la mwisho la Kilatini, 1559; tafsiri ya Kiingereza ya John Allen, 1813; Project Gutenberg #45001), Kitabu cha I, sura za I–III, kamili (sehemu za I–III, I–II na I–III): uhusiano kati ya kumjua Mungu na kujijua sisi wenyewe, asili ya utauwa wa kweli, na hisia ya Mungu iliyopandwa katika kila akili ya mwanadamu. Chanzo cha msingi; tafsiri ni za mwandishi.John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (final Latin edition, 1559; English translation by John Allen, 1813; Project Gutenberg #45001), Book I, chapters I–III, complete (sections I–III, I–II and I–III): the connection between knowing God and knowing ourselves, the nature of true piety, and the sense of God implanted in every human mind. Primary source; the interpretations are the author’s.

> Maelezo ya CTS: Calvin (1509–1564) alichapisha Taasisi mara ya kwanza mwaka 1536 kama kitabu kifupi cha mwongozo kwa Waprotestanti wa Ufaransa, kisha akaendelea kukiongeza hadi toleo la mwisho la Kilatini la 1559, ambalo kozi hii inalitumia katika Kiingereza cha John Allen (1813). Sura hizi za mwanzo zinaweka mpango wa kazi nzima: hekima ya kweli ni kumjua Mungu na kujijua sisi wenyewe. Neno “utauwa” (piety) la Allen linamaanisha heshima iliyoambatana na upendo kwa Mungu, inayotokana na kujua fadhili zake; “Deity” (Uungu) na “Divinity” (Uungu) humaanisha tu Mungu; “the schools” (shule) ni vyuo vikuu. Calvin anawatumia waandishi wa kale wa Kigiriki na Kirumi (Cicero, Plato, Plutarko) na historia ya Roma (mfalme Caligula) kuonyesha kwamba hata wapagani hawakuweza kuepuka hisia ya Mungu. Sehemu ya kwanza ya kila sura ya Calvin haina namba; sehemu zinazofuata zimehesabiwa II, III, na kadhalika, kama kwa Allen. Alama za tanbihi zimeondolewa.CTS note: Calvin (1509–1564) first published the Institutes in 1536 as a short handbook for French Protestants and kept enlarging it until the final Latin edition of 1559, which this course uses in John Allen’s English (1813). These opening chapters set the plan of the whole work: true wisdom is knowing God and knowing ourselves. Allen’s “piety” means reverence joined with love toward God, arising from knowing his benefits; “Deity” and “Divinity” simply mean God; “the schools” are the universities. Calvin draws freely on classical authors (Cicero, Plato, Plutarch) and on Roman history (the emperor Caligula) to show that even pagans could not escape a sense of God. Calvin’s first section in each chapter carries no number; the following sections are numbered II, III, and so on, as in Allen. Footnote markers have been removed.

Kitabu cha I. Sura ya I. Uhusiano Kati ya Kumjua Mungu na Kujijua Sisi Wenyewe.Book I. Chapter I. The Connection Between the Knowledge of God and the Knowledge of Ourselves.

Hekima ya kweli na thabiti hasa ina sehemu mbili: kumjua Mungu, na kujijua sisi wenyewe. Lakini ingawa mambo haya mawili ya maarifa yameunganika kwa karibu sana, si rahisi kugundua lipi hutangulia na kulizaa lingine. Maana, kwanza kabisa, hakuna mtu awezaye kujitazama mwenyewe bila kuelekeza mara moja mawazo yake kwa Mungu, ambaye ndani yake yeye “anaishi na kutenda”; kwa kuwa ni dhahiri kwamba vipawa tulivyo navyo havitoki kwetu wenyewe, na kwamba kuwapo kwetu kwenyewe si chochote ila kutegemea Mungu peke yake. Fadhili hizi, zinazotudondokea kutoka mbinguni tone kwa tone, ni kama vijito vingi vinavyotuongoza hadi kwenye chemchemi yenyewe. Umaskini wetu unasaidia kuonyesha waziwazi zaidi utele usio na kikomo wa Mungu. Hasa, uharibifu wa kusikitisha tuliotumbukizwa ndani yake kwa kuasi kwa mtu wa kwanza, unatulazimisha kuinua macho yetu mbinguni, si tu kama watu wenye njaa wanaotafuta huko riziki ya mahitaji yao, bali pia, tukiwa tumeamshwa kwa hofu, ili tujifunze unyenyekevu. Kwa kuwa mwanadamu yuko chini ya wingi wa mateso, na amenyang’anywa vazi lake la kimungu, ufunuo huu wa huzuni unaonyesha rundo kubwa la ubaya; kwa hiyo kila mtu lazima aguswe na fahamu ya taabu yake mwenyewe, hata afikie kiasi fulani cha kumjua Mungu. Hivyo, fahamu ya ujinga wetu, ubatili, umaskini, udhaifu, upotovu na uharibifu inatuongoza kuona na kukiri kwamba kwa Bwana peke yake ndiko zinakopatikana hekima ya kweli, nguvu thabiti, wema kamili na haki isiyo na doa; na hivyo, kwa upungufu wetu tunachochewa kuutafakari ukamilifu wa Mungu. Wala hatuwezi kweli kumwelekea yeye, mpaka tuanze kutoridhika na sisi wenyewe. Maana ni nani asiyetaka kuridhika na nafsi yake? Yuko wapi mtu ambaye hajazama kabisa katika kujipendeza, maadamu hajui hali yake halisi, au anaridhika na vipawa vyake mwenyewe, na hajui au amesahau taabu yake? Kwa hiyo, kujijua sisi wenyewe si tu kichocheo cha kumtafuta Mungu, bali pia ni msaada mkubwa wa kumpata.True and substantial wisdom principally consists of two parts, the knowledge of God, and the knowledge of ourselves. But, while these two branches of knowledge are so intimately connected, which of them precedes and produces the other, is not easy to discover. For, in the first place, no man can take a survey of himself but he must immediately turn to the contemplation of God, in whom he “lives and moves;” since it is evident that the talents which we possess are not from ourselves, and that our very existence is nothing but a subsistence in God alone. These bounties, distilling to us by drops from heaven, form, as it were, so many streams conducting us to the fountain-head. Our poverty conduces to a clearer display of the infinite fulness of God. Especially, the miserable ruin, into which we have been plunged by the defection of the first man, compels us to raise our eyes towards heaven, not only as hungry and famished, to seek thence a supply for our wants, but, aroused with fear, to learn humility. For, since man is subject to a world of miseries, and has been spoiled of his divine array, this melancholy exposure discovers an immense mass of deformity: every one, therefore, must be so impressed with a consciousness of his own infelicity, as to arrive at some knowledge of God. Thus a sense of our ignorance, vanity, poverty, infirmity, depravity, and corruption, leads us to perceive and acknowledge that in the Lord alone are to be found true wisdom, solid strength, perfect goodness, and unspotted righteousness; and so, by our imperfections, we are excited to a consideration of the perfections of God. Nor can we really aspire toward him, till we have begun to be displeased with ourselves. For who would not gladly rest satisfied with himself? where is the man not actually absorbed in self-complacency, while he remains unacquainted with his true situation, or content with his own endowments, and ignorant or forgetful of his own misery? The knowledge of ourselves, therefore, is not only an incitement to seek after God, but likewise a considerable assistance towards finding him.

II. Kwa upande mwingine, ni wazi kwamba hakuna mtu awezaye kufikia maarifa ya kweli juu yake mwenyewe, bila kwanza kuutafakari tabia ya Mungu, kisha kushuka kuitafakari tabia yake mwenyewe. Maana, jinsi ilivyo kiburi cha asili cha sisi sote, sikuzote tunajiona kuwa tu waadilifu, wasio na hatia, wenye hekima na watakatifu, hata tuhakikishwe kwa ushahidi ulio wazi juu ya udhalimu wetu, uchafu wetu, upumbavu wetu na unajisi wetu. Lakini hatuhakikishwi hivyo kamwe tukijitazama sisi wenyewe tu bila kumtazama Bwana, ambaye ndiye kipimo pekee ambacho hukumu hii inapaswa kupimwa kwacho. Kwa sababu, kutokana na mwelekeo wetu wa asili wa unafiki, sura yoyote tupu ya haki yatutosheleza badala ya uhalisi wake; na kwa kuwa kila kitu ndani yetu na kandokando yetu kimenajisika mno, tunafurahia kile kilicho na unajisi mdogo zaidi kana kwamba ni safi kabisa, maadamu mawazo yetu yamefungwa ndani ya mipaka ya uharibifu wa kibinadamu. Ndivyo jicho lililozoea kuona weusi tu, linavyohukumu kuwa jeupe sana kile ambacho ni cheupe kidogo tu, au labda kahawia. Kwa kweli, hisia za miili yetu zaweza kutusaidia kugundua jinsi tunavyokosea vibaya katika kukadiria nguvu za roho. Maana tukitazama adhuhuri ardhini au vitu vinavyotuzunguka, tunahitimisha kwamba macho yetu yana nguvu na ukali wa kuona; lakini tunapoinua macho na kulitazama jua kwa makini, mara yanapofushwa na kuchanganyikiwa kwa mwanga huo mkali, nasi tunalazimika kukiri kwamba kuona kwetu, kulikokuwa kukali tuliposhughulika na vitu vya duniani, kunapoelekezwa kwenye jua ni giza lenyewe. Ndivyo inavyotokea pia tunapozingatia vipawa vyetu vya kiroho. Maana maadamu mitazamo yetu inaishia duniani, tukiridhika kabisa na haki yetu wenyewe, hekima yetu na nguvu zetu, tunajipapasa kwa kujidanganya, na kujidhania kuwa hatuko mbali sana na miungu ya nusu. Lakini mara tunapoinua mawazo yetu kwa Mungu, na kuzingatia asili yake, na ukamilifu mkamilifu wa haki yake, hekima yake na nguvu zake, ambazo tunapaswa kufanana nazo,—kile kilichotuvutia hapo awali ndani yetu kwa kisingizio cha uongo cha haki, kitachukiwa upesi kama uovu mkuu kuliko yote; kile kilichotudanganya kwa ajabu kwa jina la hekima, kitadharauliwa kama upumbavu mkubwa; na kile kilichoonekana kama nguvu, kitathibitika kuwa udhaifu wa kuhuzunisha kupita kiasi. Kwa hiyo kile kinachoonekana ndani yetu kuwa ukamilifu wa juu kabisa kiko mbali mno na usafi wa Mungu.II. On the other hand, it is plain that no man can arrive at the true knowledge of himself, without having first contemplated the divine character, and then descended to the consideration of his own. For, such is the native pride of us all, we invariably esteem ourselves righteous, innocent, wise, and holy, till we are convinced, by clear proofs, of our unrighteousness, turpitude, folly, and impurity. But we are never thus convinced, while we confine our attention to ourselves, and regard not the Lord, who is the only standard by which this judgment ought to be formed. Because, from our natural proneness to hypocrisy, any vain appearance of righteousness abundantly contents us instead of the reality; and, every thing within and around us being exceedingly defiled, we are delighted with what is least so, as extremely pure, while we confine our reflections within the limits of human corruption. So the eye, accustomed to see nothing but black, judges that to be very white, which is but whitish, or perhaps brown. Indeed, the senses of our bodies may assist us in discovering how grossly we err in estimating the powers of the soul. For if at noon-day we look either on the ground, or at any surrounding objects, we conclude our vision to be very strong and piercing; but when we raise our eyes and steadily look at the sun, they are at once dazzled and confounded with such a blaze of brightness, and we are constrained to confess, that our sight, so piercing in viewing terrestrial things, when directed to the sun, is dimness itself. Thus also it happens in the consideration of our spiritual endowments. For as long as our views are bounded by the earth, perfectly content with our own righteousness, wisdom, and strength, we fondly flatter ourselves, and fancy we are little less than demigods. But, if we once elevate our thoughts to God, and consider his nature, and the consummate perfection of his righteousness, wisdom, and strength, to which we ought to be conformed,—what before charmed us in ourselves under the false pretext of righteousness, will soon be loathed as the greatest iniquity; what strangely deceived us under the title of wisdom, will be despised as extreme folly; and what wore the appearance of strength, will be proved to be most wretched impotence. So very remote from the divine purity is what seems in us the highest perfection.

III. Ndiyo sababu ya kutisha na kustaajabu ambako Maandiko sikuzote huonyesha watakatifu wamejaa na kusumbuliwa nako, kila walipogundua uwepo wa Mungu. Maana tunapowaona wale ambao kabla ya kuonekana kwake walisimama salama na imara, wakistaajabishwa na kuogopeshwa hivyo na kudhihirishwa kwa utukufu wake, hata wakazimia na karibu kufa kwa hofu,—lazima tuhitimishe kwamba mwanadamu hagusiwi vya kutosha na kujua unyonge wake mwenyewe, mpaka ajilinganishe na Ukuu wa Mungu. Mifano ya mshangao huu mkubwa tunayo mingi kwa Waamuzi na Manabii; hata ikawa usemi wa kawaida kati ya watu wa Bwana—“Hakika tutakufa, kwa kuwa tumemwona Mungu.” Kwa hiyo habari ya Ayubu, ili kuwanyenyekeza watu kwa kuwafahamisha unajisi wao, kutokuwa na uwezo kwao na upumbavu wao, inachukua hoja yake kuu kutoka kwa maelezo ya usafi wa Mungu, nguvu zake na hekima yake. Wala si bila sababu. Maana tunamwona Abrahamu, kadiri alivyokaribia kuuona utukufu wa Bwana, ndivyo alivyokiri kikamilifu zaidi kwamba yeye ni “mavumbi na majivu” tu; na jinsi Eliya asivyoweza kustahimili kukaribia kwake bila kufunika uso wake, kwa kuwa kutokea kwake ni kwa kutisha. Na mwanadamu, aliye mchafu na mpotovu kabisa, anaweza kufanya nini, wakati hofu inawalazimisha hata makerubi wenyewe kufunika nyuso zao? Hili ndilo nabii Isaya analosema—“Mwezi utaaibika, na jua litatahayarika, wakati Bwana wa majeshi atakapomiliki”: yaani, atakapofanya onyesho kamili zaidi na la karibu zaidi la fahari yake, litafifisha fahari ya kitu chochote kingine kilicho angavu zaidi. Lakini ingawa kumjua Mungu na kujijua sisi wenyewe kumeunganika kwa karibu, utaratibu unaofaa wa mafundisho unatutaka tushughulikie kwanza la kwanza, kisha tuendelee kujadili la pili.III. Hence that horror and amazement with which the Scripture always represents the saints to have been impressed and disturbed, on every discovery of the presence of God. For when we see those, who before his appearance stood secure and firm, so astonished and affrighted at the manifestation of his glory, as to faint and almost expire through fear,—we must infer that man is never sufficiently affected with a knowledge of his own meanness, till he has compared himself with the Divine Majesty. Of this consternation we have frequent examples in the Judges and Prophets; so that it was a common expression among the Lord’s people—“We shall die, because we have seen God.” Therefore the history of Job, to humble men with a consciousness of their pollution, impotence, and folly, derives its principal argument from a description of the Divine purity, power, and wisdom. And not without reason. For we see how Abraham, the nearer he approached to behold the glory of the Lord, the more fully acknowledged himself to be but “dust and ashes;” and how Elias could not bear his approach without covering his face, his appearance is so formidable. And what can man do, all vile and corrupt, when fear constrains even the cherubim themselves to veil their faces? This is what the prophet Isaiah speaks of—“the moon shall be confounded, and the sun ashamed, when the Lord of hosts shall reign:” that is, when he shall make a fuller and nearer exhibition of his splendour, it shall eclipse the splendour of the brightest object besides. But, though the knowledge of God and the knowledge of ourselves be intimately connected, the proper order of instruction requires us first to treat of the former, and then to proceed to the discussion of the latter.

Kitabu cha I. Sura ya II. Asili na Mwelekeo wa Kumjua Mungu.Book I. Chapter II. The Nature and Tendency of the Knowledge of God.

Ninaposema kumjua Mungu, simaanishi tu wazo kwamba yupo Kiumbe kama huyo, bali pia kufahamu chochote tunachopaswa kujua juu yake, kinachoelekea utukufu wake na faida yetu. Maana hatuwezi kusema kwa usahihi kwamba kuna kumjua Mungu mahali ambapo hapana dini wala utauwa. Simaanishi hapa ile namna ya maarifa ambayo kwayo watu, waliopotea na kuhukumiwa ndani yao wenyewe, wanamfahamu Mungu Mkombozi katika Kristo Mpatanishi; bali ni ile maarifa ya kwanza na rahisi tu, ambayo utaratibu halisi wa asili ungetuongoza kuyafikia, kama Adamu angedumu katika kutokuwa na hatia. Maana ingawa katika hali ya sasa ya uharibifu wa asili ya mwanadamu, hakuna mtu atakayemwona Mungu kuwa Baba, au Mwanzilishi wa wokovu, au mwenye fadhili kwa namna yoyote, ila kwa kutulizwa na upatanisho wa Kristo; hata hivyo ni jambo moja kufahamu kwamba Mungu Muumba wetu hutudumisha kwa uwezo wake, hututawala kwa majaliwa yake, hutulisha kwa wema wake, na hutufuata kwa baraka za kila aina, na ni jambo lingine kuikumbatia neema ya upatanisho tuliyowekewa katika Kristo. Kwa hiyo, kwa kuwa Mungu hufunuliwa kwanza, katika muundo wa ulimwengu na katika mwelekeo wa jumla wa Maandiko, kama Muumba tu, kisha baadaye hujidhihirisha katika nafsi ya Kristo kama Mkombozi, ndipo hutokea maarifa ya aina mbili juu yake; ambayo ya kwanza yanapaswa kuzingatiwa kwanza, na jingine litafuata mahali pake panapostahili. Maana ingawa akili yetu haiwezi kumfikiria Mungu bila kumpa ibada fulani, haitatosha kufahamu tu kwamba yeye ndiye pekee anayestahili ibada na kuabudiwa na wote, isipokuwa pia tumeshawishika kwamba yeye ni chemchemi ya kila jema, na hatutafuti jema lolote ila ndani yake. Hili ninalishikilia, si tu kwa sababu yeye huushikilia ulimwengu, kama alivyouumba hapo awali, kwa nguvu zake zisizo na kikomo, huutawala kwa hekima yake, huuhifadhi kwa wema wake, na hasa hutawala juu ya jamii ya wanadamu kwa haki na hukumu, akitumia uvumilivu wa rehema, na kuwalinda kwa ulinzi wake; bali kwa sababu haiwezi kupatikana hata chembe ndogo ya hekima, nuru, haki, nguvu, unyofu, au kweli ya dhati isiyotoka kwake na kumdai yeye kuwa mwanzilishi wake: kwa hiyo tunapaswa kujifunza kutarajia na kuomba mambo haya yote kutoka kwake, na kukiri kwa shukrani yale anayotupa. Maana fahamu hii ya ukamilifu wa kimungu inalenga kutufundisha utauwa, ambao huzaa dini. Kwa utauwa, namaanisha heshima na upendo kwa Mungu, vinavyotokana na kujua fadhili zake. Maana, mpaka watu watambue kwamba wanadaiwa kila kitu na Mungu, kwamba wanashikiliwa na uangalizi wake wa kibaba, kwamba yeye ndiye Mwanzilishi wa baraka zote wanazozifurahia, na kwamba hakuna kitu kinachopaswa kutafutwa pasipo yeye, hawatajisalimisha kwa hiari kwa mamlaka yake; hawatajitoa kikweli na kwa moyo wote katika utumishi wake, mpaka wamtegemee yeye peke yake kwa furaha ya kweli.By the knowledge of God, I intend not merely a notion that there is such a Being, but also an acquaintance with whatever we ought to know concerning Him, conducing to his glory and our benefit. For we cannot with propriety say, there is any knowledge of God where there is no religion or piety. I have no reference here to that species of knowledge by which men, lost and condemned in themselves, apprehend God the Redeemer in Christ the Mediator; but only to that first and simple knowledge, to which the genuine order of nature would lead us, if Adam had retained his innocence. For though, in the present ruined state of human nature, no man will ever perceive God to be a Father, or the Author of salvation, or in any respect propitious, but as pacified by the mediation of Christ; yet it is one thing to understand, that God our Maker supports us by his power, governs us by his providence, nourishes us by his goodness, and follows us with blessings of every kind, and another to embrace the grace of reconciliation proposed to us in Christ. Therefore, since God is first manifested, both in the structure of the world and in the general tenor of Scripture, simply as the Creator, and afterwards reveals himself in the person of Christ as a Redeemer, hence arises a twofold knowledge of him; of which the former is first to be considered, and the other will follow in its proper place. For though our mind cannot conceive of God, without ascribing some worship to him, it will not be sufficient merely to apprehend that he is the only proper object of universal worship and adoration, unless we are also persuaded that he is the fountain of all good, and seek for none but in him. This I maintain, not only because he sustains the universe, as he once made it, by his infinite power, governs it by his wisdom, preserves it by his goodness, and especially reigns over the human race in righteousness and judgment, exercising a merciful forbearance, and defending them by his protection; but because there cannot be found the least particle of wisdom, light, righteousness, power, rectitude, or sincere truth which does not proceed from him, and claim him for its author: we should therefore learn to expect and supplicate all these things from him, and thankfully to acknowledge what he gives us. For this sense of the divine perfections is calculated to teach us piety, which produces religion. By piety, I mean a reverence and love of God, arising from a knowledge of his benefits. For, till men are sensible that they owe every thing to God, that they are supported by his paternal care, that he is the Author of all the blessings they enjoy, and that nothing should be sought independently of him, they will never voluntarily submit to his authority; they will never truly and cordially devote themselves to his service, unless they rely upon him alone for true felicity.

II. Baridi na tupu, basi, ni mawazo ya wale wanaojishughulisha na mijadala juu ya nafsi ya Mungu, ilhali ingekuwa ya kuvutia zaidi kwetu kuijua tabia yake, na kujua kinachopatana na asili yake. Maana ni faida gani inayopatikana kwa kukiri, pamoja na Epikuro, kwamba kuna Mungu, ambaye, akiacha kujishughulisha kabisa na ulimwengu, hujipumzisha katika uvivu wa milele? Ni faida gani inayotokana na kumjua Mungu ambaye hatuhusiani naye? Maarifa yetu ya Mungu yanapaswa badala yake kuelekea, kwanza, kutufundisha hofu na heshima; na pili, kutuelekeza kuomba kila jema mkononi mwake, na kumpa sifa kwa yote tunayopokea. Maana unawezaje kuwaza juu ya Mungu bila kutafakari mara moja kwamba, ukiwa kiumbe cha uumbaji wake, lazima, kwa haki ya uumbaji, uwe chini ya mamlaka yake? kwamba unamdai uhai wako, na kwamba matendo yako yote yanapaswa kufanywa kwa kumhusu yeye? Ikiwa hili ni kweli, bila shaka inafuata kwamba maisha yako ni mabovu kwa kusikitisha, isipokuwa yanaongozwa na tamaa ya kumtii, kwa kuwa mapenzi yake yanapaswa kuwa kanuni ya mwenendo wetu. Wala huwezi kuwa na mtazamo wazi juu yake bila kugundua kwamba yeye ni chemchemi na asili ya kila jema. Hili lingezaa tamaa ya kuungana naye, na kumwamini, kama akili ya mwanadamu isingevutwa na upotovu wake yenyewe kutoka njia sahihi ya uchunguzi. Maana, hata mwanzoni, akili ya mcha Mungu haiwazii mungu wa kubuni, bali humtafakari Mungu mmoja wa kweli tu; na juu yake haifuati hadithi za mawazo, bali, ikiridhika kumwamini kuwa vile anavyojifunua, hutumia tahadhari ya bidii na isiyokoma, ili isije ikaanguka katika kosa kwa kuvunja mapenzi yake kwa haraka na kwa kiburi. Yule anayemjua hivyo, akitambua kwamba vitu vyote viko chini ya mamlaka yake, humtumaini kama Mlinzi wake na Msaidizi wake, na hujiweka bila kuficha chini ya utunzaji wake. Akiwa na hakika kwamba yeye ni mwanzilishi wa baraka zote, katika dhiki au uhitaji hukimbilia mara moja ulinzi wake, na kutarajia msaada wake. Akishawishika juu ya wema wake na huruma yake, humtegemea kwa uhakika usio na kikomo, wala hana shaka ya kupata katika huruma yake dawa iliyoandaliwa kwa maovu yake yote. Akimjua kuwa Bwana wake na Baba yake, anahitimisha kwamba anapaswa kuona utawala wake katika mambo yote, kuuheshimu ukuu wake, kujitahidi kuendeleza utukufu wake, na kutii amri zake. Akimwona kuwa Hakimu mwenye haki, aliyejihami kwa ukali wa kuadhibu makosa, huuweka kiti chake cha hukumu mbele ya macho yake sikuzote, na huzuiliwa na hofu asichochee ghadhabu yake. Hata hivyo hatishwi kiasi cha kutaka kuikwepa haki yake, hata ikiwezekana kuikimbia; bali humpenda sawasawa anapowaadhibu waovu kama anapowabariki wacha Mungu, kwa sababu anaamini kwamba ni lazima kwa utukufu wake kuwaadhibu wasiomcha Mungu na waliopotea, kama vile kuwapa wenye haki uzima wa milele. Zaidi ya hayo, hujizuia kutenda dhambi, si tu kwa hofu ya kisasi, bali kwa sababu anampenda na kumheshimu Mungu kama Baba yake, anamstahi na kumwabudu kama Bwana wake, na, hata kama hapangekuwa na jehanamu, angetetemeka kwa wazo la kumkosea. Tazama, basi, hali ya dini safi na ya kweli. Inajumuisha imani, iliyoungana na hofu makini ya Mungu, ikihusisha heshima ya hiari, na kuzaa ibada halali inayopatana na maagizo ya sheria. Na hili linahitaji kuzingatiwa kwa makini zaidi, kwa sababu watu kwa jumla humpa Mungu ibada ya nje tu, lakini ni wachache sana wanaomstahi kweli; huku maonyesho makubwa katika taratibu yakionekana kila mahali, lakini unyofu wa moyo ni nadra kupatikana.II. Cold and frivolous, then, are the speculations of those who employ themselves in disquisitions on the essence of God, when it would be more interesting to us to become acquainted with his character, and to know what is agreeable to his nature. For what end is answered by professing, with Epicurus, that there is a God, who, discarding all concern about the world, indulges himself in perpetual inactivity? What benefit arises from the knowledge of a God with whom we have no concern? Our knowledge of God should rather tend, first, to teach us fear and reverence; and, secondly, to instruct us to implore all good at his hand, and to render him the praise of all that we receive. For how can you entertain a thought of God without immediately reflecting, that, being a creature of his formation, you must, by right of creation, be subject to his authority? that you are indebted to him for your life, and that all your actions should be done with reference to him? If this be true, it certainly follows that your life is miserably corrupt, unless it be regulated by a desire of obeying him, since his will ought to be the rule of our conduct. Nor can you have a clear view of him without discovering him to be the fountain and origin of all good. This would produce a desire of union to him, and confidence in him, if the human mind were not seduced by its own depravity from the right path of investigation. For, even at the first, the pious mind dreams not of any imaginary deity, but contemplates only the one true God; and, concerning him, indulges not the fictions of fancy, but, content with believing him to be such as he reveals himself, uses the most diligent and unremitting caution, lest it should fall into error by a rash and presumptuous transgression of his will. He who thus knows him, sensible that all things are subject to his control, confides in him as his Guardian and Protector, and unreservedly commits himself to his care. Assured that he is the author of all blessings, in distress or want he immediately flies to his protection, and expects his aid. Persuaded of his goodness and mercy, he relies on him with unlimited confidence, nor doubts of finding in his clemency a remedy provided for all his evils. Knowing him to be his Lord and Father, he concludes that he ought to mark his government in all things, revere his majesty, endeavour to promote his glory, and obey his commands. Perceiving him to be a just Judge, armed with severity for the punishment of crimes, he keeps his tribunal always in view, and is restrained by fear from provoking his wrath. Yet he is not so terrified at the apprehension of his justice, as to wish to evade it, even if escape were possible; but loves him as much in punishing the wicked as in blessing the pious, because he believes it as necessary to his glory to punish the impious and abandoned, as to reward the righteous with eternal life. Besides, he restrains himself from sin, not merely from a dread of vengeance, but because he loves and reveres God as his Father, honours and worships him as his Lord, and, even though there were no hell, would shudder at the thought of offending him. See, then, the nature of pure and genuine religion. It consists in faith, united with a serious fear of God, comprehending a voluntary reverence, and producing legitimate worship agreeable to the injunctions of the law. And this requires to be the more carefully remarked, because men in general render to God a formal worship, but very few truly reverence him; while great ostentation in ceremonies is universally displayed, but sincerity of heart is rarely to be found.

Kitabu cha I. Sura ya III. Akili ya Mwanadamu Imejaliwa Asili Kumjua Mungu.Book I. Chapter III. The Human Mind Naturally Endued with the Knowledge of God.

Tunaweka kama msimamo usiopingika kwamba akili ya mwanadamu, hata kwa silika ya asili, ina hisia fulani ya Uungu. Maana ili mtu asijifiche chini ya kisingizio cha kutojua, Mungu amewapa wote ufahamu fulani wa kuwapo kwake, ambao hukumbushwa mara nyingi bila wao kutambua; hivyo, kwa kuwa watu wote kwa jumla wanajua kwamba yuko Mungu, na kwamba yeye ni Muumba wao, lazima wahukumiwe kwa ushuhuda wao wenyewe, kwa kutomwabudu na kuyaweka maisha yao wakfu kwa utumishi wake. Tukitafuta kutojua Uungu, hakuna mahali pengine panapowezekana kuupata zaidi kuliko miongoni mwa makabila yaliyo wajinga kuliko yote na yaliyo mbali zaidi na ustaarabu. Lakini, kama asemavyo Cicero mashuhuri, hakuna taifa lililo la kishenzi kiasi hicho, wala jamii iliyo ya kinyama kiasi hicho, isiyoshawishika kabisa juu ya kuwapo kwa Mungu. Hata wale wanaoonekana kwa mambo mengine kutofautiana kidogo tu na wanyama, sikuzote huhifadhi hisia fulani ya dini; kiasi hiki ndivyo akili za watu zilivyoshikwa na kanuni hii ya kawaida, iliyofumwa kwa karibu na umbo lao la asili. Basi, kwa kuwa hapajapata kuwapo nchi wala jamaa, tangu mwanzo wa ulimwengu, iliyokosa kabisa dini, ni ungamo la kimya kwamba hisia fulani ya Uungu imeandikwa katika kila moyo. Kuhusu maoni haya, ibada ya sanamu yenyewe hutoa ushahidi tele. Maana tunajua jinsi mwanadamu asivyopenda kujidhalilisha ili kuinua viumbe vingine juu yake. Upendeleo wake wa kuabudu kipande cha mti au jiwe, kuliko kudhaniwa kuwa hana mungu, unaonyesha kwamba alama ya Uungu katika akili ya mwanadamu ina nguvu sana, na kwamba kuifuta ni vigumu kuliko kubadilisha kabisa tabia ya asili; na hii hakika hubadilishwa, kila mwanadamu anapoacha kiburi chake cha asili na kushuka kwa hiari hadi unyonge huo kwa wazo la kumwabudu Mungu.We lay it down as a position not to be controverted, that the human mind, even by natural instinct, possesses some sense of a Deity. For that no man might shelter himself under the pretext of ignorance, God hath given to all some apprehension of his existence, the memory of which he frequently and insensibly renews; so that, as men universally know that there is a God, and that he is their Maker, they must be condemned by their own testimony, for not having worshipped him and consecrated their lives to his service. If we seek for ignorance of a Deity, it is nowhere more likely to be found, than among tribes the most stupid and furthest from civilization. But, as the celebrated Cicero observes, there is no nation so barbarous, no race so savage, as not to be firmly persuaded of the being of a God. Even those who in other respects appear to differ but little from brutes, always retain some sense of religion; so fully are the minds of men possessed with this common principle, which is closely interwoven with their original composition. Now, since there has never been a country or family, from the beginning of the world, totally destitute of religion, it is a tacit confession, that some sense of the Divinity is inscribed on every heart. Of this opinion, idolatry itself furnishes ample proof. For we know how reluctantly man would degrade himself to exalt other creatures above him. His preference of worshipping a piece of wood or stone, to being thought to have no god, evinces the impression of a Deity on the human mind to be very strong, the obliteration of which is more difficult than a total change of the natural disposition; and this is certainly changed, whenever man leaves his natural pride, and voluntarily descends to such meannesses under the notion of worshipping God.

II. Ni upuuzi mkubwa, basi, kudai, kama wengine wanavyodai, kwamba dini ilikuwa ubunifu wa watu wachache wajanja na wenye hila, mashine ya kisiasa ya kuwaweka watu wengi wasio na maarifa katika wajibu wao, ilhali wale waliowafundisha wengine ibada ya Mungu wenyewe hawakuamini kabisa kwamba yupo mungu yeyote. Nakiri, kwa kweli, kwamba watu wajanja wameingiza ubunifu mwingi katika dini, ili kuwajaza watu wa kawaida heshima, na kuwatia hofu, wapate mamlaka zaidi juu ya akili zao. Lakini hili hawangeweza kulitimiza, kama akili za watu hazingekuwa zimeshikwa kwanza na imani thabiti juu ya kuwapo kwa Mungu, ambamo mwelekeo wa dini hutoka. Na kwamba wale waliowadanganya wasiojua kwa ujanja chini ya kisingizio cha dini, wao wenyewe walikosa kabisa maarifa yoyote ya Mungu, ni jambo lisiloaminika kamwe. Maana ingawa wako waliokuwapo nyakati za kale, na wengi wanaotokea katika kizazi hiki, wanaokana kuwapo kwa Mungu, hata hivyo, wao wenyewe hupata daima ushahidi wa kile wasichotaka kukiamini. Hatusomi juu ya mtu mwenye hatia ya dharau ya kuthubutu na isiyo na kizuizi dhidi ya Uungu kuliko Caligula; lakini hapana mtu aliyepata kutetemeka kwa dhiki kubwa zaidi kwa mfano wowote wa ghadhabu ya Mungu, hata akalazimika kuogopa Uungu ambaye alidai kuudharau. Hili unaweza kuliona sikuzote kwa watu wa tabia kama hiyo. Maana wale wanaomdharau Mungu kwa ujasiri zaidi ndio wanaoshtuka zaidi, hata kwa sauti ya jani linaloanguka. Hili linatoka wapi, ila kwa kisasi cha Ukuu wa Mungu, kinachopiga dhamiri zao kwa nguvu zaidi kwa kadiri ya jitihada zao za kukikimbia? Wanajaribu kila kimbilio ili kujificha mbele za uso wa Bwana, na kuufuta akilini mwao; lakini jitihada zao zote za kuukwepa ni bure. Ingawa unaweza kuonekana kutoweka kwa muda mfupi, mara hurudi kwa nguvu iliyoongezeka; hata kama wanapata kitulizo chochote cha uchungu wa dhamiri, kinafanana na usingizi wa walevi, au wenye kichaa, ambao hawafurahii mapumziko ya amani wakiwa wamelala, kwa kuwa wanasumbuliwa daima na ndoto za kutisha na za kuogofya. Kwa hiyo, hata waovu wenyewe wanathibitisha kauli kwamba wazo la Mungu halipotei kamwe katika akili ya mwanadamu.II. It is most absurd, then, to pretend, as is asserted by some, that religion was the contrivance of a few subtle and designing men, a political machine to confine the simple multitude to their duty, while those who inculcated the worship of God on others, were themselves far from believing that any god existed. I confess, indeed, that artful men have introduced many inventions into religion, to fill the vulgar with reverence, and strike them with terror, in order to obtain the greater command over their minds. But this they never could have accomplished, if the minds of men had not previously been possessed of a firm persuasion of the existence of God, from which the propensity to religion proceeds. And that they who cunningly imposed on the illiterate, under the pretext of religion, were themselves wholly destitute of any knowledge of God, is quite incredible. For though there were some in ancient times, and many arise in the present age, who deny the existence of God, yet, in spite of their reluctance, they are continually receiving proofs of what they desire to disbelieve. We read of no one guilty of more audacious or unbridled contempt of the Deity than Caligula; yet no man ever trembled with greater distress at any instance of Divine wrath, so that he was constrained to dread the Divinity whom he professed to despise. This you may always see exemplified in persons of similar character. For the most audacious contemners of God are most alarmed, even at the noise of a falling leaf. Whence arises this, but from the vengeance of the Divine Majesty, smiting their consciences the more powerfully in proportion to their efforts to fly from it? They try every refuge to hide themselves from the Lord’s presence, and to efface it from their minds; but their attempts to elude it are all in vain. Though it may seem to disappear for a moment, it presently returns with increased violence; so that, if they have any remission of the anguish of conscience, it resembles the sleep of persons intoxicated, or subject to frenzy, who enjoy no placid rest while sleeping, being continually harassed with horrible and tremendous dreams. The impious themselves, therefore, exemplify the observation, that the idea of a God is never lost in the human mind.

III. Itakuwa dhahiri sikuzote kwa watu wenye hukumu sahihi kwamba wazo la Uungu lililowekwa katika akili ya mwanadamu haliwezi kufutika. Kwamba wote wana kwa asili imani ya ndani juu ya kuwapo kwa Mungu, imani isiyoweza kutenganishwa na umbo lao lenyewe, tunao ushahidi mwingi katika ukaidi wa waovu, ambao mapambano yao makali ya kujinasua na hofu ya Mungu hayafai kitu. Ingawa Diagoras, na wengine kama yeye, wanafanya mzaha juu ya kile ambacho vizazi vyote vimeamini kuhusu dini; ingawa Dionisio anadharau hukumu ya Mbinguni,—ni kicheko cha kulazimishwa tu, kwa kuwa funza wa dhamiri yenye hatia huwatesa ndani, vibaya kuliko kama wangechomwa kwa chuma cha moto. Sikubaliani na Cicero kwamba makosa kadiri wakati unavyopita hupitwa na wakati, na kwamba dini huongezeka na kuboreshwa kila siku. Maana ulimwengu, kama itakavyoonekana hivi karibuni, hutumia juhudi zake zote kufukuza maarifa yote ya Mungu, na hujaribu kila njia ya kuharibu ibada yake. Nadai tu kwamba, ingawa ganzi hiyo ya kijinga ambayo waovu wanatamani kuipata, ili kuendeleza dharau yao kwa Mungu, inawala akilini mwao, hisia ya Uungu ambayo wanatamani kwa bidii kuizima bado ina nguvu, na mara nyingi hujidhihirisha. Kutokana na hili tunahitimisha kwamba hili ni fundisho ambalo halipaswi kujifunzwa kwanza shuleni, bali ambalo kila mtu tangu kuzaliwa kwake amejifundisha mwenyewe, na ambalo, ingawa wengi hujitahidi kwa nguvu zote kuliondoa kwao, asili yenyewe haimruhusu mtu yeyote kulisahau. Sasa, ikiwa kusudi ambalo watu wote wanazaliwa na kuishi ni kumjua Mungu,—na kama maarifa ya Mungu hayajafikia hatua hii, ni ya mashaka na ya bure,—ni dhahiri kwamba wote wasioelekeza kila wazo na tendo la maisha kwa kusudi hili, wameharibika kutoka katika sheria ya uumbaji wao. Hili hata wanafalsafa wapagani wenyewe hawakulikosa. Hii ndiyo maana ya Plato, alipofundisha kwamba wema mkuu wa roho unapatikana katika kufanana na Mungu, roho ikiwa na maarifa wazi juu yake, na kubadilishwa kabisa kuwa mfano wake. Hoja ya Grili, katika Plutarko, nayo ni sahihi sana, anaposema kwamba watu waliokosa kabisa dini, si tu kwamba hawapiti wanyama, bali kwa njia nyingi ni wa kuhuzunisha zaidi, kwa kuwa wanakabiliwa na uovu kwa namna nyingi, na sikuzote wanaburuza maisha yenye ghasia na yasiyo na raha. Ibada ya Mungu, kwa hiyo, ndiyo kitu pekee kinachowafanya watu kuwa bora kuliko wanyama, na kuwafanya watamani kutokufa.III. It will always be evident to persons of correct judgment, that the idea of a Deity impressed on the mind of man is indelible. That all have by nature an innate persuasion of the Divine existence, a persuasion inseparable from their very constitution, we have abundant evidence in the contumacy of the wicked, whose furious struggles to extricate themselves from the fear of God are unavailing. Though Diagoras, and others like him, turn to ridicule what all ages have believed of religion; though Dionysius scoff at the judgment of Heaven,—it is but a forced laughter, for the worm of a guilty conscience torments them within, worse than if they were seared with hot irons. I agree not with Cicero, that errors in process of time become obsolete, and that religion is increased and ameliorated daily. For the world, as will shortly be observed, uses its utmost endeavours to banish all knowledge of God, and tries every method of corrupting his worship. I only maintain, that while the stupid insensibility which the wicked wish to acquire, to promote their contempt of God, preys upon their minds, yet the sense of a Deity, which they ardently desire to extinguish, is still strong, and frequently discovers itself. Whence we infer, that this is a doctrine, not first to be learned in the schools, but which every man from his birth is self-taught, and which, though many strain every nerve to banish it from them, yet nature itself permits none to forget. Now, if the end for which all men are born and live, be to know God,—and unless the knowledge of God have reached this point, it is uncertain and vain,—it is evident, that all who direct not every thought and action of life to this end, are degenerated from the law of their creation. Of this the heathen philosophers themselves were not ignorant. This was Plato’s meaning, when he taught that the chief good of the soul consists in similitude to God, when the soul, having a clear knowledge of him, is wholly transformed into his likeness. The reasoning also of Gryllus, in Plutarch, is very accurate, when he affirms, that men entirely destitute of religion, not only do not excel the brutes, but are in many respects far more wretched, being obnoxious to evil under so many forms, and always dragging on a tumultuous and restless life. The worship of God is therefore the only thing which renders men superior to brutes, and makes them aspire to immortality.

2. Miwani kwa Macho Hafifu: Maandiko na Ushuhuda wa Roho2. Spectacles for Dim Eyes: Scripture and the Witness of the Spirit

John Calvin, Taasisi za Dini ya Kikristo (toleo la mwisho la Kilatini, 1559; tafsiri ya Kiingereza ya John Allen, 1813; Project Gutenberg #45001), Kitabu cha I, sura za VI–VII, kamili (sehemu za I–IV na I–V): kwa nini Maandiko yanahitajika ili kumjua Mungu Muumba, na kwa nini mamlaka yake yamesimama juu ya ushuhuda wa ndani wa Roho Mtakatifu na si juu ya uamuzi wa Kanisa. Chanzo cha msingi; tafsiri ni za mwandishi.John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (final Latin edition, 1559; English translation by John Allen, 1813; Project Gutenberg #45001), Book I, chapters VI–VII, complete (sections I–IV and I–V): why Scripture is needed to know God the Creator, and why its authority rests on the inward testimony of the Holy Spirit rather than on the decision of the Church. Primary source; the interpretations are the author’s.

> Maelezo ya CTS: Sura ya VII ni mojawapo ya vifungu vyenye ushawishi mkubwa zaidi katika theolojia ya Kireformed. Calvin anafundisha kwamba Maandiko “yanajithibitisha yenyewe” (Kigiriki autopistos): mamlaka yake yanatoka kwa Mungu anayesema ndani yake, na waumini wanahakikishiwa jambo hili kwa ushuhuda wa ndani wa Roho Mtakatifu. Mazingira ya kihistoria: katika siku za Calvin, wabishi wa Kikatoliki cha Roma walisema kwamba hukumu ya Kanisa peke yake ndiyo inayoweza kutuambia ni vitabu gani ni Maandiko; Mtaguso wa Trento (1546) ulithibitisha Maandiko na mapokeo pamoja. Maneno makali ya Calvin (“watu wakufuru,” “udhalimu usio na kikomo”) yanahusu mjadala huo wa karne ya kumi na sita, na wapinzani wake nao walijibu kwa lugha kali vilevile. Wanafunzi wanapaswa kupima hoja, wasiuige ukali wa sauti; Wakristo wa mapokeo mengi leo wanakubali kwamba Roho na Kanisa vyote vina sehemu katika kupokea Maandiko, ingawa bado wanatofautiana jinsi vinavyohusiana. “Cavillers” ni watu wanaoleta pingamizi ndogondogo; “an earnest” (arabuni) ni malipo ya awali au dhamana.CTS note: Chapter VII is one of the most influential passages in Reformed theology. Calvin teaches that Scripture is “self-authenticated” (Greek autopistos): its authority comes from God who speaks in it, and believers are assured of this by the inward testimony of the Holy Spirit. Historical context: in Calvin’s day Roman Catholic controversialists argued that only the Church’s judgment could tell us which books are Scripture; the Council of Trent (1546) affirmed Scripture and tradition together. Calvin’s sharp words (“sacrilegious men,” “unlimited tyranny”) belong to that sixteenth-century debate and were matched by equally harsh language from his opponents. Students should weigh the argument, not adopt the tone; Christians of many traditions today agree that the Spirit and the Church both have a part in receiving Scripture, while still differing on how they relate. “Cavillers” are people who raise petty objections; “an earnest” is a down payment or pledge.

Kitabu cha I. Sura ya VI. Mwongozo na Mafundisho ya Maandiko Yanayohitajika Kutuongoza Kumjua Mungu Muumba.Book I. Chapter VI. The Guidance and Teaching of the Scripture Necessary to Lead to the Knowledge of God the Creator.

Ingawa nuru inayojionyesha kwa macho yote, mbinguni na duniani, inatosha kabisa kuwanyima wanadamu kisingizio chochote kwa kutokushukuru kwao, kwa kuwa Mungu, ili kuwafunga wanadamu wote katika hatia moja, huwawekea wote bila ubaguzi onyesho la ukuu wake, lililochorwa katika viumbe,—hata hivyo tunahitaji msaada mwingine, ulio bora zaidi, wa kutuelekeza ipasavyo kwa Muumba wa ulimwengu. Kwa hiyo hakuongeza nuru ya neno lake bila sababu, ili ajulikane kwa wokovu, naye amewaheshimu kwa fursa hii wale aliokusudia kuwaunganisha naye katika uhusiano wa karibu na wa kifamilia zaidi. Maana, alipoona akili za watu wote zinasumbuliwa na tabia zisizo imara, alipowachagua Wayahudi kuwa kundi lake maalum, aliwazungushia kama zizi, wasipotee kufuata ubatili wa mataifa mengine. Wala si bila sababu anatuhifadhi sisi katika maarifa safi juu yake mwenyewe kwa njia hiyo hiyo; maana vinginevyo, hata wale wanaoonekana kusimama imara kwa kulinganisha wangeanguka upesi. Maana kama vile watu wazee, au ambao macho yao yamefifia kwa njia yoyote, ukiwaonyesha kitabu kizuri kuliko vyote, ingawa wanaona kuna kitu kimeandikwa, hawawezi kusoma hata maneno mawili mfululizo, lakini kwa msaada wa miwani wataanza kusoma kwa wazi,—vivyo hivyo Maandiko, yakikusanya akilini mwetu mawazo ya Uungu yaliyochanganyikana, yanatawanya giza, na kutupa mtazamo wazi wa Mungu wa kweli. Hii ni neema ya pekee, kwamba katika mafundisho ya Kanisa, Mungu hatumii walimu bubu tu, bali hufungua kinywa chake kitakatifu mwenyewe; si tu kutangaza kwamba mungu fulani anapaswa kuabudiwa, bali wakati huo huo hujitangaza kuwa ndiye Yule anayestahili ibada hii; na si tu kuwafundisha wateule kuinua macho yao kwa Uungu, bali pia hujionyesha yeye mwenyewe kuwa lengo la tafakari yao. Njia hii ameishika kwa Kanisa lake tangu mwanzo; zaidi ya masomo hayo ya kawaida, aliwapa pia neno lake; ambalo hutoa kipimo sahihi zaidi na cha uhakika cha kumtofautisha na miungu yote ya kubuni. Na bila shaka ni kwa msaada huu kwamba Adamu, Nuhu, Abrahamu, na mababu wengine, walifikia ule ujuzi wa karibu uliowatofautisha na wasioamini. Sisemi bado juu ya fundisho maalum la imani lililowatia nuru hata wakapata tumaini la uzima wa milele. Maana, ili kupita kutoka mauti hadi uzima, lazima walimjua Mungu, si kama Muumba tu, bali pia kama Mkombozi; kama hakika walivyopata yote mawili kutoka kwa neno lake. Kwa kuwa aina ile ya maarifa iliyomhusu yeye kama Muumba na Mtawala wa ulimwengu, kwa mpangilio, ilitangulia ile nyingine. Kwa hayo liliongezwa baadaye lile maarifa lingine la ndani, ambalo peke yake huzihuisha roho zilizokufa, na humwelewa Mungu, si tu kama Muumba wa ulimwengu, na kama Mwanzilishi na Mwamuzi pekee wa matukio yote, bali pia kama Mkombozi katika nafsi ya Mpatanishi. Lakini kwa kuwa bado hatujafikia anguko la mwanadamu na uharibifu wa asili, wala sishughulikii pia dawa yake. Kwa hiyo msomaji akumbuke kwamba sishughulikii bado agano lile ambalo kwalo Mungu aliwapokea watoto wa Abrahamu, wala hatua ile ya mafundisho ambayo kwayo waumini wametengwa sikuzote na mataifa yasiyo ya kimungu, kwa kuwa hiyo imejengwa juu ya Kristo; bali nionyeshe tu jinsi tunavyopaswa kujifunza kutoka Maandiko kwamba Mungu aliyeumba ulimwengu anaweza kutofautishwa kwa uhakika na wingi wote wa miungu ya kubuni. Mfuatano wa mada utatuongoza kwenye ukombozi kwa wakati wake. Lakini ingawa tutaleta ushuhuda mwingi kutoka Agano Jipya, na baadhi pia kutoka Torati na Manabii, ambamo Kristo anatajwa waziwazi, yote yatalenga kuthibitisha kwamba Maandiko yanatufunulia Mungu kama Muumba wa ulimwengu, na yanatangaza ni mawazo gani tunapaswa kuwa nayo juu yake, ili tusimtafute mungu katika labirinti ya mashaka.Though the light which presents itself to all eyes, both in heaven and in earth, is more than sufficient to deprive the ingratitude of men of every excuse, since God, in order to involve all mankind in the same guilt, sets before them all, without exception, an exhibition of his majesty, delineated in the creatures,—yet we need another and better assistance, properly to direct us to the Creator of the world. Therefore he hath not unnecessarily added the light of his word, to make himself known unto salvation, and hath honoured with this privilege those whom he intended to unite in a more close and familiar connection with himself. For, seeing the minds of all men to be agitated with unstable dispositions, when he had chosen the Jews as his peculiar flock, he enclosed them as in a fold, that they might not wander after the vanities of other nations. And it is not without cause that he preserves us in the pure knowledge of himself by the same means; for, otherwise, they who seem comparatively to stand firm, would soon fall. For, as persons who are old, or whose eyes are by any means become dim, if you show them the most beautiful book, though they perceive something written, but can scarcely read two words together, yet, by the assistance of spectacles, will begin to read distinctly,—so the Scripture, collecting in our minds the otherwise confused notions of Deity, dispels the darkness, and gives us a clear view of the true God. This, then, is a singular favour, that, in the instruction of the Church, God not only uses mute teachers, but even opens his own sacred mouth; not only proclaims that some god ought to be worshipped, but at the same time pronounces himself to be the Being to whom this worship is due; and not only teaches the elect to raise their view to a Deity, but also exhibits himself as the object of their contemplation. This method he hath observed toward his Church from the beginning; beside those common lessons of instruction, to afford them also his word; which furnishes a more correct and certain criterion to distinguish him from all fictitious deities. And it was undoubtedly by this assistance that Adam, Noah, Abraham, and the rest of the patriarchs, attained to that familiar knowledge which distinguished them from unbelievers. I speak not yet of the peculiar doctrine of faith which illuminated them into the hope of eternal life. For, to pass from death to life, they must have known God, not only as the Creator, but also as the Redeemer; as they certainly obtained both from his word. For that species of knowledge, which related to him as the Creator and Governor of the world, in order, preceded the other. To this was afterwards added the other internal knowledge, which alone vivifies dead souls, and apprehends God, not only as the Creator of the world, and as the sole Author and Arbiter of all events, but also as the Redeemer in the person of the Mediator. But, being not yet come to the fall of man and the corruption of nature, I also forbear to treat of the remedy. Let the reader remember, therefore, that I am not yet treating of that covenant by which God adopted the children of Abraham, and of that point of doctrine by which believers have always been particularly separated from the profane nations, since that is founded on Christ; but am only showing how we ought to learn from the Scripture, that God, who created the world, may be certainly distinguished from the whole multitude of fictitious deities. The series of subjects will, in due time, lead us to redemption. But, though we shall adduce many testimonies from the New Testament, and some also from the Law and the Prophets, in which Christ is expressly mentioned, yet they will all tend to prove, that the Scripture discovers God to us as the Creator of the world, and declares what sentiments we should form of him, that we may not be seeking after a deity in a labyrinth of uncertainty.

II. Lakini, ikiwa Mungu alijifunua kwa mababu kwa maneno ya kiunabii na maono, au alipendekeza, kwa huduma ya watu, kile kilichopaswa kupitishwa kwa mapokeo kwa vizazi vyao, hakuna shaka kwamba akili zao zilitiwa muhuri wa uhakika thabiti wa mafundisho hayo, hata wakashawishika na kuhakikishwa kwamba habari walizopokea zilitoka kwa Mungu. Maana Mungu sikuzote alilihakikishia neno lake sifa isiyotiliwa shaka, kuu kuliko maoni yote ya wanadamu. Hatimaye, ili kweli idumu duniani katika mfululizo wa mafundisho kwa vizazi vyote, aliamua kwamba mausia yale yale aliyoyaweka kwa mababu yawekwe katika kumbukumbu za hadharani. Kwa kusudi hili Sheria ilitangazwa, ambayo Manabii waliongezwa baadaye kuwa wafasiri wake.—Maana ingawa matumizi ya sheria yalikuwa mengi, kama itakavyoonekana vizuri mahali pake; na hasa nia ya Musa, na ya manabii wote, ilikuwa kufundisha njia ya upatanisho kati ya Mungu na mwanadamu, (ndiyo maana Paulo pia anamwita Kristo “mwisho wa sheria,”)—hata hivyo narudia tena kwamba, zaidi ya fundisho maalum la imani na toba, linalomweka Kristo kuwa Mpatanishi, Maandiko yanamtofautisha Mungu mmoja wa kweli kwa alama na majina fulani, kama Muumba na Mtawala wa ulimwengu, asichanganywe na wingi wa miungu ya uongo. Kwa hiyo, ingawa kila mtu anapaswa kujishughulisha kwa dhati na kuzitafakari kazi za Mungu, akiwa amewekwa katika jukwaa hili tukufu sana awe mtazamaji wake, anapaswa hasa kulisikiliza neno, ili apate faida za juu zaidi. Na kwa hiyo si ajabu kwamba wale waliozaliwa gizani wanazidi kuwa wagumu katika ujinga wao; kwa kuwa ni wachache sana wanaolisikiliza neno la Mungu kwa moyo wa kufundishika, wajizuie ndani ya mipaka ambayo linaiweka, bali hushangilia katika ubatili wao wenyewe. Hii, basi, lazima ichukuliwe kama kanuni thabiti: ili tufurahie nuru ya dini ya kweli, tunapaswa kuanzia na mafundisho ya mbinguni; na kwamba hakuna mtu awezaye kuwa na maarifa hata kidogo ya mafundisho ya kweli na yenye afya, bila kuwa mwanafunzi wa Maandiko. Kutoka hapa huanza hekima yote ya kweli, tunapoukumbatia kwa heshima ushuhuda ambao Mungu amependa kuutoa humo juu yake mwenyewe. Maana utii ni chanzo, si cha imani kamili kabisa tu, bali cha maarifa yote sahihi ya Mungu. Na kwa kweli katika jambo hili Mungu, kwa majaliwa yake, ameangalia hasa faida za kweli za wanadamu katika vizazi vyote.II. But, whether God revealed himself to the patriarchs by oracles and visions, or suggested, by means of the ministry of men, what should be handed down by tradition to their posterity, it is beyond a doubt that their minds were impressed with a firm assurance of the doctrine, so that they were persuaded and convinced that the information they had received came from God. For God always secured to his word an undoubted credit, superior to all human opinion. At length, that the truth might remain in the world in a continual course of instruction to all ages, he determined that the same oracles which he had deposited with the patriarchs should be committed to public records. With this design the Law was promulgated, to which the Prophets were afterwards annexed, as its interpreters.—For, though the uses of the law were many, as will be better seen in the proper place; and particularly the intention of Moses, and of all the prophets, was to teach the mode of reconciliation between God and man, (whence also Paul calls Christ “the end of the law,”)—yet I repeat again, that, beside the peculiar doctrine of faith and repentance, which proposes Christ as the Mediator, the Scripture distinguishes the only true God by certain characters and titles, as the Creator and Governor of the world, that he may not be confounded with the multitude of false gods. Therefore, though every man should seriously apply himself to a consideration of the works of God, being placed in this very splendid theatre to be a spectator of them, yet he ought principally to attend to the word, that he may attain superior advantages. And, therefore, it is not surprising, that they who are born in darkness grow more and more hardened in their stupidity; since very few attend to the word of God with teachable dispositions, to restrain themselves within the limits which it prescribes, but rather exult in their own vanity. This, then, must be considered as a fixed principle, that, in order to enjoy the light of true religion, we ought to begin with the doctrine of heaven; and that no man can have the least knowledge of true and sound doctrine, without having been a disciple of the Scripture. Hence originates all true wisdom, when we embrace with reverence the testimony which God hath been pleased therein to deliver concerning himself. For obedience is the source, not only of an absolutely perfect and complete faith, but of all right knowledge of God. And truly in this instance God hath, in his providence, particularly consulted the true interests of mankind in all ages.

III. Maana, tukitafakari kubadilikabadilika kwa akili ya mwanadamu,—jinsi ilivyo rahisi kusahau Mungu; jinsi mwelekeo wake wa makosa ya kila aina ulivyo mkubwa; jinsi hasira yake ya kubuni daima dini mpya na za uongo ilivyo kali,—itakuwa rahisi kuona umuhimu wa mafundisho ya mbinguni kuandikwa hivyo, yasipotee katika usahaulifu, wala yasipotee katika makosa, wala yasiharibiwe na kiburi cha wanadamu. Kwa kuwa ni dhahiri, basi, kwamba Mungu, akiona kuwa kujidhihirisha kwake katika muundo wa kupendeza wa ulimwengu hakuna matokeo ya kutosha, amewapa msaada wa neno lake wote ambao aliamua kuwafundisha kwa ufanisi,—ikiwa kwa dhati tunatamani kumtafakari Mungu kwa unyofu, ni lazima tuifuate njia hii sahihi. Lazima tulifikie neno, nasema, linalotoa maelezo sahihi na hai ya Mungu kama anavyoonekana katika kazi zake, kazi hizo zinapokadiriwa si kwa hukumu yetu iliyoharibika, bali kwa kipimo cha kweli ya milele. Tukiiacha, kama nilivyokwisha sema, ingawa tunakimbia kwa kasi kubwa, kwa kuwa tuko nje ya njia hatutafika kamwe kwenye lengo. Maana lazima tuhitimishe kwamba nuru ya uso wa Mungu, ambayo hata Mtume anasema “hakuna mtu awezaye kuikaribia,” ni kama labirinti (msokoto wa njia) isiyoweza kufafanuliwa kwetu, isipokuwa tukiongozwa na mstari wa neno; hata ingekuwa afadhali kusimama njiani humo kuliko kukimbia kwa kasi kubwa nje yake. Kwa hiyo Daudi, akisisitiza umuhimu wa kuondoa ushirikina duniani, dini safi istawi, mara nyingi humleta Mungu akiwa “anamiliki”; kwa neno “anamiliki,” akimaanisha si nguvu aliyo nayo, na anayoitumia katika utawala wa jumla wa asili, bali fundisho ambalo kwalo anadai enzi yake halali; kwa sababu makosa hayawezi kung’olewa moyoni mwa mwanadamu, mpaka maarifa ya kweli ya Mungu yapandwe ndani yake.III. For, if we consider the mutability of the human mind,—how easy its lapse into forgetfulness of God; how great its propensity to errors of every kind; how violent its rage for the perpetual fabrication of new and false religions,—it will be easy to perceive the necessity of the heavenly doctrine being thus committed to writing, that it might not be lost in oblivion, or evaporate in error, or be corrupted by the presumption of men. Since it is evident, therefore, that God, foreseeing the inefficacy of his manifestation of himself in the exquisite structure of the world, hath afforded the assistance of his word to all those to whom he determined to make his instructions effectual,—if we seriously aspire to a sincere contemplation of God, it is necessary for us to pursue this right way. We must come, I say, to the word, which contains a just and lively description of God as he appears in his works, when those works are estimated, not according to our depraved judgment, but by the rule of eternal truth. If we deviate from it, as I have just observed, though we run with the utmost celerity, yet, being out of the course, we shall never reach the goal. For it must be concluded, that the light of the Divine countenance, which even the Apostle says “no man can approach unto,” is like an inexplicable labyrinth to us, unless we are directed by the line of the word; so that it were better to halt in this way, than to run with the greatest rapidity out of it. Therefore David, inculcating the necessity of the removal of superstitions out of the world, that pure religion may flourish, frequently introduces God as “reigning;” by the word “reigning,” intending, not the power which he possesses, and which he exercises in the universal government of nature, but the doctrine in which he asserts his legitimate sovereignty; because errors can never be eradicated from the human heart, till the true knowledge of God is implanted in it.

IV. Kwa hiyo mwimbaji yule yule, baada ya kusema kwamba “mbingu zauhubiri utukufu wa Mungu, na anga laitangaza kazi ya mikono yake; mchana husemezana na mchana, na usiku hutoa maarifa kwa usiku,” anaendelea baadaye kulitaja neno: “Sheria ya Bwana ni kamilifu, huuburudisha nafsi; ushuhuda wa Bwana ni amini, humtia mjinga hekima; maagizo ya Bwana ni adili, huufurahisha moyo; amri ya Bwana ni safi, huyatia macho nuru.” Maana ingawa anajumuisha pia matumizi mengine ya sheria, anaonyesha kwa jumla kwamba, kwa kuwa mwaliko wa Mungu kwa mataifa yote kwake kwa kutazama mbingu na dunia hauna matokeo, hii ndiyo shule maalum ya watoto wa Mungu. Jambo hilo hilo linadokezwa katika Zaburi ya ishirini na tisa, ambamo mwimbaji, baada ya kuhubiri vitisho vya sauti ya Mungu, ambayo katika radi, katika pepo, katika mvua nyingi, katika vimbunga na dhoruba, hutikisa dunia, hutetemesha milima, na kuvunja mierezi, anaongeza hatimaye, karibu na mwisho, “hekaluni mwake kila mtu husema, Utukufu!”; kwa sababu wasioamini ni viziwi kwa sauti zote za Mungu zinazovuma angani. Vivyo hivyo, katika Zaburi nyingine, baada ya kueleza mawimbi ya kutisha ya bahari, anamalizia hivi: “Shuhuda zako ni amini sana; utakatifu wafaa nyumba yako, Ee Bwana, milele na milele.” Kutoka hapa pia unatoka usemi wa Kristo kwa yule mwanamke Msamaria, kwamba taifa lake na mataifa mengine yote yaliabudu wasiyoyajua; na kwamba Wayahudi peke yao ndio waliomwabudu Mungu wa kweli. Maana, kwa kuwa akili ya mwanadamu haina uwezo, kwa sababu ya udhaifu wake, wa kufikia maarifa yoyote ya Mungu bila msaada wa neno lake takatifu, wanadamu wote, isipokuwa Wayahudi, kwa kuwa walimtafuta Mungu pasipo neno, lazima walikuwa wakitangatanga katika ubatili na makosa.IV. Therefore the same Psalmist, having said, that “the heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament showeth his handy-work; day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night showeth knowledge,” afterwards proceeds to the mention of the word: “The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple: the statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes.” For, though he also comprehends other uses of the law, yet he suggests, in general, that, since God’s invitation of all nations to him by the view of heaven and earth is ineffectual, this is the peculiar school of the children of God. The same is adverted to in the twenty-ninth Psalm, where the Psalmist, having preached the terrors of the Divine voice, which in thunders, in winds, in showers, in whirlwinds, and in tempests, shakes the earth, makes the mountains tremble, and breaks the cedars, adds, at length, towards the close, “in his temple doth every one speak of his glory;” because unbelievers are deaf to all the voices of God, which resound in the air. So, in another Psalm, after describing the terrible waves of the sea, he concludes thus: “Thy testimonies are very sure: holiness becometh thine house, O Lord, for ever.” Hence also proceeds the observation of Christ to the Samaritan woman, that her nation and all others worshipped they knew not what; and that the Jews were the only worshippers of the true God. For, since the human mind is unable, through its imbecility, to attain any knowledge of God without the assistance of his sacred word, all mankind, except the Jews, as they sought God without the word, must necessarily have been wandering in vanity and error.

Kitabu cha I. Sura ya VII. Ushuhuda wa Roho Unahitajika Kuthibitisha Maandiko, Ili Kuimarisha Kikamilifu Mamlaka Yake. Kutegemeza Mamlaka Yake kwa Hukumu ya Kanisa ni Uvumbuzi Usiomcha Mungu.Book I. Chapter VII. The Testimony of the Spirit Necessary to Confirm the Scripture, in Order to the Complete Establishment of Its Authority. The Suspension of Its Authority on the Judgment of the Church, an Impious Fiction.

Kabla sijaendelea zaidi, inafaa kutoa maelezo kadhaa juu ya mamlaka ya Maandiko, si tu kuiandaa akili kuyaheshimu ipasavyo, bali pia kuondoa kila shaka. Maana, inapokubaliwa kuwa ni tamko la neno la Mungu, hakuna mtu mwenye kiburi cha kusikitisha hivyo, isipokuwa awe amekosa akili ya kawaida na hisia za kawaida za wanadamu, atakayethubutu kupunguza heshima inayostahili aliyesema. Lakini kwa kuwa hatupewi kila siku maneno ya kiunabii kutoka mbinguni, na kwa kuwa ni katika Maandiko tu ambamo Bwana ameona vema kuihifadhi kweli yake katika ukumbusho wa daima, yanapata kwa waumini imani na mamlaka kamili sawasawa, wanapokuwa na hakika ya asili yake ya kimungu, kama kwamba wangesikia maneno yenyewe yakitamkwa na Mungu mwenyewe. Mada hii kwa kweli inastahili mjadala mpana, na uchunguzi makini kabisa. Lakini msomaji nisamehe, ikiwa nitazingatia zaidi kile ambacho kusudi la kazi hii linaruhusu, kuliko kile ambacho upana wa mada ya sasa unahitaji. Lakini umeenea sana kosa baya kabisa, kwamba Maandiko yana uzito kiasi tu kinachopewa na kura za Kanisa; kana kwamba ukweli wa milele na usiovunjika wa Mungu unategemea mapenzi ya kiholela ya wanadamu. Maana kwa dharau kubwa kwa Roho Mtakatifu, wanauliza hivi: Nani anaweza kutuhakikishia kwamba Mungu ndiye mwandishi wake? Nani anaweza kuthibitisha kwa uhakika kwamba yamehifadhiwa salama na bila kuharibiwa hadi kizazi hiki? Nani anaweza kutushawishi kwamba kitabu hiki kinapaswa kupokelewa kwa heshima, na kile kuondolewa katika hesabu takatifu, isipokuwa mambo haya yote yangeamuliwa na maamuzi ya Kanisa? Kwa hiyo hutegemea, (wanasema,) uamuzi wa Kanisa, kuamua heshima inayostahili Maandiko, na vitabu gani vijumuishwe katika kanuni yake. Hivyo watu wakufuru, wakitaka kuingiza udhalimu usio na kikomo, kwa jina la Kanisa, hawajali kabisa upuuzi gani wanaojitwika wao wenyewe na wengine, maadamu wanaweza kuwapokonya wajinga ungamo hili moja, kwamba Kanisa linaweza kufanya kila kitu. Lakini, ikiwa hili ni kweli, hali itakuwaje kwa dhamiri hizo za kusikitisha, zinazotafuta uhakika thabiti wa uzima wa milele, ikiwa ahadi zote zilizopo juu yake zinategemea hukumu ya wanadamu tu? Je, kupokea jibu kama hilo kutatuliza mizunguko yao, na kuondoa hofu zao? Tena, wasiomcha Mungu watadhihakije imani yetu, na watu wote kuitilia shaka, ikiwa inaeleweka kuwa ina mamlaka ya kutetereka tu yanayotegemea upendeleo wa wanadamu!Before I proceed any further, it is proper to introduce some remarks on the authority of the Scripture, not only to prepare the mind to regard it with due reverence, but also to remove every doubt. For, when it is admitted to be a declaration of the word of God, no man can be so deplorably presumptuous, unless he be also destitute of common sense and of the common feelings of men, as to dare to derogate from the credit due to the speaker. But since we are not favoured with daily oracles from heaven, and since it is only in the Scriptures that the Lord hath been pleased to preserve his truth in perpetual remembrance, it obtains the same complete credit and authority with believers, when they are satisfied of its divine origin, as if they heard the very words pronounced by God himself. The subject, indeed, merits a diffuse discussion, and a most accurate examination. But the reader will pardon me, if I attend rather to what the design of this work admits, than to what the extensive nature of the present subject requires. But there has very generally prevailed a most pernicious error, that the Scriptures have only so much weight as is conceded to them by the suffrages of the Church; as though the eternal and inviolable truth of God depended on the arbitrary will of men. For thus, with great contempt of the Holy Spirit, they inquire, Who can assure us that God is the author of them? Who can with certainty affirm, that they have been preserved safe and uncorrupted to the present age? Who can persuade us that this book ought to be received with reverence, and that expunged from the sacred number, unless all these things were regulated by the decisions of the Church? It depends, therefore, (say they,) on the determination of the Church, to decide both what reverence is due to the Scripture, and what books are to be comprised in its canon. Thus sacrilegious men, while they wish to introduce an unlimited tyranny, under the name of the Church, are totally unconcerned with what absurdities they embarrass themselves and others, provided they can extort from the ignorant this one admission, that the Church can do every thing. But, if this be true, what will be the condition of those wretched consciences, which are seeking a solid assurance of eternal life, if all the promises extant concerning it rest only on the judgment of men? Will the reception of such an answer cause their fluctuations to subside, and their terrors to vanish? Again, how will the impious ridicule our faith, and all men call it in question, if it be understood to possess only a precarious authority depending on the favour of men!

II. Lakini wapinzani kama hao wanashindwa kabisa hata kwa neno moja la Mtume. Anashuhudia kwamba kanisa “limejengwa juu ya msingi wa mitume na manabii.” Ikiwa mafundisho ya manabii na mitume ndiyo msingi wa Kanisa, lazima yalikuwa na uhakika kabla ya kuwapo kwa Kanisa. Wala pingamizi hili halina msingi, kwamba ingawa Kanisa lina asili yake katika Maandiko, bado ni jambo la shaka ni maandishi gani yanapaswa kuhesabiwa kwa manabii na mitume, isipokuwa Kanisa liamue. Maana ikiwa Kanisa la Kikristo limejengwa tangu mwanzo juu ya maandishi ya manabii na mahubiri ya mitume, popote mafundisho hayo yanapopatikana, kuyakubali kulitangulia hakika kuundwa kwa Kanisa; kwa kuwa bila hayo Kanisa lenyewe lisingekuwapo kamwe. Ni wazo la uongo sana, basi, kwamba uwezo wa kuhukumu Maandiko ni wa Kanisa, hata uhakika wake ukategemee mapenzi ya Kanisa. Kwa hiyo, Kanisa linapoyapokea na kuyatia muhuri kwa kura yake, halithibitishi kitu kilichokuwa cha mashaka au cha mabishano; bali, likijua kuwa ni kweli ya Mungu wake, linatimiza wajibu wa utauwa, kwa kuyaheshimu mara moja. Lakini kuhusu swali hili, Tutawezaje kushawishika juu ya asili yake ya kimungu, bila kukimbilia amri ya Kanisa? ni sawa kabisa na mtu kuuliza, Tutajifunzaje kutofautisha nuru na giza, nyeupe na nyeusi, tamu na chungu? Maana Maandiko yanaonyesha ushahidi ulio wazi wa ukweli wake, kama vitu vyeupe na vyeusi vinavyoonyesha rangi yao, au vitu vitamu na vichungu vinavyoonyesha ladha yake.II. But such cavillers are completely refuted even by one word of the Apostle. He testifies that the church is “built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets.” If the doctrine of the prophets and apostles be the foundation of the Church, it must have been certain, antecedently to the existence of the Church. Nor is there any foundation for this cavil, that though the Church derive its origin from the Scriptures, yet it remains doubtful what writings are to be ascribed to the prophets and apostles, unless it be determined by the Church. For if the Christian Church has been from the beginning founded on the writings of the prophets and the preaching of the apostles, wherever that doctrine is found, the approbation of it has certainly preceded the formation of the Church; since without it the Church itself had never existed. It is a very false notion, therefore, that the power of judging of the Scripture belongs to the Church, so as to make the certainty of it dependent on the Church’s will. Wherefore, when the Church receives it, and seals it with her suffrage, she does not authenticate a thing otherwise dubious or controvertible; but, knowing it to be the truth of her God, performs a duty of piety, by treating it with immediate veneration. But, with regard to the question, How shall we be persuaded of its divine original, unless we have recourse to the decree of the Church? this is just as if any one should inquire, How shall we learn to distinguish light from darkness, white from black, sweet from bitter? For the Scripture exhibits as clear evidence of its truth, as white and black things do of their colour, or sweet and bitter things of their taste.

III. Najua, kwa kweli, kwamba kwa kawaida wananukuu maoni ya Augustino, anaposema “kwamba asingeiamini Injili kama asingeshawishiwa na mamlaka ya Kanisa.” Lakini jinsi hili linavyonukuliwa kwa uongo na bila haki kuunga mkono wazo kama hilo, ni rahisi kugundua kutoka kwenye muktadha. Alikuwa katika hilo akibishana na Wamani, waliotaka kuaminiwa bila mabishano, waliposema kweli iko upande wao, lakini hawakuithibitisha kamwe. Sasa, kwa kuwa walifanya mamlaka ya Injili kuwa kisingizio ili kuimarisha sifa ya Mani wao, anauliza wangefanya nini wakikutana na mtu ambaye haiamini Injili; wangemgeuza kwa aina gani ya ushawishi kuelekea maoni yao. Baadaye anaongeza, “Hakika, mimi nisingeiamini Injili,” n.k., akimaanisha kwamba yeye mwenyewe, akiwa mgeni wa imani, asingeweza kushawishika kuikubali Injili kuwa kweli ya uhakika ya Mungu, mpaka alipohakikishwa na mamlaka ya Kanisa. Na je, ni ajabu kwamba mtu yeyote, ambaye bado hajapata maarifa ya Kristo, awaheshimu watu? Kwa hiyo Augustino hathibitishi hapo kwamba imani ya wacha Mungu inajengwa juu ya mamlaka ya Kanisa, wala hamaanishi kwamba uhakika wa Injili unalitegemea; bali ni kwamba tu wasioamini wasingekuwa na uhakika wa ukweli wa Injili utakaowavuta kwa Kristo, isipokuwa wangeshawishiwa na makubaliano ya Kanisa. Na kidogo kabla ya hapo, anathibitisha wazi kwa maneno haya: “Nitakapokuwa nimelisifu imani yangu, na kuidhihaki yako, tunapaswa kuunda hukumu gani, tunapaswa kufuata mwenendo gani, ila kuwaacha wale wanaotualika kukiri mambo ya uhakika, kisha wanatuamuru kuamini mambo yasiyo ya uhakika; na kuwafuata wale wanaotualika kwanza kuamini yale tusiyoweza bado kuyaona waziwazi, ili, tukiimarishwa na imani, tupate ufahamu wa yale tunayoyaamini; akili yetu ikiwa sasa imeimarishwa na kutiwa nuru ndani, si na wanadamu, bali na Mungu mwenyewe?” Haya ni maneno halisi ya Augustino; kutokana nayo hitimisho ni wazi kwa kila mtu, kwamba mtu huyu mtakatifu hakukusudia kutegemeza imani yetu katika Maandiko juu ya uamuzi wa kiholela wa Kanisa, bali kuonyesha tu (kile ambacho sisi sote tunakiri kuwa ni kweli) kwamba wale ambao bado hawajatiwa nuru na Roho wa Mungu, huletwa, kwa kuliheshimu Kanisa, kwenye unyenyekevu wa kufundishika hata wakakubali kujifunza imani ya Kristo kutoka kwa Injili; na kwamba hivyo mamlaka ya Kanisa ni utangulizi wa kutuandaa kwa imani ya Injili. Maana tunaona kwamba anataka uhakika wa wacha Mungu usimame juu ya msingi tofauti kabisa. Vinginevyo sikatai kwamba mara nyingi aliwasihi Wamani kwa makubaliano ya jumla ya Kanisa, kwa nia ya kuthibitisha ukweli wa Maandiko, ambayo wao walikataa. Kutokana na hili ndipo karipio lake kwa Faustus, “kwa kutokunyenyekea kweli ya Injili, iliyojengwa hivyo, iliyothibitishwa hivyo, iliyosherehekewa kwa utukufu hivyo, na kukabidhiwa kwa mfululizo wa uhakika tangu enzi ya mitume.” Lakini hapendekezi popote kwamba mamlaka tunayoyapa Maandiko yanategemea ufafanuzi au amri za wanadamu: anatoa tu hukumu ya jumla ya Kanisa, ambayo ilikuwa ya manufaa sana kwa hoja yake, na ikampa faida juu ya wapinzani wake. Ikiwa mtu yeyote anataka uthibitisho kamili zaidi wa hili, na asome tasnifu yake “Juu ya Faida ya Kuamini”; ambamo atapata kwamba hapendekezi wepesi mwingine wa kuamini ila ule unaoweza kutupatia utangulizi, na kuwa mwanzo unaofaa wa uchunguzi, kama anavyosema yeye mwenyewe; hata hivyo tusiridhike na maoni tu, bali tupumzike juu ya kweli ya uhakika na thabiti.III. I know, indeed, that they commonly cite the opinion of Augustine, where he says, “that he would not believe the Gospel unless he were influenced by the authority of the Church.” But how falsely and unfairly this is cited in support of such a notion, it is easy to discover from the context. He was in that contending with the Manichees, who wished to be credited, without any controversy, when they affirmed the truth to be on their side, but never proved it. Now, as they made the authority of the Gospel a pretext in order to establish the credit of their Manichæus, he inquires what they would do if they met with a man who did not believe the Gospel; with what kind of persuasion they would convert him to their opinion. He afterwards adds, “Indeed, I would not give credit to the Gospel,” &c., intending, that he himself, when an alien from the faith, could not be prevailed on to embrace the Gospel as the certain truth of God, till he was convinced by the authority of the Church. And is it surprising that any one, yet destitute of the knowledge of Christ, should pay a respect to men? Augustine, therefore, does not there maintain that the faith of the pious is founded on the authority of the Church, nor does he mean that the certainty of the Gospel depends on it; but simply, that unbelievers would have no assurance of the truth of the Gospel, that would win them to Christ, unless they were influenced by the consent of the Church. And a little before, he clearly confirms it in these words: “When I shall have commended my own creed, and derided yours, what judgment, think you, ought we to form, what conduct ought we to pursue, but to forsake those who invite us to acknowledge things that are certain, and afterwards command us to believe things that are uncertain; and to follow those who invite us first to believe what we cannot yet clearly see, that, being strengthened by faith, we may acquire an understanding of what we believe; our mind being now internally strengthened and illuminated, not by men, but by God himself?” These are the express words of Augustine; whence the inference is obvious to every one, that this holy man did not design to suspend our faith in the Scriptures on the arbitrary decision of the Church, but only to show (what we all confess to be true) that they who are yet unilluminated by the Spirit of God, are, by a reverence for the Church, brought to such a docility as to submit to learn the faith of Christ from the Gospel; and that thus the authority of the Church is an introduction to prepare us for the faith of the Gospel. For we see that he will have the certainty of the pious to rest on a very different foundation. Otherwise I do not deny his frequently urging on the Manichees the universal consent of the Church, with a view to prove the truth of the Scripture, which they rejected. Whence his rebuke of Faustus, “for not submitting to the truth of the Gospel, so founded, so established, so gloriously celebrated, and delivered through certain successions from the apostolic age.” But he nowhere insinuates that the authority which we attribute to the Scripture depends on the definitions or decrees of men: he only produces the universal judgment of the Church, which was very useful to his argument, and gave him an advantage over his adversaries. If any one desire a fuller proof of this, let him read his treatise “Of the Advantage of Believing;” where he will find, that he recommends no other facility of believing, than such as may afford us an introduction, and be a proper beginning of inquiry, as he expresses himself; yet that we should not be satisfied with mere opinion, but rest upon certain and solid truth.

IV. Lazima ishikiliwe, kama nilivyosema hapo awali, kwamba hatuimarishwi katika kuamini mafundisho mpaka tushawishike bila shaka kwamba Mungu ndiye Mwandishi wake. Kwa hiyo, uthibitisho mkuu wa Maandiko hutolewa kila mahali kutokana na tabia ya Msemaji wa Kimungu. Manabii na mitume hawajisifu kwa kipaji chao wenyewe, wala kwa vipawa vyovyote vinavyoshinda imani ya wasikilizaji; wala hawasisitizi hoja za akili; bali wanaleta jina takatifu la Mungu, kulazimisha ulimwengu wote kunyenyekea. Sasa tunapaswa kuona jinsi inavyoonekana, si kwa kukisia tu, bali kwa maonyesho wazi, kwamba matumizi haya ya jina la Mungu si ya haraka wala ya udanganyifu. Sasa, tukitaka kushauriana na faida ya kweli ya dhamiri zetu; zisiwe tete na zinazoyumba, mada ya mashaka ya daima; zisisite kwa mashaka madogo kabisa,—ushawishi huu lazima utafutwe kutoka chanzo cha juu zaidi kuliko sababu za wanadamu, au hukumu, au makisio—yaani kutoka ushuhuda wa siri wa Roho. Ni kweli kwamba, tukielekea kubishana juu ya jambo hili, mambo mengi yangeweza kuletwa ambayo hakika yanathibitisha, ikiwa kuna Mungu yeyote mbinguni, kwamba yeye ndiye Mwandishi wa Sheria, na Unabii, na Injili. Hata kama watu wa elimu na wenye hukumu ya kina watainuka kupinga, na kutumia na kuonyesha nguvu zote za akili zao katika mjadala huu, hata hivyo, isipokuwa wamepotea kabisa kwa hisia yoyote ya aibu, ungamo hili litapokonywa kwao, kwamba Maandiko yanaonyesha ushahidi ulio wazi kabisa kwamba ni Mungu anayesema ndani yake, ambao hudhihirisha kwamba mafundisho yake ni ya kimungu. Na tutaona hivi karibuni kwamba vitabu vyote vya Maandiko Matakatifu vinapita kwa mbali maandishi mengine yote. Tukiyasoma kwa macho safi na akili timamu, tutaona mara moja ukuu wa Mungu, utakaotiisha mapingamizi yetu ya kuthubutu, na kutulazimisha kumtii. Hata hivyo ni kutenda kinyume cha mpangilio kujaribu kuzaa imani thabiti kwa Maandiko kwa mijadala. Ingawa, kwa kweli, mimi niko mbali kuwa na ustadi au ufasaha wa pekee, hata hivyo, ningebishana na wadharau wajanja zaidi wa Mungu, wanaotamani sana kuonyesha akili zao na ustadi wao katika kudhoofisha mamlaka ya Maandiko, nina matumaini ningeweza, bila taabu, kunyamazisha kelele zao za ghasia. Na, kama ingekuwa na faida yoyote kujaribu kukanusha madai yao ya upinzani, ningebomoa kwa urahisi majivuno wanayonung’unika katika pembe za siri. Lakini ingawa mtu yeyote analitetea neno takatifu la Mungu dhidi ya shutuma za wanadamu, hili halitaweka mioyoni mwao uhakika ule ambao ni muhimu kwa utauwa wa kweli. Dini ikionekana kwa watu wasio na dini kuwa inajumuisha maoni tu, ili wasiamini kitu chochote kwa sababu za kijinga au nyepesi, wanataka na kutarajia ithibitishwe kwa hoja za akili kwamba Musa na manabii walisema kwa pumzi ya Mungu. Lakini ninajibu kwamba ushuhuda wa Roho ni mkuu kuliko akili yote. Maana, kama vile Mungu peke yake ni shahidi wa kutosha wa yeye mwenyewe katika neno lake mwenyewe, vivyo hivyo neno halitapata imani mioyoni mwa wanadamu, mpaka lithibitishwe kwa ushuhuda wa ndani wa Roho. Ni lazima, kwa hiyo, Roho yule yule aliyesema kwa vinywa vya manabii, aingie mioyoni mwetu, kutushawishi kwamba waliwasilisha kwa uaminifu maneno ya kiunabii waliyokabidhiwa kwa njia ya Mungu. Na uhusiano huu umeelezwa vizuri sana kwa maneno haya: “Roho yangu iliyo juu yako, na maneno yangu niliyoweka kinywani mwako, hayataondoka kinywani mwako, wala vinywani mwa wazao wako, wala vinywani mwa wazao wa wazao wako, tangu sasa na hata milele.” Baadhi ya watu wema husumbuka kwa kuwa hawako tayari sikuzote na ushahidi wazi wa kuwapinga wasiomcha Mungu, wanaponung’unika bila adhabu dhidi ya neno la Mungu; kana kwamba Roho hakuitwa “muhuri,” na “arabuni,” kwa kuimarisha imani ya wacha Mungu; kwa sababu, mpaka atakapotia akili zao nuru, wanayumbayumba daima kati ya wingi wa mashaka.IV. It must be maintained, as I have before asserted, that we are not established in the belief of the doctrine till we are indubitably persuaded that God is its Author. The principal proof, therefore, of the Scriptures is every where derived from the character of the Divine Speaker. The prophets and apostles boast not of their own genius, or any of those talents which conciliate the faith of the hearers; nor do they insist on arguments from reason; but bring forward the sacred name of God, to compel the submission of the whole world. We must now see how it appears, not from probable supposition, but from clear demonstration, that this use of the divine name is neither rash nor fallacious. Now, if we wish to consult the true interest of our consciences; that they may not be unstable and wavering, the subjects of perpetual doubt; that they may not hesitate at the smallest scruples,—this persuasion must be sought from a higher source than human reasons, or judgments, or conjectures—even from the secret testimony of the Spirit. It is true that, if we were inclined to argue the point, many things might be adduced which certainly evince, if there be any God in heaven, that he is the Author of the Law, and the Prophecies, and the Gospel. Even though men of learning and deep judgment rise up in opposition, and exert and display all the powers of their minds in this dispute, yet, unless they are wholly lost to all sense of shame, this confession will be extorted from them, that the Scripture exhibits the plainest evidences that it is God who speaks in it, which manifests its doctrine to be divine. And we shall soon see, that all the books of the sacred Scripture very far excel all other writings. If we read it with pure eyes and sound minds, we shall immediately perceive the majesty of God, which will subdue our audacious contradictions, and compel us to obey him. Yet it is acting a preposterous part, to endeavour to produce sound faith in the Scripture by disputations. Though, indeed, I am far from excelling in peculiar dexterity or eloquence, yet, if I were to contend with the most subtle despisers of God, who are ambitious to display their wit and their skill in weakening the authority of Scripture, I trust I should be able, without difficulty, to silence their obstreperous clamour. And, if it were of any use to attempt a refutation of their cavils, I would easily demolish the boasts which they mutter in secret corners. But though any one vindicates the sacred word of God from the aspersions of men, yet this will not fix in their hearts that assurance which is essential to true piety. Religion appearing, to profane men, to consist wholly in opinion, in order that they may not believe any thing on foolish or slight grounds, they wish and expect it to be proved by rational arguments, that Moses and the prophets spake by divine inspiration. But I reply, that the testimony of the Spirit is superior to all reason. For, as God alone is a sufficient witness of himself in his own word, so also the word will never gain credit in the hearts of men, till it be confirmed by the internal testimony of the Spirit. It is necessary, therefore, that the same Spirit, who spake by the mouths of the prophets, should penetrate into our hearts, to convince us that they faithfully delivered the oracles which were divinely intrusted to them. And this connection is very suitably expressed in these words: “My Spirit that is upon thee, and my word which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed’s seed, for ever.” Some good men are troubled that they are not always prepared with clear proof to oppose the impious, when they murmur with impunity against the divine word; as though the Spirit were not therefore denominated a “seal,” and “an earnest,” for the confirmation of the faith of the pious; because, till he illuminate their minds, they are perpetually fluctuating amidst a multitude of doubts.

V. Na ichukuliwe, basi, kuwa ukweli usiopingika, kwamba wale waliofundishwa ndani na Roho, huhisi kuridhika kabisa na Maandiko, na kwamba yanajithibitisha yenyewe, yakibeba ushahidi wake yenyewe, wala hayapaswi kufanywa mada ya maonyesho na hoja za akili; bali hupata kwetu imani inayostahili kwa ushuhuda wa Roho. Maana ingawa yanashinda heshima yetu kwa ukuu wake wa ndani, hayatugusi kwa uzito wowote mpaka yathibitishwe na Roho mioyoni mwetu. Kwa hiyo, tukiwa tumetiwa nuru naye, sasa tunaamini asili ya kimungu ya Maandiko, si kwa hukumu yetu wenyewe au ya wengine, bali tunaona uhakika kwamba tumeyapokea kutoka kinywa cha Mungu mwenyewe kwa huduma ya wanadamu, kuwa mkuu kuliko hukumu yoyote ya kibinadamu, na sawa na ule wa kuona moja kwa moja Mungu mwenyewe ndani yake. Hatutafuti hoja wala uwezekano wa kuunga mkono hukumu yetu, bali tunanyenyekeza hukumu zetu na akili zetu kama kwa jambo ambalo haiwezekani kwetu kulihukumu; wala si kama watu fulani, ambao wamezoea kukubali haraka wasichokielewa, kisha hawapendezwi nacho mara wanapokichunguza, bali kwa sababu tunahisi kusadiki kuliko kwote kwamba tunashikilia ukweli usioshindika; wala si kama wale wasio na furaha wanaotoa akili zao mateka kwa ushirikina, bali kwa sababu tunaona ndani yake nguvu zisizo na shaka za uwezo wa Mungu, ambazo kwazo tunavutwa na kuwashwa hata tuelewe na kutii kwa hiari, lakini kwa nguvu na ufanisi mkuu kuliko uwezo wowote wa mapenzi au maarifa ya mwanadamu. Kwa haki kubwa, basi, Mungu anatangaza kupitia Isaya kwamba manabii na watu wote walikuwa mashahidi wake; kwa sababu, wakiwa wamefundishwa kwa unabii, walikuwa na uhakika kwamba Mungu alikuwa amesema bila hitilafu wala utata wowote. Ni ushawishi, kwa hiyo, usiohitaji sababu; ni maarifa yanayoungwa mkono na akili ya juu kabisa, ambayo ndani yake akili hutulia kwa usalama na uthabiti kuliko katika sababu zozote; ni, hatimaye, hisia ambayo haiwezi kuzaliwa isipokuwa kwa ufunuo kutoka mbinguni. Sisemi chochote ila kile ambacho kila mwamini hukipata moyoni mwake, isipokuwa kwamba lugha yangu iko mbali na kuelezea mada hii vizuri. Ninapita mambo mengi kwa sasa, kwa sababu mada hii itajitokeza kujadiliwa tena mahali pengine. Ijulikane hapa tu kwamba ile peke yake ndiyo imani ya kweli ambayo Roho wa Mungu huitia muhuri mioyoni mwetu. Na kwa sababu hii moja kila msomaji mnyenyekevu na mwenye kufundishika atatoshelezwa: Isaya anatabiri kwamba “wana wako wote” wa Kanisa lililofanywa upya “watafundishwa na Bwana.” Katika hili Mungu anaona vema kuwapa wateule wake fursa ya pekee, ambao anawatofautisha na wanadamu wengine. Maana mwanzo wa elimu ya kweli ni nini ila hamu ya haraka ya kusikia sauti ya Mungu? Kwa kinywa cha Musa anadai usikivu wetu kwa maneno haya: “Usiseme moyoni mwako, Ni nani atakayepanda kwenda mbinguni? au, Ni nani atakayeshuka kwenda vilindini? Lile neno li karibu nawe, kinywani mwako.” Ikiwa Mungu ameamua kwamba hazina hii ya hekima iwekwe akiba kwa watoto wake, si ajabu wala si upuuzi kwamba tunaona ujinga na upumbavu mwingi miongoni mwa umati wa kawaida wa wanadamu. Kwa jina hili ninawateua hata wale wenye vipawa vikubwa zaidi na vyeo vya juu kabisa, mpaka waunganishwe na Kanisa. Zaidi ya hayo, Isaya, akiona kwamba mafundisho ya kiunabii yangekuwa yasiyosadikika, si kwa wageni tu, bali hata kwa Wayahudi, waliotaka kuhesabiwa kuwa wanafamilia, anaongeza, wakati huo huo, sababu—Kwa kuwa mkono wa Bwana hautafunuliwa kwa wote. Kwa hiyo, wakati wowote tunaposumbuliwa na uchache wa waumini, tukumbuke kwa upande mwingine kwamba hakuna ila wale waliopewa wanaoelewa siri za Mungu.V. Let it be considered, then, as an undeniable truth, that they who have been inwardly taught by the Spirit, feel an entire acquiescence in the Scripture, and that it is self-authenticated, carrying with it its own evidence, and ought not to be made the subject of demonstration and arguments from reason; but it obtains the credit which it deserves with us by the testimony of the Spirit. For though it conciliate our reverence by its internal majesty, it never seriously affects us till it is confirmed by the Spirit in our hearts. Therefore, being illuminated by him, we now believe the divine original of the Scripture, not from our own judgment or that of others, but we esteem the certainty, that we have received it from God’s own mouth by the ministry of men, to be superior to that of any human judgment, and equal to that of an intuitive perception of God himself in it. We seek not arguments or probabilities to support our judgment, but submit our judgments and understandings as to a thing concerning which it is impossible for us to judge; and that not like some persons, who are in the habit of hastily embracing what they do not understand, which displeases them as soon as they examine it, but because we feel the firmest conviction that we hold an invincible truth; nor like those unhappy men who surrender their minds captives to superstitions, but because we perceive in it the undoubted energies of the Divine power, by which we are attracted and inflamed to an understanding and voluntary obedience, but with a vigour and efficacy superior to the power of any human will or knowledge. With the greatest justice, therefore, God exclaims by Isaiah, that the prophets and all the people were his witnesses; because, being taught by prophecies, they were certain that God had spoken without the least fallacy or ambiguity. It is such a persuasion, therefore, as requires no reasons; such a knowledge as is supported by the highest reason, in which, indeed, the mind rests with greater security and constancy than in any reasons; it is, finally, such a sentiment as cannot be produced but by a revelation from heaven. I speak of nothing but what every believer experiences in his heart, except that my language falls far short of a just explication of the subject. I pass over many things at present, because this subject will present itself for discussion again in another place. Only let it be known here, that that alone is true faith which the Spirit of God seals in our hearts. And with this one reason every reader of modesty and docility will be satisfied: Isaiah predicts that “all the children” of the renovated Church “shall be taught of God.” Herein God deigns to confer a singular privilege on his elect, whom he distinguishes from the rest of mankind. For what is the beginning of true learning but a prompt alacrity to hear the voice of God? By the mouth of Moses he demands our attention in these terms: “Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? or, Who shall descend into the deep? The word is even in thy mouth.” If God hath determined that this treasury of wisdom shall be reserved for his children, it is neither surprising nor absurd, that we see so much ignorance and stupidity among the vulgar herd of mankind. By this appellation I designate even those of the greatest talents and highest rank, till they are incorporated into the Church. Moreover, Isaiah, observing that the prophetical doctrine would be incredible, not only to aliens, but also to the Jews, who wished to be esteemed members of the family, adds, at the same time, the reason—Because the arm of the Lord will not be revealed to all. Whenever, therefore, we are disturbed at the paucity of believers, let us, on the other hand, remember that none, but those to whom it was given, have any apprehension of the mysteries of God.

3. Mkono Kwenye Usukani: Majaliwa ya Mungu na Faraja Yake3. The Hand on the Helm: God’s Providence and Its Comfort

John Calvin, Taasisi za Dini ya Kikristo (toleo la mwisho la Kilatini, 1559; tafsiri ya Kiingereza ya John Allen, 1813; Project Gutenberg #45001), Kitabu cha I, sura ya XVI, kamili (sehemu za I–IX), na sura ya XVII, sehemu za VII–XI (sehemu za I–VI na XII–XIV zimeachwa): utawala wa Mungu juu ya vitu vyote, tofauti kati ya majaliwa na hatima au bahati, na shukrani, subira na usalama ambavyo fundisho hili huleta. Chanzo cha msingi; tafsiri ni za mwandishi.John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (final Latin edition, 1559; English translation by John Allen, 1813; Project Gutenberg #45001), Book I, chapter XVI, complete (sections I–IX), and chapter XVII, sections VII–XI (sections I–VI and XII–XIV omitted): God’s government of all things, the difference between providence and fate or fortune, and the gratitude, patience and security that this doctrine brings. Primary source; the interpretations are the author’s.

> Maelezo ya CTS: Calvin aliandika sura hizi kwa waumini walioishi katikati ya tauni, vita, mateso na uhamisho; orodha yake maarufu ya hatari (meli, farasi, vigae vya paa, moto wa nyumba) inaeleza maisha ya kawaida ya karne ya kumi na sita. Anasisitiza kwamba Mungu hatawali asili kwa jumla tu, bali kila tukio mahususi (“majaliwa ya pekee” au “majaliwa mahususi”), lakini anakataa wazo la Wastoiki la hatima, mnyororo wa visababishi usio na nafsi. “Inferior causes” (visababishi vya chini) humaanisha kile wanateolojia wa baadaye wanachokiita visababishi vya pili: uchaguzi halisi wa wanadamu na njia za asili, ambazo mwamini bado anapaswa kuzitumia na ambazo watu wanabaki kuwajibika kwazo. Tofauti kati ya “necessity of consequent and of consequence” (ulazima wa matokeo na ulazima wa mfuatano) ni istilahi ya kitaalamu ya mantiki ya zama za kati: kile ambacho Mungu ameamua hakika kitatokea, ingawa si cha lazima kwa asili yake. Wakristo wa mapokeo mengine (kwa mfano Waarminiani na Waweslesi) pia hufundisha majaliwa ya Mungu, lakini hueleza uhusiano wake na uhuru wa mwanadamu kwa njia tofauti. Sehemu zilizoachwa za sura ya XVII zinahusu mipaka ya uchunguzi wetu wa mashauri ya Mungu na maana ya “kutubu” kwa Mungu katika Maandiko.CTS note: Calvin wrote these chapters for believers who lived amid plague, war, persecution and exile; his famous list of dangers (ships, horses, roof tiles, house fires) describes ordinary sixteenth-century life. He insists that God governs not only nature in general but each particular event (“special” or “particular” providence), yet he rejects the Stoic idea of fate, an impersonal chain of causes. “Inferior causes” means what later theologians call secondary causes: real human choices and natural means, which the believer must still use and for which people remain responsible. The distinction between “necessity of consequent and of consequence” is a technical term of medieval logic: what God has decreed will certainly happen, though it is not necessary by nature. Christians in other traditions (for example Arminian and Wesleyan) also teach God’s providence but explain its relation to human freedom differently. The omitted sections of chapter XVII treat the limits of our inquiry into God’s counsels and the meaning of God’s “repentance” in Scripture.

Kitabu cha I. Sura ya XVI. Mungu Anaulinda na Kuutegemeza Ulimwengu kwa Nguvu Zake, na Kutawala Kila Sehemu Yake kwa Majaliwa Yake.Book I. Chapter XVI. God’s Preservation and Support of the World by His Power, and His Government of Every Part of It by His Providence.

Kumwonyesha Mungu kuwa Muumba kwa muda mfupi tu, aliyemaliza kazi yake yote mara moja, ni kufikiri kwa baridi na kwa ukavu; na katika hili hasa yatupasa kutofautiana na wapagani, ili uwepo wa uwezo wa Mungu uonekane kwetu si kidogo katika hali ya kudumu ya ulimwengu kuliko katika asili yake ya kwanza. Maana ingawa akili za hata wasiomcha Mungu, kwa kutafakari tu dunia na mbingu, hulazimika kuinuka hadi kwa Muumba, hata hivyo imani ina njia yake ya pekee ya kumpa Mungu sifa yote ya uumbaji. Kwa kusudi hili ndilo tamko la Mtume lililokwisha kutajwa, kwamba ni “kwa imani” tu “tunafahamu ya kuwa ulimwengu uliumbwa kwa neno la Mungu”; kwa sababu, isipokuwa tuendelee hadi majaliwa yake, hatuna ufahamu sahihi wa maana ya kifungu hiki, “kwamba Mungu ni Muumba”; ingawa tunaweza kuonekana kukielewa akilini na kukiri kwa ndimi zetu. Akili ya kimwili, ikishatazama nguvu za Mungu katika uumbaji, husimama hapo; na ikienda mbali zaidi, huchunguza na kutafakari tu hekima, na nguvu, na wema wa Mwandishi katika kutoa kazi kama hiyo, vitu ambavyo hujitokeza vyenyewe machoni hata mwa wale wasiotaka kuviona. Kisha hudhani kuna kazi fulani ya jumla ya Mungu katika kuuhifadhi na kuutawala, ambayo uwezo wa kusogea hutegemea. Mwishowe hudhani kwamba nguvu alizotia Mungu awali katika vitu vyote zinatosha kuvidumisha. Lakini imani yapaswa kupenya zaidi. Ikishajifunza kwamba yeye ni Muumba wa vitu vyote, inapaswa kuhitimisha mara moja kwamba yeye pia ni mtawala na mhifadhi wao wa daima; na si kwa mwendo fulani wa jumla unaoendesha mashine yote ya ulimwengu na sehemu zake zote, bali kwa majaliwa mahususi yanayotegemeza, kulisha, na kuandalia kila kitu alichokiumba. Hivyo Daudi, baada ya kutangulia kusema kwa ufupi kwamba ulimwengu uliumbwa na Mungu, mara hushuka hadi mwendo wa daima wa majaliwa yake: “Kwa neno la Bwana mbingu zilifanyika; na jeshi lake lote kwa pumzi ya kinywa chake.” Baadaye anaongeza, “Bwana anawatazama wanadamu wote;” na kuongeza zaidi kwa kusudi hilo hilo. Maana ingawa si watu wote wanaofikiri kwa ustadi huo, hata hivyo, kwa kuwa haingeaminika kwamba Mungu anajali mambo ya wanadamu, kama hakuwa Muumba wa ulimwengu, na hakuna anayeamini kwa dhati kwamba ulimwengu uliumbwa na Mungu, asiyeshawishika kwamba anazitunza kazi zake mwenyewe, si bila sababu Daudi anatuongoza kwa mfuatano bora kabisa kutoka jambo moja hadi lingine. Kwa jumla, kwa kweli, wanafalsafa hufundisha, na akili za wanadamu huwaza, kwamba sehemu zote za ulimwengu zinahuishwa na pumzi ya siri ya Mungu. Lakini hawafikii kiwango cha Daudi, anayefuatwa na wacha Mungu wote, anaposema, “Hao wote wanakungoja wewe, uwapatie chakula chao kwa wakati wake. Unawapa, nao wanakusanya; waufumbua mkono wako, wanashiba mema. Waficha uso wako, wanafadhaika; waondoa pumzi yao, wanakufa, na kurudi mavumbini mwao. Watuma roho yako, wanaumbwa; nawe waufanya upya uso wa nchi.” Ingawa wanakubaliana na tamko la Paulo kwamba ndani ya Mungu “tunaishi, tunakwenda, na kuwa na uhai wetu,” wako mbali sana na ufahamu wa dhati wa fadhili zake zinazosifiwa na Mtume; kwa sababu hawana ufahamu wa utunzaji wa pekee wa Mungu, ambao pekee ndio unaofanya fadhili zake za kibaba zijulikane.To represent God as a Creator only for a moment, who entirely finished all his work at once, were frigid and jejune; and in this it behoves us especially to differ from the heathen, that the presence of the Divine power may appear to us no less in the perpetual state of the world than in its first origin. For although the minds even of impious men, by the mere contemplation of earth and heaven, are constrained to rise to the Creator, yet faith has a way peculiar to itself to assign to God the whole praise of creation. To which purpose is that assertion of an Apostle before cited, that it is only “through faith that we understand the worlds were framed by the word of God;” because, unless we proceed to his providence, we have no correct conception of the meaning of this article, “that God is the Creator;” however we may appear to comprehend it in our minds, and to confess it with our tongues. The carnal sense, when it has once viewed the power of God in the creation, stops there; and when it proceeds the furthest, it only examines and considers the wisdom, and power, and goodness, of the Author in producing such a work, which spontaneously present themselves to the view even of those who are unwilling to observe them. In the next place, it conceives of some general operation of God in preserving and governing it, on which the power of motion depends. Lastly, it supposes that the vigour originally infused by God into all things is sufficient for their sustentation. But faith ought to penetrate further. When it has learned that he is the Creator of all things, it should immediately conclude that he is also their perpetual governor and preserver; and that not by a certain universal motion, actuating the whole machine of the world, and all its respective parts, but by a particular providence sustaining, nourishing, and providing for every thing which he has made. Thus David, having briefly premised that the world was made by God, immediately descends to the continual course of his providence: “By the word of the Lord were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.” He afterwards adds, “The Lord beholdeth all the sons of men;” and subjoins more to the same purpose. For though all men argue not so skilfully, yet, since it would not be credible that God was concerned about human affairs, if he were not the Maker of the world, and no one seriously believes that the world was made by God, who is not persuaded that he takes care of his own works, it is not without reason that David conducts us by a most excellent series from one to the other. In general, indeed, both philosophers teach, and the minds of men conceive, that all the parts of the world are quickened by the secret inspiration of God. But they go not so far as David, who is followed by all the pious, when he says, “These all wait upon thee; that thou mayest give them their meat in due season. That thou givest them, they gather; thou openest thine hand, they are filled with good. Thou hidest thy face, they are troubled; thou takest away their breath, they die, and return to their dust. Thou sendest forth thy Spirit, they are created; and thou renewest the face of the earth.” Though they subscribe to the assertion of Paul, that in God “we live, and move, and have our being,” yet they are very far from a serious sense of his favour, celebrated by the Apostle; because they have no apprehension of the special care of God, from which alone his paternal favour is known.

II. Ili kuonyesha tofauti hii kwa uwazi zaidi, ni lazima ieleweke kwamba majaliwa ya Mungu, kama yanavyofundishwa katika Maandiko, yanapingana na bahati na ajali. Sasa, kwa kuwa imekuwa imani ya kawaida katika vizazi vyote, na hata leo ni maoni karibu ya wote, kwamba mambo yote hutokea kwa ajali, ni hakika kwamba kila wazo sahihi juu ya majaliwa hufunikwa, na karibu kuzikwa katika usahaulifu, na dhana hii potofu. Mtu akiangukia mikononi mwa wanyang’anyi, au akikutana na wanyama wakali; akivunjikiwa merikebu baharini na dhoruba ya ghafla; akiuawa kwa kuanguka kwa nyumba au mti; mwingine, akitangatanga jangwani, akipata nafuu katika ukosefu wake, au, baada ya kutupwa huku na huko na mawimbi, akifika bandarini, na kuepuka mauti kwa nywele moja tu, kama ilivyokuwa,—akili ya mwilini itayahusisha matukio haya yote, ya mafanikio na ya matatizo, na bahati. Lakini yeyote aliyefundishwa kutoka kinywa cha Kristo kwamba nywele za kichwa chake zimehesabiwa zote, atatafuta sababu zaidi, na kuhitimisha kwamba matukio yote yanatawaliwa na shauri la siri la Mungu. Na kuhusu vitu visivyo na uhai, lazima ikubaliwe kwamba, ingawa vyote vimepewa asili sifa zake maalum, hata hivyo havitumii nguvu zake zaidi ya kadiri vinavyoelekezwa na mkono wa Mungu uliopo. Kwa hiyo si kitu kingine ila vyombo ambavyo Mungu huvijaza ufanisi kadiri apendavyo, akivielekeza na kuvigeuza kwa matendo yoyote, kulingana na mapenzi yake. Hakuna nguvu miongoni mwa viumbe vyote iliyo ya ajabu au tukufu kuliko ile ya jua. Maana, zaidi ya kuuangaza ulimwengu wote kwa fahari yake, ni ajabu jinsi anavyowapasha joto na kuwahuisha wanyama wote kwa joto lake; kwa miale yake huipa dunia uwezo wa kuzaa; kutoka kwenye mbegu, zilizopashwa joto kwa upole katika kifua chake, huotesha majani mabichi, ambayo, yakitegemezwa na lishe mpya, huyaongeza na kuyaimarisha hadi yainuke kuwa mashina; huyalisha kwa mivuke ya daima, hadi yachanue maua, na kutoka maua hadi matunda, ambayo kisha huyaivisha kwa nguvu zake; kwamba miti pia, na mizabibu, kwa joto lake la upole, kwanza hutoa majani, kisha maua, na kutoka maua huzaa matunda yake! Lakini Bwana, ili kujiwekea sifa ya mambo haya yote kabisa, alipenda kwamba nuru iwepo, na nchi izae kila aina ya mimea na matunda, kabla hajaumba jua. Mtu mcha Mungu, kwa hiyo, hatalifanya jua kuwa sababu kuu au ya lazima ya mambo yaliyokuwapo kabla ya kuumbwa kwa jua, bali chombo tu ambacho Mungu hukitumia kwa kuwa ndivyo anavyopenda; ilhali asingepata ugumu zaidi kutenda mwenyewe bila nuru hiyo. Mwishowe, kama tunavyosoma kwamba jua lilisimama mahali pamoja kwa siku mbili kwa maombi ya Yoshua, na kwamba kivuli chake kilirudi nyuma digrii kumi kwa ajili ya mfalme Hezekia, Mungu ametangaza kwa miujiza hii michache kwamba kuchomoza na kutua kwa jua kila siku hakutokani na silika kipofu ya asili, bali kwamba yeye mwenyewe huongoza mwendo wake, kufanya upya kumbukumbu ya fadhili zake za kibaba kwetu. Hakuna kilicho cha asili zaidi kuliko kufuatana kwa masika baada ya kipupwe, kiangazi baada ya masika, na vuli baada ya kiangazi. Lakini kuna tofauti na kutolingana kukubwa sana kunakoonekana katika mfuatano huu, hata ni dhahiri kwamba kila mwaka, mwezi, na siku, inatawaliwa na majaliwa mapya na mahususi ya Mungu.II. For the clearer manifestation of this difference, it must be observed that the providence of God, as it is taught in Scripture, is opposed to fortune and fortuitous accidents. Now, since it has been the common persuasion in all ages, and is also in the present day almost the universal opinion, that all things happen fortuitously, it is certain that every correct sentiment concerning providence is not only obscured, but almost buried in oblivion by this erroneous notion. If any one falls into the hands of robbers, or meets with wild beasts; if by a sudden storm he is shipwrecked on the ocean; if he is killed by the fall of a house or a tree; if another, wandering through deserts, finds relief for his penury, or, after having been tossed about by the waves, reaches the port, and escapes, as it were, but a hair’s-breadth from death,—carnal reason will ascribe all these occurrences, both prosperous and adverse, to fortune. But whoever has been taught from the mouth of Christ, that the hairs of his head are all numbered, will seek further for a cause, and conclude that all events are governed by the secret counsel of God. And respecting things inanimate, it must be admitted, that, though they are all naturally endued with their peculiar properties, yet they exert not their power, any further than as they are directed by the present hand of God. They are, therefore, no other than instruments into which God infuses as much efficacy as he pleases, bending and turning them to any actions, according to his will. There is no power among all the creatures more wonderful or illustrious, than that of the sun. For, besides his illumination of the whole world by his splendour, how astonishing it is that he cherishes and enlivens all animals with his heat; with his rays inspires fecundity into the earth; from the seeds, genially warmed in her bosom, produces a green herbage, which, being supported by fresh nourishment, he increases and strengthens till it rises into stalks; feeds them with perpetual exhalations, till they grow into blossoms, and from blossoms to fruit, which he then by his influences brings to maturity; that trees, likewise, and vines, by his genial warmth, first put forth leaves, then blossoms, and from the blossoms produce their fruit! But the Lord, to reserve the praise of all these things entirely to himself, was pleased that the light should exist, and the earth abound in every kind of herbs and fruits, before he created the sun. A pious man, therefore, will not make the sun either a principal or necessary cause of those things which existed before the creation of the sun, but only an instrument which God uses, because it is his pleasure so to do; whereas he would find no more difficulty in acting by himself without that luminary. Lastly, as we read that the sun remained in one situation for two days at the prayer of Joshua, and that his shadow made a retrograde motion of ten degrees for the sake of king Hezekiah, God has declared by these few miracles, that the daily rising and setting of the sun is not from a blind instinct of nature, but that he himself governs his course, to renew the memory of his paternal favour towards us. Nothing is more natural than the succession of spring to winter, of summer to spring, and of autumn to summer. But there is so great a diversity and inequality discovered in this series, that it is obvious that every year, month, and day, is governed by a new and particular providence of God.

III. Na kwa hakika, Mungu anadai kumiliki uweza wote, na anadai tukiri sifa hii; si ile inayobuniwa na wanasofisti, ya bure, ya uvivu, na karibu ya usingizi, bali ile iliyo macho, yenye ufanisi, inayotenda, na inayojishughulisha na kazi ya daima; si kanuni ya jumla tu ya mwendo uliochanganyika, kana kwamba angeamuru mto utiririke kwenye mikondo iliyokwisha kuchimbwa kwa ajili yake, bali nguvu inayotumiwa daima juu ya kila mwendo mmoja mmoja na mahususi. Maana anahesabiwa kuwa mwenye uweza wote, si kwa sababu anaweza kutenda, lakini hukaa bila kazi, au huendeleza kwa silika ya jumla utaratibu wa asili aliouweka hapo awali; bali kwa sababu anatawala mbingu na dunia kwa majaliwa yake, na kuvidhibiti vitu vyote kiasi kwamba hakuna kinachotokea ila kwa shauri lake. Maana inaposemwa katika Zaburi kwamba hufanya lolote apendalo, inaashiria mapenzi yake ya hakika na ya kuamuliwa. Kwa kuwa ingekuwa pasipo ladha kabisa kuyafafanua maneno ya Nabii kwa namna ya kifalsafa, kwamba Mungu ndiye mtendaji wa kwanza, kwa sababu ndiye chanzo na sababu ya mwendo wote; ilhali waaminifu wanapaswa badala yake kujitia moyo katika shida kwa faraja hii, kwamba hawapati dhiki yoyote ila kwa agizo na amri ya Mungu, kwa sababu wako chini ya mkono wake. Lakini ikiwa utawala wa Mungu umeenea hivyo kwa kazi zake zote, ni pingamizi la kitoto kuudhibiti katika ushawishi na mwendo wa asili. Wale wanaofunga majaliwa ya Mungu ndani ya mipaka myembamba hivyo, kana kwamba aliruhusu vitu vyote viendelee bila kizuizi, kulingana na sheria ya daima ya asili, wanamnyima Mungu utukufu wake na wao wenyewe fundisho lenye manufaa makubwa; kwa kuwa hapana kitu ambacho kingezidi mateso ya mwanadamu, kama angekuwa wazi kwa mienendo yote ya mbingu, hewa, dunia, na maji. Zaidi ya hayo, wazo hili lingepunguza kwa aibu wema wa pekee wa Mungu kwa kila mtu mmoja mmoja. Daudi anapaza sauti kwamba watoto wachanga bado wananyonya matiti ya mama zao wana ufasaha wa kutosha kuitukuza sifa ya Mungu; kwa sababu, mara tu wanapozaliwa, wanakuta chakula kimewaandalia kwa uangalizi wake wa mbinguni. Hili ni kweli kwa jumla; hata hivyo haliwezi kuepuka macho yetu na hisia zetu, likithibitishwa wazi kwa uzoefu, kwamba baadhi ya mama wana matiti yaliyojaa na yenye wingi, lakini wengine karibu makavu; kwa kuwa Mungu hupenda kumwandalia mmoja kwa ukarimu zaidi, na mwingine kwa kiasi kidogo. Lakini wale wanaoutolea uweza wa Mungu sifa stahiki, hupokea kutokana nao faida mbili. Kwanza, lazima yeye aliye nazo mbingu na dunia, na ambaye mapenzi yake viumbe vyote hutazamia hata kujitoa kwa utumishi wake, awe na uwezo mkubwa wa kuwabariki. Na pili, wanaweza kupumzika kwa usalama katika ulinzi wake, ambaye mapenzi yake yanatawala maovu yote yanayoweza kuogopwa kutoka upande wowote; ambaye kwa uweza wake Shetani anazuiliwa, pamoja na hasira zake zote na hila zake zote; ambaye mapenzi yake yanatawala kila kinachopinga usalama wetu; wala hakuna jambo lingine linaloweza kusahihisha au kutuliza hofu hizo za kupita kiasi na za ushirikina, tunazozihisi mara nyingi tunapoona hatari. Tunakuwa waoga kwa ushirikina, nasema, ikiwa, kila viumbe vinapotutishia au kututia hofu, tunaogopa, kana kwamba vina uwezo vyenyewe wa kutudhuru, au vingeweza kutuumiza kwa ajali; au kana kwamba dhidi ya madhara yao Mungu hangeweza kutupatia msaada wa kutosha. Kwa mfano, Nabii anawakataza watoto wa Mungu kuziogopa nyota na ishara za mbinguni, kama ilivyo desturi ya wasioamini. Hakika hahukumu kila aina ya hofu. Lakini wasioamini wanapohamisha utawala wa ulimwengu kutoka kwa Mungu kwenda kwa nyota, wakijifanya kwamba furaha au taabu yao hutegemea maamuzi na dalili za nyota, na si mapenzi ya Mungu, matokeo ni kwamba hofu yao inaondolewa kutoka kwake ambaye peke yake wanapaswa kumtazama, na kuwekwa juu ya nyota na vimondo. Basi yeyote anayetaka kuepuka ukafiri huu akumbuke daima kwamba katika viumbe hakuna nguvu, wala kitendo, wala mwendo usiodhibitiwa; bali vinatawaliwa kwa shauri la siri la Mungu hata hakuna kinachoweza kutokea ila kilicho chini ya ujuzi wake, na kuamriwa kwa mapenzi yake.III. And, indeed, God asserts his possession of omnipotence, and claims our acknowledgment of this attribute; not such as is imagined by sophists, vain, idle, and almost asleep, but vigilant, efficacious, operative, and engaged in continual action; not a mere general principle of confused motion, as if he should command a river to flow through the channels once made for it, but a power constantly exerted on every distinct and particular movement. For he is accounted omnipotent, not because he is able to act, yet sits down in idleness, or continues by a general instinct the order of nature originally appointed by him; but because he governs heaven and earth by his providence, and regulates all things in such a manner that nothing happens but according to his counsel. For when it is said in the Psalms, that he does whatsoever he pleases, it denotes his certain and deliberate will. For it would be quite insipid to expound the words of the Prophet in the philosophical manner, that God is the prime agent, because he is the principle and cause of all motion; whereas the faithful should rather encourage themselves in adversity with this consolation, that they suffer no affliction, but by the ordination and command of God, because they are under his hand. But if the government of God be thus extended to all his works, it is a puerile cavil to limit it to the influence and course of nature. And they not only defraud God of his glory, but themselves of a very useful doctrine, who confine the Divine providence within such narrow bounds, as though he permitted all things to proceed in an uncontrolled course, according to a perpetual law of nature; for nothing would exceed the misery of man, if he were exposed to all the motions of the heaven, air, earth, and waters. Besides, this notion would shamefully diminish the singular goodness of God towards every individual. David exclaims, that infants yet hanging on the breasts of their mothers are sufficiently eloquent to celebrate the glory of God; because, as soon as they are born, they find aliment prepared for them by his heavenly care. This, indeed, is generally true; yet it cannot escape the observation of our eyes and senses, being evidently proved by experience, that some mothers have breasts full and copious, but others almost dry; as it pleases God to provide more liberally for one, but more sparingly for another. But they who ascribe just praise to the Divine omnipotence, receive from this a double advantage. In the first place, he must have ample ability to bless them, who possesses heaven and earth, and whose will all the creatures regard so as to devote themselves to his service. And, secondly, they may securely repose in his protection, to whose will are subject all those evils which can be feared from any quarter; by whose power Satan is restrained, with all his furies, and all his machinations; on whose will depends all that is inimical to our safety; nor is there any thing else by which those immoderate and superstitious fears, which we frequently feel on the sight of dangers, can be corrected or appeased. We are superstitiously timid, I say, if, whenever creatures menace or terrify us, we are frightened, as though they had of themselves the power to hurt us, or could fortuitously injure us; or as if against their injuries God were unable to afford us sufficient aid. For example, the Prophet forbids the children of God to fear the stars and signs of heaven, as is the custom of unbelievers. He certainly condemns not every kind of fear. But when infidels transfer the government of the world from God to the stars, pretending that their happiness or misery depends on the decrees and presages of the stars, and not on the will of God, the consequence is, that their fear is withdrawn from him, whom alone they ought to regard, and is placed on stars and comets. Whoever, then, desires to avoid this infidelity, let him constantly remember, that in the creatures there is no erratic power, or action, or motion; but that they are so governed by the secret counsel of God, that nothing can happen but what is subject to his knowledge, and decreed by his will.

IV. Kwanza, basi, wasomaji wafahamu kwamba kile kinachoitwa majaliwa kinamweleza Mungu, si kama anayetazama bila kazi kutoka mbinguni mambo yanayotokea duniani, bali kama anayeshika usukani wa ulimwengu, na kuyadhibiti matukio yote. Hivyo ni kazi ya mikono yake si pungufu ya macho yake. Abrahamu alipomwambia mwanawe, “Mungu atajipatia,” hakukusudia tu kuthibitisha kwamba anajua kabla tukio la baadaye, bali kuliachia jambo lisilojulikana kwa mapenzi yake yeye ambaye mara nyingi huumaliza mazingira ya mashaka na mkanganyiko. Kutokana na hili inafuata kwamba majaliwa yanajumuisha kitendo; kwa maana ni upuuzi wa kijinga kuzungumza juu ya kujua kabla tu. Si mbaya kiasi hicho kosa la wale wanaomhusisha Mungu na utawala, kama nilivyosema, wa aina iliyochanganyika na isiyochaguliwa; wakikiri kwamba Mungu huuzungusha na kuusukuma mtambo wa ulimwengu, pamoja na sehemu zake zote, kwa mwendo wa jumla, bila kuelekeza hasa kitendo cha kila kiumbe kimoja kimoja. Lakini hata kosa hili haliwezi kuvumiliwa. Maana wanadai kwamba majaliwa haya, wanayoyaita ya ulimwengu mzima, si kizuizi kwa viumbe vyote kutendeshwa kwa bahati nasibu, wala kwa mwanadamu kujigeuza huku au huko kwa uchaguzi huru wa mapenzi yake mwenyewe. Na wanagawanya hivi kati ya Mungu na mwanadamu; kwamba Mungu kwa uwezo wake humpa mwendo, kumwezesha kutenda kulingana na mwelekeo wa asili aliyopewa; lakini kwamba mwanadamu huongoza matendo yake kwa uchaguzi wake wa hiari. Kwa ufupi, wanawaza kwamba ulimwengu, mambo ya wanadamu, na wanadamu wenyewe, wanatawaliwa na uweza wa Mungu, lakini si kwa agizo lake. Sisemi juu ya Waepikuro, ambao daima wameusumbua ulimwengu, wanaoota mungu aliyezama katika uvivu na kutotenda; wala juu ya wengine wasio na makosa madogo, ambao zamani walijifanya kwamba utawala wa Mungu uliendelea hadi eneo la kati la hewa, lakini aliyaacha mambo ya chini kwa bahati; kwa kuwa viumbe bubu vyenyewe vinapaza sauti vya kutosha dhidi ya upumbavu huo ulio dhahiri. Kusudi langu la sasa ni kukanusha maoni yale ambayo karibu yameenea kwa wote, ambayo, kwa kumpa Mungu aina ya mwendo kipofu na usio wa uhakika, humnyima kitu kikuu, ambacho ni kuelekeza na kupanga, kwa hekima yake isiyoweza kueleweka, vitu vyote kwa lengo lake sahihi; na hivyo, kwa kumnyang’anya Mungu utawala wa ulimwengu, humfanya kuwa mtawala wake kwa jina tu, na si kwa kweli. Maana, tafadhali, kutawala ni nini, ila kuongoza kwa namna ya kuwatawala, kwa maamuzi thabiti, wale unaowaongoza? Hata hivyo siyakatai kabisa wanayoyadai juu ya majaliwa ya ulimwengu mzima, mradi wao nao wakubali kwamba Mungu anautawala ulimwengu, si tu kwa sababu anahifadhi utaratibu wa asili aliouweka yeye mwenyewe, bali kwa sababu anatumia uangalizi wa pekee kwa kila kazi zake. Ni kweli kwamba vitu vyote vinatendeshwa na silika ya siri ya asili, kana kwamba vinaitii amri ya milele ya Mungu, na kwamba kile ambacho Mungu amekwisha kukiamua, kinaonekana kutokana na mwelekeo wa hiari katika viumbe. Na kwa hili yaweza kurejelewa tamko la Kristo kwamba Baba yake na yeye mwenyewe walikuwa daima wakifanya kazi, tangu mwanzo; na kauli ya Paulo kwamba “ndani yake tunaishi, tunakwenda, na kuwa na uhai wetu;” na pia kile anachokisema mwandishi wa Waraka kwa Waebrania, kwa kusudi la kuthibitisha Uungu wa Kristo, kwamba vitu vyote vinashikwa kwa neno la uweza wake. Lakini wanatenda isivyofaa kabisa kwa kuficha na kutia giza, kwa kisingizio hiki, fundisho la majaliwa mahususi, linalodaiwa katika ushuhuda wa Maandiko ulio wazi na bayana hata ni ajabu mtu awezaje kuwa na shaka juu yake. Na kwa hakika, wale wanaolificha kwa pazia hili nililolitaja, wanalazimika kujisahihisha kwa kuongeza kwamba mambo mengi hutokea kwa utunzaji wa pekee wa Mungu; lakini hili wanalifunga kimakosa kwa matendo fulani mahususi. Kwa hiyo yatupasa kuthibitisha kwamba Mungu anajishughulisha na utawala wa matukio mahususi, na kwamba yote yanatoka katika shauri lake lililoamuliwa, kwa namna ambayo hakuwezi kuwapo jambo kama ajali ya kubahatisha.IV. First, then, let the readers know that what is called providence describes God, not as idly beholding from heaven the transactions which happen in the world, but as holding the helm of the universe, and regulating all events. Thus it belongs no less to his hands than to his eyes. When Abraham said to his son, “God will provide,” he intended not only to assert his prescience of a future event, but to leave the care of a thing unknown to the will of him who frequently puts an end to circumstances of perplexity and confusion. Whence it follows, that providence consists in action; for it is ignorant trifling to talk of mere prescience. Not quite so gross is the error of those who attribute to God a government, as I have observed, of a confused and promiscuous kind; acknowledging that God revolves and impels the machine of the world, with all its parts, by a general motion, without peculiarly directing the action of each individual creature. Yet even this error is not to be tolerated. For they maintain that this providence, which they call universal, is no impediment either to all the creatures being actuated contingently, or to man turning himself hither or thither at the free choice of his own will. And they make the following partition between God and man; that God by his power inspires him with motions, enabling him to act according to the tendency of the nature with which he is endued; but that man governs his actions by his own voluntary choice. In short, they conceive, that the world, human affairs, and men themselves, are governed by the power of God, but not by his appointment. I speak not of the Epicureans, who have always infested the world, who dream of a god absorbed in sloth and inactivity; and of others no less erroneous, who formerly pretended that the dominion of God extended over the middle region of the air, but that he left inferior things to fortune; since the mute creatures themselves sufficiently exclaim against such evident stupidity. My present design is to refute that opinion, which has almost generally prevailed, which, conceding to God a sort of blind and uncertain motion, deprives him of the principal thing, which is his directing and disposing, by his incomprehensible wisdom, all things to their proper end; and thus, robbing God of the government of the world, it makes him the ruler of it in name only, and not in reality. For, pray, what is governing, but presiding in such a manner, as to rule, by fixed decrees, those over whom you preside? Yet I reject not altogether what they assert concerning universal providence, provided they, on their part admit that God governs the world, not merely because he preserves the order of nature fixed by himself, but because he exercises a peculiar care over every one of his works. It is true that all things are actuated by a secret instinct of nature, as though they obeyed the eternal command of God, and that what God has once appointed, appears to proceed from voluntary inclination in the creatures. And to this may be referred the declaration of Christ, that his Father and himself had always been working, even from the beginning; and the assertion of Paul, that “in him we live, and move, and have our being;” and also what is observed by the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, with a design to prove the Divinity of Christ, that all things are sustained by the word of his power. But they act very improperly in concealing and obscuring, by this pretext, the doctrine of a particular providence, which is asserted in such plain and clear testimonies of Scripture, that it is surprising how any one could entertain a doubt concerning it. And, certainly, they who conceal it with this veil which I have mentioned, are obliged to correct themselves by adding, that many things happen through the peculiar care of God; but this they erroneously restrict to some particular acts. Wherefore we have to prove, that God attends to the government of particular events, and that they all proceed from his determinate counsel, in such a manner that there can be no such thing as fortuitous contingence.

V. Tukikubali kwamba chanzo cha mwendo kinatoka kwa Mungu, lakini kwamba vitu vyote hubebwa kwa hiari au kwa ajali kuelekea mahali ambapo mwelekeo wa asili unavisukuma, mabadilikobadiliko ya mchana na usiku, ya kipupwe na kiangazi, yatakuwa kazi ya Mungu, kwa kadiri alivyogawia kila moja sehemu zake na kuwawekea sheria fulani; yaani, hivyo ndivyo ingekuwa kama wangelishika daima kipimo kile kile kwa mfuatano usiobadilika, siku zikifuata usiku, miezi ikifuata miezi, na miaka ikifuata miaka. Lakini wakati mwingine joto kali kupita kiasi na ukame huunguza na kuchoma matunda ya dunia; wakati mwingine mvua zisizo za wakati huharibu mavuno ya nafaka, na maafa ya ghafla husababishwa na mvua za mawe na dhoruba: hili halitakuwa kazi ya Mungu; isipokuwa labda, kama mawingu au hali ya hewa tulivu, au baridi au joto, vinapata asili yake katika upinzani wa nyota na visababishi vingine vya asili. Lakini maelezo haya hayaachi nafasi kwa Mungu kuonyesha au kutumia fadhili zake za kibaba, au hukumu zake. Wakisema kwamba Mungu ni mwema vya kutosha kwa mwanadamu, kwa sababu anatia mbinguni na duniani nguvu ya kawaida, ambayo kwayo vinamtolea chakula, ni wazo dhaifu sana na lisilo la heshima; kana kwamba rutuba ya mwaka mmoja haikuwa baraka ya pekee ya Mungu, na kana kwamba uhaba na njaa havikuwa laana na kisasi chake. Lakini kwa kuwa ingechosha kukusanya sababu zote za kulikataa kosa hili, na turidhike na mamlaka ya Mungu mwenyewe. Katika sheria na katika manabii mara nyingi anatangaza kwamba kila anapoinyeshea nchi umande au mvua, anatoa ushuhuda wa fadhili zake; na kwamba, kinyume chake, anapoamuru mbingu ziwe ngumu kama chuma, mazao ya nafaka yanapokauka na kuharibiwa vinginevyo, na mvua za mawe na dhoruba zinapovamia mashamba, anatoa uthibitisho wa kisasi chake cha hakika na cha pekee. Tukiyaamini haya, ni hakika kwamba hakuna tone la mvua linaloanguka ila kwa amri ya wazi ya Mungu. Daudi kwa kweli anasifu majaliwa ya jumla ya Mungu, kwa sababu “huwapa chakula makinda ya kunguru wanaolia;” lakini Mungu mwenyewe anapowatishia wanyama kwa njaa, je, hatangazi waziwazi kwamba huwalisha viumbe vyote vyenye uhai, wakati mwingine kwa posho ndogo, wakati mwingine kwa kubwa, apendavyo? Ni kitoto, kama nilivyokwisha kusema, kulifunga hili kwenye matendo mahususi; ilhali Kristo anasema, bila ubaguzi wowote, kwamba hakuna shomoro hata mdogo wa thamani aangukaye chini pasipo mapenzi ya Baba. Hakika, ikiwa safari ya ndege inaongozwa na shauri la Mungu lisilokosea, hatuna budi kukiri pamoja na Nabii kwamba, ingawa “anakaa juu,” hata hivyo “hunyenyekea kuviangalia vilivyo mbinguni na duniani.”V. If we grant that the principle of motion originates from God, but that all things are spontaneously or accidentally carried whither the bias of nature impels them, the mutual vicissitudes of day and night, of winter and summer, will be the work of God, inasmuch as he has distributed to each its respective parts, and prescribed to them a certain law; that is, this would be the case if with even tenor they always observed the same measure, days succeeding to nights, months to months, and years to years. But sometimes excessive heats and drought parch and burn the fruits of the earth; sometimes unseasonable rains injure the crops of corn, and sudden calamities are occasioned by showers of hail and storms: this will not be the work of God; unless, perhaps, as either clouds or serene weather, or cold or heat, derive their origin from the opposition of the stars and other natural causes. But this representation leaves no room for God to display or exercise his paternal favour, or his judgments. If they say that God is sufficiently beneficent to man, because he infuses into heaven and earth an ordinary power, by which they supply him with food, it is a very flimsy and profane notion; as though the fecundity of one year were not the singular benediction of God, and as though penury and famine were not his malediction and vengeance. But as it would be tedious to collect all the reasons for rejecting this error, let us be content with the authority of God himself. In the law and in the prophets he frequently declares, that whenever he moistens the earth with dew or with rain, he affords a testimony of his favour; and that, on the contrary, when, at his command, heaven becomes hard as iron, when the crops of corn are blasted and otherwise destroyed, and when showers of hail and storms molest the fields, he gives a proof of his certain and special vengeance. If we believe these things, it is certain that not a drop of rain falls but at the express command of God. David indeed praises the general providence of God, because “he giveth food to the young ravens which cry;” but when God himself threatens animals with famine, does he not plainly declare, that he feeds all living creatures, sometimes with a smaller allowance, sometimes with a larger, as he pleases? It is puerile, as I have already observed, to restrain this to particular acts; whereas Christ says, without any exception, that not a sparrow of the least value falls to the ground without the will of the Father. Certainly, if the flight of birds be directed by the unerring counsel of God, we must be constrained to confess with the Prophet, that, though “he dwelleth on high,” yet “he humbleth himself to behold the things which are in heaven and in the earth.”

VI. Lakini kwa kuwa tunajua kwamba ulimwengu uliumbwa hasa kwa ajili ya wanadamu, tunapaswa pia kuzingatia kusudi hili katika utawala wake. Nabii Yeremia anapaza sauti, “Ee Bwana, najua ya kuwa njia ya mwanadamu si ya yeye mwenyewe; si ya mtu anayekwenda kuziongoza hatua zake.” Na Sulemani: “Hatua za mtu zatoka kwa Bwana; basi imewezekanaje mtu kuielewa njia yake mwenyewe?” Sasa, na waseme kwamba mwanadamu anatendeshwa na Mungu kulingana na mwelekeo wa asili yake, lakini yeye huuongoza ushawishi huo kulingana na raha yake mwenyewe. Kama hili lingeweza kusemwa kwa kweli, mwanadamu angekuwa na uchaguzi huru wa njia zake. Labda hilo watalikana, kwa sababu hawezi kufanya chochote pasipo uwezo wa Mungu. Lakini kwa kuwa ni dhahiri kwamba Nabii na Sulemani wanamhusisha Mungu na uchaguzi na agizo, pamoja na uwezo, hili hakika halitawaokoa kutoka katika ugumu huo. Lakini Sulemani, mahali pengine, anakemea kwa uzuri ujasiri huu wa wanadamu, wanaojiwekea lengo bila kumjali Mungu, kana kwamba hawaongozwi na mkono wake: “Matayarisho ya moyo ni ya mwanadamu,” asema, “lakini jawabu la ulimi hutoka kwa Bwana.” Ni wazimu wa kuchekesha kwa watu wanyonge kuamua kuanza kazi yoyote pasipo Mungu, ilhali hawawezi hata kusema neno ila lile analochagua. Zaidi ya hayo, Maandiko, ili kueleza kikamilifu zaidi kwamba hakuna kinachotendeka duniani ila kulingana na uteuzi wake, yanaonyesha kwamba hata mambo yanayoonekana kuwa ya ajali kabisa yako chini yake. Maana ni nini ungekuwa tayari zaidi kukihusisha na bahati, kuliko tawi lililovunjika kutoka mti likimuua msafiri anayepita? Lakini uamuzi wa Bwana ni tofauti kabisa, kwani anakiri kwamba amemtia mikononi mwa muuaji. Nani pia anayeziachia kura upofu wa bahati? Lakini Bwana haziachi, bali anadai kuzipanga yeye mwenyewe. Anatufundisha kwamba si kwa nguvu yoyote yao wenyewe kwamba kura hutupwa kifuani na kutolewa; bali jambo pekee ambalo lingeweza kuhusishwa na ajali, anatangaza kuwa ni lake mwenyewe. Kwa kusudi hilo hilo ni kifungu kingine cha Sulemani: “Maskini na mdhalimu hukutana pamoja; Bwana ndiye anayeyatia nuru macho ya wote wawili.” Maana ingawa maskini na tajiri wamechanganyika duniani, hata hivyo, kwa kuwa hali zao zimeamriwa kwao kwa uteuzi wa Mungu, anadokeza kwamba Mungu, anayewatia nuru wote, si kipofu, na hivyo anawasihi maskini kuwa na subira; kwa sababu wale wasioridhika na kura yao wanajitahidi kuutikisa mzigo waliowekewa na Mungu. Vivyo hivyo pia Nabii mwingine anawakemea wasiomcha Mungu, wanaohusisha na bidii ya wanadamu, au bahati, kwamba watu wengine hubaki gizani, na wengine hupanda hadi heshima: “Kwa maana kuinuliwa hakutoki mashariki, wala magharibi, wala kusini. Bali Mungu ndiye mwamuzi; humshusha huyu, na kumwinua huyu.” Kwa kuwa Mungu hawezi kujivua wadhifa wa mwamuzi, hivyo anahoji kwamba ni kwa shauri la siri la Mungu kwamba wengine hupanda cheo, na wengine hubaki kudharauliwa.VI. But as we know that the world was made chiefly for the sake of mankind, we must also observe this end in the government of it. The Prophet Jeremiah exclaims, “I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps.” And Solomon: “Man’s goings are of the Lord: how can a man then understand his own way?” Now, let them say that man is actuated by God according to the bias of his nature, but that he directs that influence according to his own pleasure. If this could be asserted with truth, man would have the free choice of his own ways. That, perhaps, they will deny, because he can do nothing independently of the power of God. But since it is evident that both the Prophet and Solomon ascribe to God choice and appointment, as well as power, this by no means extricates them from the difficulty. But Solomon, in another place, beautifully reproves this temerity of men, who predetermine on an end for themselves, without regard to God, as though they were not led by his hand: “The preparation of the heart in man,” says he, “and the answer of the tongue, is from the Lord.” It is, indeed, a ridiculous madness for miserable men to resolve on undertaking any work independently of God, whilst they cannot even speak a word but what he chooses. Moreover, the Scripture, more fully to express that nothing is transacted in the world but according to his destination, shows that those things are subject to him which appear most fortuitous. For what would you be more ready to attribute to chance, than when a limb broken off from a tree kills a passing traveller? But very different is the decision of the Lord, who acknowledges that he has delivered him into the hand of the slayer. Who, likewise, does not leave lots to the blindness of fortune? Yet the Lord leaves them not, but claims the disposal of them himself. He teaches us that it is not by any power of their own that lots are cast into the lap and drawn out; but the only thing which could be ascribed to chance, he declares to belong to himself. To the same purpose is another passage from Solomon: “The poor and the deceitful man meet together: the Lord enlighteneth the eyes of them both.” For although the poor and the rich are blended together in the world, yet, as their respective conditions are assigned to them by Divine appointment, he suggests that God, who enlightens all, is not blind, and thus exhorts the poor to patience; because those who are discontented with their lot, are endeavouring to shake off the burden imposed on them by God. Thus also another Prophet rebukes profane persons, who attribute it to human industry, or to fortune, that some men remain in obscurity, and others rise to honours: “Promotion cometh neither from the east, nor from the west, nor from the south. But God is the Judge; he putteth down one, and setteth up another.” Since God cannot divest himself of the office of a judge, hence he reasons, that it is from the secret counsel of God, that some rise to promotion, and others remain in contempt.

VII. Zaidi ya hayo, matukio mahususi kwa jumla ni ushahidi wa majaliwa ya pekee ya Mungu. Mungu aliinua jangwani upepo wa kusini, ili kuwaletea watu kundi kubwa la ndege. Alipotaka Yona atupwe baharini, alituma upepo kuinua dhoruba. Wale wanaodhani Mungu hashiki usukani wa ulimwengu watasema kuwa hili lilikuwa kupotoka kutoka mwenendo wa kawaida wa mambo. Lakini hitimisho ninalolipata kutoka hapo ni kwamba hakuna upepo wowote unaoinuka au kuvuma ila kwa amri ya pekee ya Mungu. Maana vinginevyo haingekuwa kweli kwamba hufanya pepo kuwa wajumbe wake, na mwali wa moto kuwa watumishi wake, kwamba hufanya mawingu kuwa gari lake, na kutembea juu ya mbawa za upepo, isipokuwa angeelekeza apendavyo mwendo wa mawingu na wa pepo, na kuonyesha ndani yao uwepo wa pekee wa uweza wake. Vivyo hivyo pia tunafundishwa mahali pengine kwamba, wakati wowote bahari inapovurugwa kuwa dhoruba na pepo, misukosuko hiyo huthibitisha uwepo wa pekee wa Mungu. “Huamuru, na kuinua upepo wa dhoruba, uinuao mawimbi” ya bahari. “Huigeuza dhoruba iwe shwari, mawimbi yake yakatulia;” kama mahali pengine anavyotangaza kwamba aliwapiga watu kwa pepo kali zikaushazo. Hivyo, ingawa wanadamu wamepewa asili uwezo wa kuzaa, Mungu anataka ikiriwe kama tokeo la fadhili zake za pekee kwamba huwaacha wengine bila wazao, na huwapa wengine watoto; kwa kuwa “uzao wa tumbo ni thawabu.” Kwa hiyo Yakobo alimwambia mkewe, “Je! Mimi niko badala ya Mungu, aliyekuzuilia uzao wa tumbo?” Lakini kwa kumalizia; hakuna kitu cha kawaida zaidi katika asili kuliko sisi kulishwa mkate. Lakini Roho anatangaza, si tu kwamba mazao ya dunia ni zawadi ya pekee ya Mungu, bali kwamba watu hawaishi kwa mkate peke yake; kwa sababu wanategemezwa, si kwa wingi wa chakula chao, bali kwa baraka ya siri ya Mungu; kama, kinyume chake, anavyotisha kwamba atavunja “tegemeo la mkate.” Wala hatungeweza vinginevyo kwa dhati kuomba chakula chetu cha kila siku, kama Mungu hakutupatia chakula kwa mkono wake wa kibaba. Nabii, kwa hiyo, ili kuwashawishi waaminifu kwamba katika kuwalisha Mungu hutenda kama baba bora wa familia, anatufahamisha kwamba “huwapa chakula wote wenye mwili.” Mwishowe, tunaposikia, upande mmoja, kwamba “macho ya Bwana huwaelekea wenye haki, na masikio yake husikia kilio chao,” na, upande mwingine, kwamba “uso wa Bwana ni juu ya watenda mabaya, ili kufuta kumbukumbu lao katika nchi,” tunaweza kuwa na hakika kwamba viumbe vyote, vya juu na vya chini, viko tayari kwa utumishi wake, ili avitumie kwa matumizi yoyote apendayo. Kutokana na hili tunahitimisha, si tu kwamba kuna majaliwa ya jumla ya Mungu juu ya viumbe, kudumisha utaratibu wa asili, bali kwamba, kwa shauri lake la ajabu, vyote vinaelekezwa kwa lengo fulani mahususi na linalofaa.VII. Moreover, particular events are in general proofs of the special providence of God. God raised in the desert a south wind, to convey to the people a large flock of birds. When he would have Jonah thrown into the sea, he sent forth a wind to raise a tempest. It will be said by them who suppose God not to hold the helm of the world, that this was a deviation from the common course of things. But the conclusion which I deduce from it is, that no wind ever rises or blows but by the special command of God. For otherwise it would not be true that he makes the winds his messengers, and a flame of fire his ministers, that he makes the clouds his chariot, and rides on the wings of the wind, unless he directed at his pleasure the course both of the clouds and of the winds, and displayed in them the singular presence of his power. Thus also we are elsewhere taught, that, whenever the sea is blown into a tempest by the winds, those commotions prove the special presence of God. “He commandeth and raiseth the stormy wind, which lifteth up the waves” of the sea. “Then he maketh the storm a calm, so that the waves thereof are still;” as in another place he proclaims, that he scourged the people with parching winds. Thus, whilst men are naturally endued with a power of generation, yet God will have it acknowledged as the effect of his special favour, that he leaves some without any posterity, and bestows children on others; for “the fruit of the womb is his reward.” Therefore Jacob said to his wife, “Am I in God’s stead, who hath withheld from thee the fruit of the womb?” But to conclude; there is nothing more common in nature, than for us to be nourished with bread. But the Spirit declares, not only that the produce of the earth is the special gift of God, but that men do not live by bread alone; because they are supported not by the abundance of their food, but by the secret benediction of God; as, on the contrary, he threatens that he will break “the stay of bread.” Nor, indeed, could we otherwise seriously offer a prayer for daily bread, if God did not supply us with food from his fatherly hand. The Prophet, therefore, to convince the faithful that in feeding them God acts the part of an excellent father of a family, informs us, that he “giveth food to all flesh.” Lastly, when we hear, on the one hand, that “the eyes of the Lord are upon the righteous, and his ears are open unto their cry,” and, on the other, that “the face of the Lord is against them that do evil, to cut off the remembrance of them from the earth,” we may be assured that all creatures, above and below, are ready for his service, that he may apply them to any use that he pleases. Hence we conclude, not only that there is a general providence of God over the creatures, to continue the order of nature, but that, by his wonderful counsel, they are all directed to some specific and proper end.

VIII. Wale wanaotaka kuleta chuki juu ya fundisho hili, wanalishutumu kuwa sawa na maoni ya Wastoiki juu ya hatima, ambayo Augustino naye alishutumiwa nayo zamani. Ingawa hatupendi mabishano yote juu ya maneno, hatulikubali neno hatima; kwa sababu ni la aina ile mpya na isiyo ya kimungu ambayo Paulo anatufundisha kuiepuka, na kwa sababu wanajitahidi kuipakia kweli ya Mungu chuki inayoambatana nalo. Lakini shutuma hiyo dhidi yetu ni ya uongo na ya nia mbaya. Kwa maana sisi hatuwazi, pamoja na Wastoiki, ulazima unaotokana na mnyororo wa daima na mfuatano mgumu wa visababishi, ulio ndani ya asili; bali tunamfanya Mungu kuwa Mwamuzi na Mtawala wa vitu vyote, ambaye, katika hekima yake mwenyewe, tangu umilele wa mbali kabisa, ameamua atakalofanya, na sasa, kwa uweza wake mwenyewe, anatekeleza alichokiamua. Kutokana na hili tunasema kwamba si mbingu na dunia tu, na viumbe visivyo na uhai, bali pia mashauri na maamuzi ya wanadamu, vinatawaliwa na majaliwa yake kiasi cha kuelekezwa kwenye lengo lililowekwa nayo. Sasa je? utasema; hakuna kinachotokea kwa ajali au kwa bahati? Ninajibu kwamba Basil Mkuu alisema kweli kwamba bahati na ajali ni maneno ya wapagani, ambayo maana yake akili za wacha Mungu hazipaswi kushughulishwa nayo. Maana ikiwa kila mafanikio ni baraka ya Mungu, na maafa na shida ni laana yake, hakuna nafasi iliyobaki katika mambo ya wanadamu kwa bahati wala ajali. Nasi tuzingatie tamko hili la Augustino: “Sijipendezwi,” asema, “kwa kuwa katika tasnifu zangu dhidi ya Wanaakademia nimetaja bahati mara nyingi hivyo, ingawa kwa neno hilo sikukusudia mungu-mke yeyote, bali tukio la ajali la mambo ya nje, mema au mabaya. Kutoka hapo pia maneno kama hayo, ambayo hakuna dini inayokataza kuyatumia, kama labda, huenda, pengine, ambayo, hata hivyo, lazima yote yarejeshwe kwa majaliwa ya Mungu. Na kuhusu hili sikunyamaza, nikisema kwamba labda kile kinachoitwa kwa kawaida bahati kinatawaliwa na utaratibu wa siri, na kwamba kile tunachokiita ajali ni kile tu ambacho hatujui sababu yake wala chanzo chake. Hivyo, kwa kweli, nimejieleza; lakini ninatubu kwa kutaja bahati kwa namna hiyo, kwa kuwa naona kwamba watu wamezoea desturi ya dhambi sana: wanapopaswa kusema, ‘Hili lilikuwa mapenzi ya Mungu,’ husema, ‘Hili lilikuwa mapenzi ya Bahati.’” Hatimaye, kila mahali anashikilia kwamba ikiwa kitu chochote kimeachiwa bahati, ulimwengu unazunguka kwa kubahatisha. Na ingawa mahali pengine anaamua kwamba mambo yote huendeshwa kwa sehemu kwa hiari ya mwanadamu, na kwa sehemu kwa majaliwa ya Mungu, hata hivyo mara baadaye anaonyesha kwamba wanadamu wako chini yake na wanatawaliwa nayo, akichukua kama kanuni kwamba hakuna lililo la kipuuzi zaidi kuliko kitu kutokea pasipo agizo la Mungu; kwa kuwa kingetokea kwa kubahatisha. Kwa hoja hii anaondoa pia ajali yoyote inayotegemea mapenzi ya mwanadamu; na mara baada ya hapo anathibitisha kwa uwazi zaidi kwamba hatupaswi kuuliza sababu yoyote ya mapenzi ya Mungu. Lakini katika maana gani kuruhusu kunapaswa kueleweka, kila anapolitaja, itaonekana kutoka kifungu kimoja; ambamo anathibitisha kwamba mapenzi ya Mungu ndiyo sababu kuu na ya kwanza ya vitu vyote, kwa sababu hakuna kinachotokea ila kwa amri yake au ruhusa yake. Hakika hadhani kwamba Mungu hubaki mtazamaji asiye na kazi, akiamua kuruhusu jambo lolote; kuna kuingilia kati kwa mapenzi halisi, kama naruhusiwa kusema hivyo, ambayo vinginevyo hayangeweza kamwe kuhesabiwa kuwa sababu.VIII. Those who wish to bring an odium on this doctrine, calumniate it as the same with the opinion of the Stoics concerning fate, with which Augustine also was formerly reproached. Though we are averse to all contentions about words, yet we admit not the term fate; both because it is of that novel and profane kind which Paul teaches us to avoid, and because they endeavour to load the truth of God with the odium attached to it. But that dogma is falsely and maliciously charged upon us. For we do not, with the Stoics, imagine a necessity arising from a perpetual concatenation and intricate series of causes, contained in nature; but we make God the Arbiter and Governor of all things, who, in his own wisdom, has, from the remotest eternity, decreed what he would do, and now, by his own power, executes what he has decreed. Whence we assert, that not only the heaven and the earth, and inanimate creatures, but also the deliberations and volitions of men, are so governed by his providence, as to be directed to the end appointed by it. What then? you will say; does nothing happen fortuitously or contingently? I answer, that it was truly observed by Basil the Great, that fortune and chance are words of the heathen, with the signification of which the minds of the pious ought not to be occupied. For if all success be the benediction of God, and calamity and adversity his malediction, there is no room left in human affairs for fortune or chance. And we should attend to this declaration of Augustine: “I am not pleased with myself,” says he, “for having, in my treatises against the Academics, so frequently mentioned fortune, although I have not intended by that word any goddess, but a fortuitous occurrence of external things, either good or evil. Hence also such words, the use of which no religion prohibits, as perhaps, perchance, peradventure, which, nevertheless, must be entirely referred to the Divine providence. And on this I have not been silent, remarking that perhaps what is commonly termed fortune is regulated by a secret order, and that what we call chance is only that, with the reason and cause of which we are not acquainted. Thus, indeed, I have expressed myself; but I repent of having mentioned fortune in this manner, since I see that men are habituated to a very sinful custom: when they ought to say, ‘This was the will of God,’ they say, ‘This was the will of Fortune.’ ” Finally, he every where maintains, that if any thing be left to fortune, the world revolves at random. And though he elsewhere decides, that all things are conducted partly by the free will of man, partly by the providence of God, yet he just after shows that men are subject to it and governed by it, assuming as a principle that nothing could be more absurd, than for any thing to happen independently of the ordination of God; because it would happen at random. By this reasoning he excludes also any contingence dependent on the human will; and immediately after more expressly asserts that we ought not to inquire for any cause of the will of God. But in what sense permission ought to be understood, whenever it is mentioned by him, will appear from one passage; where he proves that the will of God is the supreme and first cause of all things, because nothing happens but by his command or permission. He certainly does not suppose God to remain an idle spectator, determining to permit any thing; there is an intervention of actual volition, if I may be allowed the expression, which otherwise could never be considered as a cause.

IX. Hata hivyo, kwa kuwa ukavu wa akili zetu uko chini sana ya utukufu wa majaliwa ya Mungu, tujitahidi kuzisaidia kwa tofauti. Nasema, basi, kwamba licha ya kuamriwa kwa vitu vyote kwa kusudi na mwongozo wa hakika wa Mungu, kwetu sisi ni vya ajali: si kwamba tunadhani bahati ina mamlaka yoyote juu ya ulimwengu na wanadamu, na kuzungusha vitu vyote kwa kubahatisha, kwa kuwa upumbavu huo unapaswa kuwa mbali na moyo wa Mkristo; bali kwa sababu mpangilio, sababu, lengo, na ulazima wa matukio hufichwa hasa katika kusudi la Mungu, wala havieleweki na akili ya mwanadamu, mambo hayo kwa kiasi fulani ni ya ajali, ambayo hakika yatatokea kulingana na mapenzi ya Mungu. Maana hayajionyeshi vinginevyo, yakitazamwa katika asili yake yenyewe, au yakikadiriwa kwa ujuzi wetu na hukumu yetu. Tufikirie, kwa mfano, mfanyabiashara aliyeingia msituni pamoja na watu waaminifu, akatangatanga mbali na wenzake bila busara, na kwa kufuata njia mbaya akaangukia mikononi mwa wanyang’anyi, akauawa. Kifo chake hakikuonekana tu na Mungu mapema, bali pia kiliamriwa naye. Maana haisemwi kwamba ameona mapema mipaka ya maisha ya kila mtu itafikia wapi, bali kwamba “amemwekea mipaka asiyoweza kuipita.” Hata hivyo, kwa kadiri akili zetu zinavyoweza kuelewa, mazingira haya yote yanaonekana ya ajali. Mkristo atatoa maoni gani juu ya kisa hiki? Atayaona mazingira yote ya kifo kama hicho kuwa ya ajali kwa asili yake; lakini hatashuku kwamba majaliwa ya Mungu yalitawala, na kuielekeza bahati kwenye lengo hilo. Hoja hiyo hiyo itatumika kwa mambo ya baadaye yasiyo ya hakika. Kwa kuwa mambo yote ya baadaye hayana hakika kwetu, tunayashikilia kwa mashaka, kana kwamba yangeweza kutokea kwa njia moja au nyingine. Hata hivyo hii inabaki kuwa kanuni thabiti mioyoni mwetu, kwamba hakuna tukio ambalo Mungu hajaliamuru. Kwa maana hii neno ajali hurudiwa mara nyingi katika kitabu cha Mhubiri; kwa sababu, kwa mtazamo wa kwanza, watu hawafikii sababu ya kwanza, iliyofichwa kwa kina. Na bado fundisho la Maandiko juu ya majaliwa ya siri ya Mungu halijafutika kabisa mioyoni mwa wanadamu, hata chembe zake ziliendelea kung’aa gizani sikuzote. Hivyo wachawi Wafilisti, ingawa walikuwa wakiyumba katika mashaka, walihusisha ajali mbaya kwa sehemu na Mungu, kwa sehemu na bahati. “Ikiwa sanduku,” wanasema, “linapanda kwa njia hiyo, tutajua kwamba Mungu ndiye aliyetutendea mabaya haya makubwa; lakini ikiwa sivyo, ilikuwa ajali tu iliyotupata.” Walionyesha upumbavu mkubwa, kwa kweli, baada ya kudanganywa na uaguzi, kukimbilia bahati; lakini wakati huo huo tunawaona wakizuiliwa, hata hawathubutu kudhani kwamba dhiki iliyowapata ilikuwa ya ajali. Lakini jinsi Mungu, kwa hatamu za majaliwa yake, anavyoelekeza matukio yote apendavyo yeye, itaonekana kwa mfano mashuhuri. Katika wakati ule ule Daudi alipokuwa amezingirwa katika jangwa la Maoni, tazama, Wafilisti walivamia nchi, na Sauli akalazimika kuondoka. Ikiwa Mungu, akijali usalama wa mtumishi wake, aliweka kizuizi hiki njiani mwa Sauli, basi, hakika, ingawa Wafilisti wangeweza kuchukua silaha ghafla, na kinyume cha matarajio ya wanadamu, hatutasema kwamba hili lilitokea kwa ajali; bali kile kinachoonekana kwetu kuwa ajali, imani itakikiri kuwa msukumo wa siri wa Mungu. Si mara zote, kwa kweli, kwamba sababu inayofanana inaonekana; lakini ichukuliwe kuwa ni hakika bila shaka kwamba mabadiliko yote yanayoonekana ulimwenguni yanatoka kwa utendaji wa siri wa uweza wa Mungu. Kile ambacho Mungu anaamua, lazima kitokee; hata hivyo si kwa ulazima wa kabisa wala wa kiasili. Tunapata mfano wa kawaida kuhusu mifupa ya Kristo. Kwa kuwa alikuwa na mwili kama wetu, hakuna mtu mwenye akili atakayekana kwamba mifupa yake ingeweza kuvunjwa; hata hivyo kwamba ivunjwe haikuwezekana. Kutokana na hili, tena, tunaona kwamba tofauti za ulazima wa kulinganisha na ulazima wa kabisa, pamoja na ulazima wa matokeo na ulazima wa mfuatano, hazikubuniwa shuleni bila sababu; kwa kuwa Mungu aliifanya mifupa ya Mwanawe iweze kuvunjika, ambayo hata hivyo aliiepusha isivunjwe kwa kweli, na hivyo kuzuia, kwa ulazima wa kusudi lake, kile ambacho kingeweza kutokea kiasili.IX. Yet, since the dulness of our minds is very much below the sublimity of the Divine providence, let us endeavour to assist them by a distinction. I say, then, that, notwithstanding the ordination of all things by the certain purpose and direction of God, yet to us they are fortuitous: not that we suppose fortune holds any dominion over the world and mankind, and whirls about all things at random, for such folly ought to be far from the breast of a Christian; but because the order, reason, end, and necessity of events are chiefly concealed in the purpose of God, and not comprehended by the mind of man, those things are in some measure fortuitous, which must certainly happen according to the Divine will. For they present no other appearance, whether they are considered in their own nature, or are estimated according to our knowledge and judgment. Let us suppose, for example, that a merchant, having entered a wood in the company of honest men, imprudently wanders from his companions, and, pursuing a wrong course, falls into the hands of robbers, and is murdered. His death was not only foreseen by God, but also decreed by him. For it is said, not that he has foreseen to what limits the life of every man would extend, but that he “hath appointed bounds which he cannot pass.” Yet, as far as our minds are capable of comprehending, all these circumstances appear fortuitous. What opinion shall a Christian form on this case? He will consider all the circumstances of such a death as in their nature fortuitous; yet he will not doubt that the providence of God presided, and directed fortune to that end. The same reasoning will apply to future contingencies. All future things being uncertain to us, we hold them in suspense, as though they might happen either one way or another. Yet this remains a fixed principle in our hearts, that there will be no event which God has not ordained. In this sense the word chance is frequently repeated in the book of Ecclesiastes; because, on the first view, men penetrate not to the first cause, which lies deeply concealed. And yet the doctrine of the Scripture respecting the secret providence of God, has never been so far obliterated from the hearts of men, but that some sparks of it always shone in the darkness. Thus the Philistine sorcerers, though they fluctuated in uncertainty, ascribed adverse accidents partly to God, partly to fortune. “If the ark,” say they, “goeth up by that way, we shall know that God hath done us this great evil; but if not, it was a chance that happened to us.” They betrayed great folly, indeed, after having been deceived by divination, to have recourse to fortune; yet at the same time, we see them restrained, so that they cannot dare to suppose the affliction which had befallen them was fortuitous. But how God, by the reins of his providence, directs all events according to his own pleasure, will appear by an eminent example. At the very same instant of time when David had been overtaken in the wilderness of Maon, behold, the Philistines made an irruption into the land, and Saul was compelled to depart. If God, consulting the safety of his servant, laid this impediment in the way of Saul, then, surely, though the Philistines might have taken up arms suddenly, and contrary to human expectation, yet we will not say that this happened by chance; but what to us seems a contingency, faith will acknowledge to have been a secret impulse of God. It is not always, indeed, that there appears a similar reason; but it should be considered as indubitably certain, that all the revolutions visible in the world proceed from the secret exertion of the Divine power. What God decrees, must necessarily come to pass; yet it is not by absolute or natural necessity. We find a familiar example in respect to the bones of Christ. Since he possessed a body like ours, no reasonable man will deny that his bones were capable of being broken; yet that they should be broken was impossible. Hence, again, we perceive that the distinctions of relative and absolute necessity, as well as necessity of consequent and of consequence, were not without reason invented in the schools; since God made the bones of his Son capable of being broken, which, however, he had exempted from being actually broken, and thus prevented, by the necessity of his purpose, what might naturally have come to pass.

Kitabu cha I. Sura ya XVII. Matumizi Sahihi ya Fundisho Hili Ili Liwe na Faida Kwetu.Book I. Chapter XVII. The Proper Application of This Doctrine to Render It Useful to Us.

[Sehemu za I–VI zimeachwa.][Sections I–VI omitted.]

VII. Mtumishi wa Mungu, akitiwa moyo na ahadi hizi na mifano, ataongeza ushuhuda unaotujulisha kwamba watu wote wako chini ya uweza wake, ama kushinda mioyo yao kwa upande wetu, au kuzuia ubaya wao usituumize. Maana ni Bwana anayetupa kibali, si kwa marafiki zetu tu, bali pia machoni pa Wamisri; naye anajua kuutiisha, kwa njia mbalimbali, ghadhabu ya adui zetu. Wakati mwingine huwanyima ufahamu, hata hawawezi kufanya mipango ya busara wala ya hekima; kama alivyomtuma Shetani ajaze vinywa vya manabii wote uongo, ili kumdanganya Ahabu: alimpumbaza Rehoboamu kwa shauri la vijana, ili kwa upumbavu wake mwenyewe anyang’anywe ufalme wake. Wakati mwingine, anapowapa ufahamu, huwatia hofu na kuwavunja moyo hata hawawezi kuamua wala kufanya yale waliyoyawaza. Wakati mwingine pia, anapowaruhusu kujaribu yale ambayo hasira yao na shauku yao huwasukuma kufanya, huvunja kwa wakati unaofaa ukali wao, asiwaruhusu kuendelea hadi kutimiza mipango yao. Hivyo alishinda mapema shauri la Ahithofeli, ambalo lingekuwa la kuangamiza kwa Daudi. Hivyo pia, anajali kutawala viumbe vyote kwa faida na usalama wa watu wake, hata Ibilisi mwenyewe, ambaye tunamwona hakuthubutu kujaribu jambo lolote dhidi ya Ayubu bila ruhusa na amri yake. Matokeo ya lazima ya ujuzi huu ni shukrani katika mafanikio, subira katika shida, na usalama wa ajabu kuhusu wakati ujao. Kila tukio la mafanikio na la kupendeza, kwa hiyo, mcha Mungu atalihusisha kabisa na Mungu, iwe wema wake umepokelewa kwa huduma ya wanadamu, au kwa msaada wa viumbe visivyo na uhai. Maana hili litakuwa tafakari ya akili yake: “Hakika ni Bwana aliyeelekeza mioyo yao kunipendelea, aliyewaunganisha nami kuwa vyombo vya wema wake kwangu.” Katika wingi wa mazao ya dunia, atafikiri kwamba ni Bwana anayeangalia mbingu, ili mbingu ziangalie dunia, ili dunia nayo iangalie mazao yake: katika mambo mengine hatakuwa na shaka kwamba ni baraka ya Mungu peke yake ndiyo sababu ya mafanikio yote; wala hatavumilia kuwa mtovu wa shukrani baada ya maonyo mengi hivyo.VII. The servant of God, encouraged by these promises and examples, will add the testimonies, which inform us that all men are subject to his power, either to conciliate their minds in our favour, or to restrain their malice from being injurious. For it is the Lord who gives us favour, not only with our friends, but also in the eyes of the Egyptians; and he knows how to subdue, by various methods, the fury of our enemies. Sometimes he deprives them of understanding, so that they can form no sober or prudent plans; as he sent Satan to fill the mouths of all the prophets with falsehood, in order to deceive Ahab: he infatuated Rehoboam by the counsel of the young men, that through his own folly he might be spoiled of his kingdom. Sometimes, when he grants them understanding, he so terrifies and dispirits them, that they can neither determine nor undertake what they have conceived. Sometimes, also, when he has permitted them to attempt what their rage and passion prompted, he opportunely breaks their impetuosity, not suffering them to proceed to the accomplishment of their designs. Thus he prematurely defeated the counsel of Ahithophel, which would have been fatal to David. Thus, also, he takes care to govern all creatures for the benefit and safety of his people, even the devil himself, who, we see, dared not to attempt any thing against Job, without his permission and command. The necessary consequences of this knowledge are, gratitude in prosperity, patience in adversity, and a wonderful security respecting the future. Every prosperous and pleasing event, therefore, the pious man will ascribe entirely to God, whether his beneficence be received through the ministry of men, or by the assistance of inanimate creatures. For this will be the reflection of his mind: “It is certainly the Lord that has inclined their hearts to favour me, that has united them to me to be the instruments of his benignity towards me.” In an abundance of the fruits of the earth, he will consider, that it is the Lord who regards the heaven, that the heaven may regard the earth, that the earth, also, may regard its own productions: in other things he will not doubt that it is the Divine benediction alone which is the cause of all prosperity; nor will he bear to be ungrateful after so many admonitions.

VIII. Akipatwa na shida yoyote, katika hali hii pia, mara atainua moyo wake kwa Mungu, ambaye mkono wake ndio unaoweza zaidi kutujaza subira na utulivu wa akili. Kama Yusufu angekaa akitafakari hila za ndugu zake, asingeweza kamwe kurejesha upendo wa kindugu kwao. Lakini kwa kuwa aligeuza akili yake kwa Bwana, alisahau madhara yao, na akaelekea upole na huruma, hata akawafariji kwa hiari, akisema, “Si ninyi mlionileta huku, bali ni Mungu; mlinitakia mabaya; lakini Mungu aliyakusudia kuwa mema.” Kama Ayubu angewatazama Wakaldayo waliomsumbua, angewaka kisasi; lakini kwa kulitambua tukio hilo wakati huo huo kuwa kazi ya Bwana, alijifariji kwa usemi huu mzuri sana: “Bwana alitoa, Bwana ametwaa; jina la Bwana lihimidiwe.” Vivyo hivyo Daudi, aliposhambuliwa na Shimei kwa maneno ya matusi na mawe, kama angekuwa amefungia macho yake kwa mwanadamu, angewatia askari wake moyo kulipiza kisasi; lakini kwa kuelewa kwamba haikufanywa bila kuchochewa na Bwana, badala yake huwatuliza: “Na amlaani,” asema, “kwa kuwa Bwana amemwambia, Mlaani Daudi.” Mahali pengine anaweka kizuizi hicho hicho juu ya kupita kiasi kwa huzuni yake: “Nalinyamaza kimya,” asema, “sikufunua kinywa changu; kwa kuwa wewe ndiwe uliyefanya.” Ikiwa hakuna dawa yenye nguvu zaidi dhidi ya hasira na kukosa subira, hakika mtu huyo ameendelea si kidogo ambaye amejifunza katika hali hii kutafakari majaliwa ya Mungu, ili aweze wakati wowote kurejesha akili yake kwa wazo hili: “Ni mapenzi ya Bwana, kwa hiyo yanapaswa kuvumiliwa; si kwa sababu upinzani ni haramu na bure tu, bali kwa sababu hapendi kitu ila kilicho cha haki na chenye faida.” Hitimisho la yote ni hili—kwamba tunapoteseka madhara kutoka kwa wanadamu, tukisahau ubaya wao, ambao ungeongeza tu huzuni yetu na kuchochea akili zetu kulipiza kisasi, tunapaswa kukumbuka kupanda hadi kwa Mungu, na kujifunza kuhesabu kuwa kweli ya hakika kwamba chochote ambacho adui zetu wametutendea kwa uhalifu, kimeruhusiwa na kuelekezwa na utaratibu wake wa haki. Ili kututuliza tusilipize madhara, Paulo kwa busara anatuonya kwamba mashindano yetu si juu ya damu na nyama, bali juu ya adui wa kiroho, Ibilisi, ili tujiandae kwa mapambano. Lakini onyo hili lina faida kubwa zaidi katika kutuliza mashambulizi yote ya chuki, kwamba Mungu huwapa silaha kwa mapambano Ibilisi na watu wote waovu, na yeye mwenyewe huketi kama mwamuzi wa vita, ili kuzoeza subira yetu. Lakini ikiwa maafa na dhiki zinazotuonea zinatokea bila kuingilia kwa wanadamu, tukumbuke fundisho la sheria, kwamba kila tukio la mafanikio hutoka kwa baraka ya Mungu, lakini yote ya shida ni laana zake; na tutetemeke kwa tishio hilo la kutisha, “Mkienda kwa kinyume nami, mimi nami nitakwenda kinyume nanyi;” lugha inayokemea ujinga wetu, tunapoyahesabu matukio yote, ya mafanikio na ya shida, kuwa ya ajali, kulingana na mawazo ya kawaida ya mwili, bila kutiwa moyo wa kumwabudu Mungu kwa fadhili zake, wala kuchochewa kutubu kwa adhabu zake. Hii ndiyo sababu ya mabishano makali ya Yeremia na Amosi, kwa sababu Wayahudi walidhani kwamba matukio mema na mabaya yalitokea bila uteuzi wowote wa Mungu. Kwa kusudi hilo hilo ni kifungu hiki cha Isaya: “Mimi naumba nuru, na kuumba giza; nafanya amani, na kuumba mabaya; mimi, Bwana, ndiye nifanyaye haya yote.”VIII. If any adversity befall him, in this case, also, he will immediately lift up his heart to God, whose hand is most capable of impressing us with patience and placid moderation of mind. If Joseph had dwelt on a review of the perfidy of his brethren, he never could have recovered his fraternal affection for them. But as he turned his mind to the Lord, he forgot their injuries, and was so inclined to mildness and clemency, as even voluntarily to administer consolation to them, saying, “It was not you that sent me hither, but God did send me before you to save your lives. Ye thought evil against me; but God meant it unto good.” If Job had regarded the Chaldeans, by whom he was molested, he had been inflamed to revenge; but recognizing the event at the same time as the work of the Lord, he consoled himself with this very beautiful observation: “The Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord.” Thus David, when assailed by Shimei with reproachful language and with stones, if he had confined his views to man, would have animated his soldiers to retaliate the injury; but understanding that it was not done without the instigation of the Lord, he rather appeases them: “Let him curse,” says he, “because the Lord hath said unto him, Curse David.” In another place he imposes the same restraint on the intemperance of his grief: “I was dumb,” says he, “I opened not my mouth; because thou didst it.” If there be no more efficacious remedy for anger and impatience, surely that man has made no small proficiency, who has learned in this case to meditate on the Divine providence, that he may be able at all times to recall his mind to this consideration: “It is the will of the Lord, therefore it must be endured; not only because resistance is unlawful and vain, but because he wills nothing but what is both just and expedient.” The conclusion of the whole is this—that, when we suffer injuries from men, forgetting their malice, which would only exasperate our grief and instigate our minds to revenge, we should remember to ascend to God, and learn to account it a certain truth, that whatever our enemies have criminally committed against us, has been permitted and directed by his righteous dispensation. To restrain us from retaliating injuries, Paul prudently admonishes us that our contention is not with flesh and blood, but with a spiritual enemy, the devil, in order that we may prepare ourselves for the contest. But this admonition is the most useful in appeasing all the sallies of resentment, that God arms for the conflict both the devil and all wicked men, and sits himself as the arbiter of the combat, to exercise our patience. But if the calamities and miseries which oppress us happen without the interposition of men, let us recollect the doctrine of the law, that every prosperous event proceeds from the benediction of God, but that all adverse ones are his maledictions; and let us tremble at that awful denunciation, “If ye will walk contrary unto me, then will I also walk contrary unto you;” language which reproves our stupidity, while, according to the common apprehensions of the flesh, esteeming every event, both prosperous and adverse, to be fortuitous, we are neither animated to the worship of God by his benefits, nor stimulated to repentance by his corrections. This is the reason of the sharp expostulations of Jeremiah and of Amos, because the Jews supposed that both good and evil events came to pass without any appointment of God. To the same purpose is this passage of Isaiah: “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.”

IX. Hata hivyo wakati huo huo mcha Mungu hatapuuza visababishi vya chini. Wala kwa kuwa anawahesabu wale aliopokea faida kutoka kwao kuwa wahudumu wa wema wa Mungu, hataviacha bila kuvizingatia, kana kwamba havistahili shukrani kwa wema wao; bali atahisi, na kukiri kwa urahisi, wajibu wake kwao, na kujitahidi kuurudisha kadiri uwezo na nafasi vinavyoruhusu. Mwishowe, atamheshimu na kumsifu Mungu kama Mwanzilishi mkuu wa faida alizopokea, lakini atawaheshimu wanadamu kama wahudumu wake; na atafahamu, kama ilivyo kweli, kwamba mapenzi ya Mungu yamemweka chini ya wajibu kwa watu wale ambao kwa njia yao Bwana ameona vema kuwasilisha faida zake. Akipata hasara yoyote kwa uzembe au kwa kutokuwa na busara, atahitimisha kwamba ilitokea kulingana na mapenzi ya Mungu, lakini pia atajitwika lawama yake mwenyewe. Mtu yeyote akiondolewa na ugonjwa, ambaye alipaswa kumtunza, lakini alimdharau,—ingawa hawezi kuwa hajui kwamba mtu huyo alikuwa amefikia mipaka ambayo haikuwezekana kwake kuipita, hata hivyo hatafanya hili kuwa udhuru wa kupunguza hatia yake; bali, kwa kuwa hakutimiza wajibu wake kwake kwa uaminifu, atamwona kuwa ameangamia kwa uzembe wake wa uhalifu. Sembuse pale udanganyifu na nia mbaya iliyopangwa mapema vinapojitokeza katika kutenda mauaji au wizi, hatayasamehe maovu hayo kwa kisingizio cha majaliwa ya Mungu: katika kosa hilo hilo ataona wazi haki ya Mungu na uovu wa mwanadamu, kama vinavyojidhihirisha kila kimoja. Lakini hasa kuhusu mambo ya baadaye ataelekeza uangalifu wake kwa visababishi vya chini vya aina hii. Maana atahesabu miongoni mwa baraka za Bwana, kutokosa msaada wa kibinadamu anaoweza kuutumia kwa usalama wake; kwa hiyo hatakuwa mzembe katika kupokea ushauri, wala mwepesi wa kusahau kuomba msaada wa wale anaowaona wanaoweza kumsaidia; bali, akizichukulia viumbe vyote vinavyoweza kumfaa kwa njia yoyote kuwa zawadi nyingi kutoka kwa Bwana, atavitumia kama vyombo halali vya majaliwa ya Mungu. Na kwa kuwa hana hakika kuhusu matokeo ya shughuli zake, ila anajua kwamba Bwana atamwandalia mema katika mambo yote, anatafuta kwa bidii kile ambacho, kulingana na hukumu bora anayoweza kuunda, kitakuwa kwa faida yake. Wala katika kuendesha mashauriano yake, hatachukuliwa na maoni yake mwenyewe, bali atajikabidhi na kujisalimisha kwa hekima ya Mungu, ili aongozwe na uongozi wake kwenye lengo sahihi. Lakini hataweka tumaini lake kwa misaada ya nje kwa kiwango kwamba, akiwa nayo, atayategemea kwa usalama, au, akikosa, atatetemeka kwa kukata tamaa. Maana akili yake itakuwa daima imeelekezwa kwa majaliwa ya Mungu peke yake, wala hataruhusu kuvutwa mbali na kuyatafakari kwa uthabiti na jambo lolote la sasa. Hivyo Yoabu, ingawa anakiri kwamba matokeo ya vita yanategemea mapenzi na uweza wa Mungu, hajisalimishi kwa uvivu, bali anatimiza kwa bidii wajibu wote wa cheo chake, na kuliacha tokeo kwa uamuzi wa Mungu. “Na tuwe hodari,” asema, “kwa ajili ya watu wetu, na kwa ajili ya miji ya Mungu wetu; naye Bwana na afanye lililo jema machoni pake.” Ujuzi huu utatuvua ujasiri wa haraka na imani ya uongo, na kutuchochea kumwomba Mungu daima; pia utaitegemeza akili zetu kwa tumaini jema, ili bila kusita tuweze kwa usalama na kwa moyo mkuu kudharau hatari zote zinazotuzunguka.IX. Yet at the same time a pious man will not overlook inferior causes. Nor, because he accounts those from whom he has received any benefit, the ministers of the Divine goodness, will he therefore pass them by unnoticed, as though they deserved no thanks for their kindness; but will feel, and readily acknowledge, his obligation to them, and study to return it as ability and opportunity may permit. Finally, he will reverence and praise God as the principal Author of benefits received, but will honour men as his ministers; and will understand, what, indeed, is the fact, that the will of God has laid him under obligations to those persons by whose means the Lord has been pleased to communicate his benefits. If he suffer any loss either through negligence or through imprudence, he will conclude that it happened according to the Divine will, but will also impute the blame of it to himself. If any one be removed by disease, whom, while it was his duty to take care of him, he has treated with neglect,—though he cannot be ignorant that that person had reached those limits which it was impossible for him to pass, yet he will not make this a plea to extenuate his guilt; but, because he has not faithfully performed his duty towards him, will consider him as having perished through his criminal negligence. Much less, when fraud and preconceived malice appear in the perpetration either of murder or of theft, will he excuse those enormities under the pretext of the Divine providence: in the same crime he will distinctly contemplate the righteousness of God and the iniquity of man, as they respectively discover themselves. But it is principally in regard to things future that he will direct his attention to inferior causes of this kind. For he will rank it among the blessings of the Lord, not to be destitute of human aids which he may use for his own safety; he will neither be remiss, therefore, in taking the advice, nor negligent in imploring the help, of those whom he perceives to be capable of affording him assistance; but, considering all the creatures, that can in any respect be serviceable to him, as so many gifts from the Lord, he will use them as the legitimate instruments of the Divine providence. And as he is uncertain respecting the issue of his undertakings, except that he knows that the Lord will in all things provide for his good, he studiously aims at what, according to the best judgment he can form, will be for his advantage. Nor, in conducting his deliberations, will he be carried away by his own opinion, but will recommend and resign himself to the wisdom of God, that he may be directed by its guidance to the right end. But he will not place his confidence in external helps to such a degree as, if possessed of them, securely to rely on them, or, if destitute of them, to tremble with despair. For his mind will always be fixed solely on the Divine providence, nor will he suffer himself to be seduced from a steady contemplation of it, by any consideration of present things. Thus Joab, though he acknowledges the event of battle to depend on the will and the power of God, yet surrenders not himself to inactivity, but sedulously executes all the duties of his office, and leaves the event to the Divine decision. “Let us play the men,” says he, “for our people, and for the cities of our God; and the Lord do that which seemeth him good.” This knowledge will divest us of temerity and false confidence, and excite us to continual invocations of God; it will also support our minds with a good hope, that without hesitation we may securely and magnanimously despise all the dangers which surround us.

X. Hapa panagunduliwa furaha isiyokadirika ya akili ya mcha Mungu. Maisha ya mwanadamu yamezingirwa na maovu yasiyohesabika, na kutishwa na mauti elfu. Tusiende mbali na sisi wenyewe,—kwa kuwa mwili wetu ni chombo cha magonjwa elfu, na hata una na kulea visababishi vya magonjwa, mwanadamu lazima abebe pamoja naye uharibifu katika namna zisizohesabika, na kuendeleza maisha ambayo, kama ilivyokuwa, yamefungamana na mauti. Maana kingine gani unaweza kusema juu yake, wakati baridi wala joto la kiasi kikubwa haviwezi kuvumiliwa bila hatari? Sasa, popote ugeukapo, vitu vyote vinavyokuzunguka si tu havistahili tumaini lako, bali karibu vinakutishia waziwazi, na vinaonekana kutishia kifo cha papo hapo. Panda meli; kuna hatua moja tu kati yako na mauti. Panda farasi; kuteleza kwa mguu mmoja kunahatarisha maisha yako. Tembea katika mitaa ya mji; unaweza kupatwa na hatari nyingi kama zilivyo vigae juu ya paa. Ikiwa kuna silaha kali mkononi mwako, au mkononi mwa rafiki yako, madhara ni dhahiri. Wanyama wote wakali unaowaona wamejihami kukuangamiza. Ukijaribu kujifungia katika bustani iliyozungushiwa ua mzuri, na isiyoonyesha ila kila kinachopendeza, hata huko wakati mwingine nyoka hujificha. Nyumba yako, daima inayoweza kuungua moto, inakutishia mchana kwa umaskini, na usiku kwa kuanguka juu ya kichwa chako. Shamba lako, lililo wazi kwa mvua ya mawe, baridi kali, ukame, na dhoruba mbalimbali, linakutishia kwa ukame na kwa mwandani wake, njaa. Naacha sumu, hila, wizi, na jeuri ya wazi, ambazo kwa sehemu hutuzingira nyumbani, na kwa sehemu hutufuata ugenini. Katikati ya shida hizi, je, mwanadamu hastahili kuwa mnyonge zaidi, ambaye ni nusu mfu angali hai, na amevunjika moyo na kuogopeshwa kana kwamba ana upanga daima shingoni? Utasema kwamba mambo haya hutokea mara chache, au hakika si sikuzote, wala kwa kila mtu, na kamwe hayatokei yote kwa pamoja. Nakubali; lakini kwa kuwa tunaonywa na mifano ya wengine kwamba yanaweza kututokea pia, na kwamba hatuna madai ya kusamehewa kuliko wengine, lazima tuyaogope kama matukio tunayoweza kuyatarajia. Unaweza kudhania nini cha kuhuzunisha zaidi kuliko woga huo? Zaidi ya hayo, ni tusi kwa Mungu kusema kwamba ameweka mwanadamu, kiumbe chake bora zaidi, wazi kwa upofu na ujasiri wa kipumbavu wa bahati. Lakini hapa nakusudia kusema tu juu ya taabu ambayo mwanadamu lazima ahisi, ikiwa yuko chini ya utawala wa bahati.X. Herein is discovered the inestimable felicity of the pious mind. Human life is beset by innumerable evils, and threatened with a thousand deaths. Not to go beyond ourselves,—since our body is the receptacle of a thousand diseases, and even contains and fosters the causes of diseases, a man must unavoidably carry about with him destruction in unnumbered forms, and protract a life which is, as it were, involved in death. For what else can you say of it, when neither cold nor heat in any considerable degree can be endured without danger? Now, whithersoever you turn, all the objects around you are not only unworthy of your confidence, but almost openly menace you, and seem to threaten immediate death. Embark in a ship; there is but a single step between you and death. Mount a horse; the slipping of one foot endangers your life. Walk through the streets of a city; you are liable to as many dangers as there are tiles on the roofs. If there be a sharp weapon in your hand, or that of your friend, the mischief is manifest. All the ferocious animals you see are armed for your destruction. If you endeavour to shut yourself in a garden surrounded with a good fence, and exhibiting nothing but what is delightful, even there sometimes lurks a serpent. Your house, perpetually liable to fire, menaces you by day with poverty, and by night with falling on your head. Your land, exposed to hail, frost, drought, and various tempests, threatens you with sterility, and with its attendant, famine. I omit poison, treachery, robbery, and open violence, which partly beset us at home, and partly pursue us abroad. Amidst these difficulties, must not man be most miserable, who is half dead while he lives, and is dispirited and alarmed as though he had a sword perpetually applied to his neck? You will say that these things happen seldom, or certainly not always, nor to every man, but never all at once. I grant it; but as we are admonished by the examples of others, that it is possible for them to happen also to us, and that we have no more claim to exemption from them than others, we must unavoidably dread them as events that we may expect. What can you imagine more calamitous than such a dread? Besides, it is an insult to God to say that he has exposed man, the noblest of his creatures, to the blindness and temerity of fortune. But here I intend to speak only of the misery which man must feel, if he be subject to the dominion of fortune.

XI. Kinyume chake, nuru hii ya majaliwa ya Mungu ikishamwangazia mcha Mungu mara moja, anaokolewa na kuondolewa si tu katika wasiwasi na hofu kuu aliyokandamizwa nayo hapo awali, bali pia katika kila wasiwasi. Maana, kama vile anavyoiogopa bahati kwa haki, ndivyo anavyothubutu kujikabidhi salama kwa Mungu. Hii, nasema, ndiyo faraja yake, kufahamu kwamba Baba yake wa mbinguni huvizuia vitu vyote kwa uweza wake, huvitawala vyote kwa mapenzi yake, na kuvidhibiti vyote kwa hekima yake, kwa namna kwamba hakuna kinachoweza kutokea ila kwa uteuzi wake; zaidi ya hayo, kwamba Mungu amemchukua chini ya ulinzi wake, na kumkabidhi kwa utunzaji wa malaika, hata hawezi kupata madhara kutoka kwa maji, wala moto, wala upanga, zaidi ya kadiri Mtawala wa Kimungu atakavyoona vema kuruhusu. Maana ndivyo anavyoimba mtunga zaburi: “Hakika yeye atakuokoa na mtego wa mwindaji, na tauni iharibuyo. Atakufunika kwa manyoya yake, na chini ya mbawa zake utakimbilia; kweli yake ni ngao na kigao. Hutaogopa hofu ya usiku, wala mshale urukao mchana; wala tauni ipitayo gizani, wala uharibifu uteketezao adhuhuri.” Kutoka hapa pia unatoka ujasiri wa kujivunia wa watakatifu: “Bwana yu upande wangu; sitaogopa; mwanadamu atanitenda nini? Bwana ndiye nguvu ya uzima wangu; nitaogopa nani? Jeshi likiweka kambi juu yangu—nijapopita kati ya bonde la uvuli wa mauti, sitaogopa mabaya.” Inawezekanaje usalama wao ubaki bila kutikiswa, ulimwengu unapoonekana kuzunguka kwa kubahatisha, ila kwa sababu wanajua kwamba Bwana anatenda kila mahali, na wanatumainia matendo yake kuwa ya manufaa kwao? Sasa, usalama wao unaposhambuliwa, ama na Ibilisi au na watu waovu, kama hawangetegemezwa na kumbukumbu na tafakari ya majaliwa, lazima wangezimia mara moja. Lakini wanapokumbuka kwamba Ibilisi na jeshi lote la waovu wamezuiliwa kwa kila njia na uweza wa Mungu, hata hawawezi kuwaza uadui wowote dhidi yetu, wala, baada ya kuuwaza, kuunda mpango wa kuutimiza, wala hata kusogeza kidole kuutekeleza mpango huo, zaidi ya kadiri alivyoruhusu, na hata kuwaamuru; na kwamba si tu wamefungwa kwa minyororo yake, bali pia wanalazimishwa kumtumikia,—wana chemchemi tele ya faraja. Maana kama vile ni jukumu la Bwana kuwapa silaha hasira yao, na kuielekeza kwa vitu vyovyote apendavyo, vivyo hivyo ni jukumu lake kuweka mipaka yake, wasifurahie ushindi usio na kikomo kulingana na mapenzi yao wenyewe. Akiwa amethibitika katika ushawishi huu, Paulo aliamua safari yake mahali pamoja kwa ruhusa ya Mungu, ambayo mahali pengine alikuwa ametangaza kuzuiliwa na Shetani. Kama angesema tu kwamba Shetani ndiye kikwazo, angeonekana kumpa uwezo mwingi mno, kana kwamba anaweza kupindua makusudi ya Mungu; lakini anaposema kwamba Mungu ndiye mwamuzi, ambaye ruhusa yake safari zote hutegemea, wakati huo huo anaonyesha kwamba Shetani, pamoja na hila zake zote, hawezi kutimiza chochote ila kwa ruhusa yake. Kwa sababu hiyo hiyo, Daudi, kwa sababu ya mabadiliko mbalimbali na ya daima ya maisha, anakimbilia kimbilio hili: “Nyakati zangu zi mkononi mwako.” Angeweza kutaja mwenendo wa maisha, au wakati, kwa umoja; lakini kwa neno nyakati alikusudia kueleza kwamba, hata hali ya wanadamu iwe isiyo thabiti kiasi gani, mabadiliko yote yanayotokea yako chini ya utawala wa Mungu. Kwa sababu hiyo Resini na mfalme wa Israeli, walipofanana, baada ya kuunganisha majeshi yao kwa uangamizo wa Yuda, na vijinga vya moto vilivyowashwa kuiteketeza nchi na kuiharibu, wanaitwa na Nabii “vijinga vya moto vinavyofuka moshi,” visivyoweza kufanya kitu ila kutoa moshi kidogo. Hivyo Farao, wakati mali yake, nguvu zake, na wingi wa majeshi yake vilimfanya kuwa wa kuogopwa na wote, analinganishwa yeye mwenyewe na mnyama mkubwa wa baharini, na majeshi yake na samaki. Kwa hiyo Mungu anatangaza kwamba atamchukua mkuu na jeshi lake kwa ndoana yake, na kuwavuta kokote apendako. Mwishowe, tusikae tena juu ya sehemu hii ya mada, kwa urahisi utaona, ukichunguza, kwamba kutojua majaliwa ndiyo taabu kuu kuliko zote, lakini kwamba kuyajua kunaambatana na furaha ya juu kabisa.XI. On the contrary, when this light of Divine providence has once shined on a pious man, he is relieved and delivered not only from the extreme anxiety and dread with which he was previously oppressed, but also from all care. For, as he justly dreads fortune, so he ventures securely to commit himself to God. This, I say, is his consolation, to apprehend that his heavenly Father restrains all things by his power, governs all things by his will, and regulates all things by his wisdom, in such a manner, that nothing can happen but by his appointment; moreover, that God has taken him under his protection, and committed him to the care of angels, so that he can sustain no injury from water, or fire, or sword, any further than the Divine Governor may be pleased to permit. For thus sings the Psalmist: “Surely he shall deliver thee from the snare of the fowler, and from the noisome pestilence. He shall cover thee with his feathers, and under his wings shalt thou trust: his truth shall be thy shield and buckler. Thou shalt not be afraid for the terror by night; nor for the arrow that flieth by day; nor for the pestilence that walketh in darkness; nor for the destruction that wasteth at noonday.” Hence also proceeds that confidence of glorying in the saints: “The Lord is on my side; I will not fear what man can do unto me. The Lord is the strength of my life; of whom shall I be afraid? Though a host should encamp against me—though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil.” How is it that their security remains unshaken, while the world appears to be revolving at random, but because they know that the Lord is universally operative, and confide in his operations as beneficial to them? Now, when their safety is attacked, either by the devil or by wicked men, if they were not supported by the recollection and contemplation of providence, they must necessarily and immediately faint. But when they recollect, that the devil and the whole army of the wicked are in every respect so restrained by the Divine power, that they can neither conceive of any hostility against us, nor, after having conceived it, form a plan for its accomplishment, nor even move a finger towards the execution of such plan, any further than he has permitted, and even commanded them; and that they are not only bound by his chains, but also compelled to do him service,—they have an abundant source of consolation. For as it belongs to the Lord to arm their fury, and to direct it to whatever objects he pleases, so it also belongs to him to fix its limits, that they may not enjoy an unbounded triumph according to their own wills. Established in this persuasion, Paul determined his journey in one place by the permission of God, which in another he had declared was prevented by Satan. If he had only said that Satan was the obstacle, he would have appeared to attribute too much power to him, as though he were able to subvert the purposes of God; but when he states God to be the arbiter, on whose permission all journeys depend, he at the same time shows, that Satan, with all his machinations, can effect nothing but by his permission. For the same reason, David, on account of the various and constant vicissitudes of life, betakes himself to this asylum: “My times are in thy hand.” He might have mentioned either the course of life, or time, in the singular number; but by the word times he intended to express, that, however unstable the condition of men may be, all the vicissitudes which take place are under the government of God. For which reason Rezin and the king of Israel, when, after the junction of their forces for the destruction of Judah, they resembled firebrands kindled to consume and ruin the land, are called by the Prophet “smoking firebrands,” which can do nothing but emit a little smoke. Thus Pharaoh, when his riches, his strength, and the multitude of his forces, rendered him formidable to all, is himself compared to a sea-monster, and his forces to fishes. Therefore God denounces that he will take both the captain and his army with his hook, and draw them whither he pleases. Finally, to dwell no longer on this part of the subject, you will easily perceive, on examination, that ignorance of providence is the greatest of miseries, but that the knowledge of it is attended with the highest felicity.

[Sehemu za XII–XIV zimeachwa.][Sections XII–XIV omitted.]

4. Anguko, Dhambi ya Asili na Utashi Uliofungwa4. The Fall, Original Sin and the Bound Will

John Calvin, Taasisi za Dini ya Kikristo (toleo la mwisho la Kilatini, 1559; tafsiri ya Kiingereza ya John Allen, 1813; Project Gutenberg #45001), Kitabu cha II, sura ya I, kamili (sehemu za I–XI), na sura ya II, sehemu za I, XII na XXVI–XXVII (sehemu za II–XI na XIII–XXV zimeachwa): asili ya dhambi ya Adamu, ufafanuzi wa dhambi ya asili, kuharibika kwa vipawa vya asili na kupotea kwa vipawa vya juu ya asili, na utumwa wa utashi. Chanzo cha msingi; tafsiri ni za mwandishi.John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (final Latin edition, 1559; English translation by John Allen, 1813; Project Gutenberg #45001), Book II, chapter I, complete (sections I–XI), and chapter II, sections I, XII and XXVI–XXVII (sections II–XI and XIII–XXV omitted): the nature of Adam’s sin, the definition of original sin, the corruption of the natural gifts and loss of the supernatural ones, and the bondage of the will. Primary source; the interpretations are the author’s.

> Maelezo ya CTS: Hapa Calvin anasimama katika mstari wa Augustino (354–430) dhidi ya Pelagio, mtawa Mwingereza wa mwanzoni mwa karne ya tano aliyefundisha kwamba dhambi ya Adamu iliwadhuru wengine kwa mfano mbaya tu; Celestio alikuwa mwanafunzi wake. Wamani walikuwa madhehebu ya kale yaliyoona uovu kama kitu kilichoumbwa na nguvu ovu. Petro Lombardo (karne ya kumi na mbili) aliandika Sentensi, kitabu cha kawaida cha kiada cha “wanashule” wa zama za kati (wanateolojia wa kielimu). “Pravity” ya Allen humaanisha upotovu; “obnoxious to” humaanisha kuwa chini ya hatari ya; “concupiscence” humaanisha tamaa mbaya iliyopotoka. Calvin hasemi kwamba watu walioanguka hawawezi kufanya chochote kizuri kwa nje — sehemu zilizoachwa XIII–XVII za sura ya II zinasifu sanaa, sayansi na fadhila za kiraia kuwa vipawa vya Roho wa Mungu hata miongoni mwa wasioamini — bali kwamba hakuna mtu awezaye kwa nafsi yake kutaka kile kinachompendeza Mungu kwa wokovu. Wakristo wa mapokeo ya Kiarminiani na Kiweslesi wanakubali kwamba utashi umeanguka lakini hufundisha kwamba neema ya Mungu ya “kutangulia” huwarudishia wote kiasi cha uhuru wa kuitikia; wanafunzi wanapaswa kujua tafsiri zote mbili, ikiwa ni pamoja na tafsiri inayojadiliwa ya Warumi 7.CTS note: Calvin here stands in the line of Augustine (354–430) against Pelagius, a British monk of the early fifth century who taught that Adam’s sin harmed others only by bad example; Celestius was his disciple. The Manichaeans were an ancient sect that treated evil as a substance created by an evil power. Peter Lombard (twelfth century) wrote the Sentences, the standard textbook of the medieval “schoolmen” (scholastic theologians). Allen’s “pravity” means depravity; “obnoxious to” means liable to; “concupiscence” means disordered desire. Calvin does not say that fallen people can do nothing outwardly good — the omitted sections XIII–XVII of chapter II praise the arts, sciences and civil virtues as gifts of God’s Spirit even among unbelievers — but that no one can of himself will what pleases God for salvation. Christians in the Arminian and Wesleyan traditions agree that the will is fallen but teach that God’s “prevenient” grace restores to all a measure of freedom to respond; students should know both readings, including the debated interpretation of Romans 7.

Kitabu cha II. Sura ya I. Anguko na Uasi wa Adamu Ndio Chanzo cha Laana Iliyowapata Wanadamu Wote, na ya Kuharibika Kwao Kutoka Hali Yao ya Kwanza. Fundisho la Dhambi ya Asili.Book II. Chapter I. The Fall and Defection of Adam the Cause of the Curse Inflicted on All Mankind, and of Their Degeneracy from Their Primitive Condition. The Doctrine of Original Sin.

Kuna sababu nyingi katika msemo wa kale unaomsisitizia mwanadamu sana kujijua mwenyewe. Maana ikiwa inadhaniwa kuwa aibu kutojua lolote linalohusu mwenendo wa maisha ya mwanadamu, kutojua nafsi zetu wenyewe ni aibu kubwa zaidi, jambo linalotufanya, tunapotafakari mambo muhimu, kupapasa njia yetu katika giza la kusikitisha, au hata katika giza totoro. Lakini kwa kadiri ya faida ya agizo hili, ndivyo tahadhari yetu inavyopaswa kuwa kubwa tusilitumie vibaya, kama tunavyowaona wanafalsafa wengine walivyofanya. Maana wanapomsihi mwanadamu ajijue mwenyewe, kusudi wanalolipendekeza ni kwamba asibaki bila kujua heshima yake na ubora wake mwenyewe: wala hawataki atafakari ndani yake chochote ila kile kinachoweza kumfurahisha kwa matumaini ya bure na kumvimbisha kwa kiburi. Lakini kujijua sisi wenyewe kunajumuisha, kwanza, kuzingatia tulichopewa wakati wa kuumbwa kwetu, na fadhili tunazozipokea daima kutoka wema wa Mungu, ili tujue jinsi ubora wa asili yetu ungekuwa mkuu, kama ingebaki katika utimilifu wake; hata hivyo, wakati huo huo, tukikumbuka kwamba hatuna kitu chochote chetu wenyewe kwa kweli, tuhisi hali yetu ya kutokuwa na hakika ya yote ambayo Mungu ametukirimia, tuweze kuweka tegemeo letu juu yake sikuzote. Pili, tunapaswa kutafakari hali yetu ya kusikitisha tangu anguko la Adamu, ambayo kuihisi kunaelekea kuharibu majivuno yote na kujiamini, kutushinda kwa aibu, na kutujaza unyenyekevu wa kweli. Maana kama vile Mungu mwanzoni alituumba kwa sura yake mwenyewe, ili kuinua akili zetu kwa mazoezi ya fadhila na kwa kutafakari uzima wa milele, vivyo hivyo, ili kuzuia ubora mkuu wa jamii yetu, unaotutofautisha na wanyama, usizikwe katika uvivu wa kijinga, inafaa kuzingatia kwamba kusudi la kupewa akili na ufahamu ni kwamba, tukiishi maisha matakatifu na ya fadhila, tutamani lengo lililowekwa mbele yetu la kutokufa kwa baraka. Lakini hatuwezi kuwaza juu ya heshima hiyo ya kwanza, bila kuvutiwa mara moja kutazama tamasha la huzuni la aibu na fedheha yetu, kwa kuwa katika nafsi ya mtu wa kwanza tumeanguka kutoka hali yetu ya awali. Kutokana na hili hutokea kujichukia na kujikataa, na unyenyekevu wa kweli; nasi tunawashwa bidii mpya ya kumtafuta Mungu, ili kupata ndani yake ubora ule ambao tunajiona tumekosa kabisa.There is much reason in the old adage, which so strongly recommends to man the knowledge of himself. For if it be thought disgraceful to be ignorant of whatever relates to the conduct of human life, ignorance of ourselves is much more shameful, which causes us, in deliberating on subjects of importance, to grope our way in miserable obscurity, or even in total darkness. But in proportion to the utility of this precept ought to be our caution not to make a preposterous use of it; as we see some philosophers have done. For while they exhort man to the knowledge of himself, the end they propose is, that he may not remain ignorant of his own dignity and excellence: nor do they wish him to contemplate in himself any thing but what may swell him with vain confidence, and inflate him with pride. But the knowledge of ourselves consists, first, in considering what was bestowed on us at our creation, and the favours we continually receive from the Divine benignity, that we may know how great the excellence of our nature would have been, if it had retained its integrity; yet, at the same time, recollecting that we have nothing properly our own, may feel our precarious tenure of all that God has conferred on us, so as always to place our dependence upon him. Secondly, we should contemplate our miserable condition since the fall of Adam, the sense of which tends to destroy all boasting and confidence, to overwhelm us with shame, and to fill us with real humility. For as God, at the beginning, formed us after his own image, that he might elevate our minds both to the practice of virtue, and to the contemplation of eternal life, so, to prevent the great excellence of our species, which distinguishes us from the brutes, from being buried in sottish indolence, it is worthy of observation, that the design of our being endued with reason and intelligence is, that, leading a holy and virtuous life, we may aspire to the mark set before us of a blessed immortality. But we cannot think upon that primeval dignity, without having our attention immediately called to the melancholy spectacle of our disgrace and ignominy, since in the person of the first man we are fallen from our original condition. Hence arise disapprobation and abhorrence of ourselves, and real humility; and we are inflamed with fresh ardour to seek after God, to recover in him those excellences of which we find ourselves utterly destitute.

II. Hili ndilo ambalo kweli ya Mungu inatuelekeza kulitafuta katika kujichunguza: inadai maarifa yatakayotutenga na kila kujiamini katika uwezo wetu wenyewe, yatunyang’anye kila sababu ya kujisifu, na yatupeleke kunyenyekea. Lazima tuifuate kanuni hii, ikiwa tunataka kufikia kiwango sahihi cha maarifa na kitendo. Ninajua mvuto mkubwa wa maoni yale yanayotualika kutafakari wema wetu kuliko kutazama umaskini wetu wa kusikitisha na fedheha yetu, ambayo ingepaswa kutushinda kwa aibu. Maana hakuna kinachotamaniwa zaidi na akili ya mwanadamu kuliko kubembelezwa; na kwa hiyo hupokea kwa kuamini sana kusikia ubora wake ukitukuzwa. Kwa hiyo si ajabu sana kwamba walio wengi wa wanadamu wameangukia katika kosa hilo la hatari. Maana, kwa kuwa kujipenda kupita kiasi kumo ndani ya watu wote, hujishawishi kwa urahisi kwamba hakuna kitu ndani yao kinachostahili kuchukiwa kwa haki. Hivyo, bila msaada wowote kutoka nje, maoni haya ya uongo, kwamba mwanadamu ana ndani yake uwezo wa kutosha kuhakikisha fadhila na furaha yake mwenyewe, kwa jumla yamekithiri. Lakini wengine wakipendelea mawazo ya unyenyekevu zaidi, ingawa wanampa Mungu kitu fulani, ili kuepuka kuonekana kujidai kila kitu wao wenyewe, hata hivyo wanagawanya hivi kwamba sababu kuu ya kujisifu na kujiamini inabaki daima kwao. Wakisikia hotuba yoyote inayobembeleza kiburi kinachofanya kazi tayari mioyoni mwao kwa hiari, hakuna kinachoweza kuwafurahisha zaidi. Kwa hiyo kila mtu aliyetukuza kwa upole ubora wa asili ya mwanadamu katika mahubiri yake amepata makofi mengi kutoka karibu vizazi vyote. Lakini sifa kama hiyo ya ubora wa mwanadamu inayomfundisha kuridhika na nafsi yake, humpendeza tu na wema wake mwenyewe, na hivyo huzaa udanganyifu unaowatumbukiza wale wanaokubaliana nao katika uangamivu mbaya kupita yote. Maana kuna faida gani kwetu, tukitegemea kila tumaini la bure, kushauriana, kuamua, na kujaribu mambo tunayodhani yanaelekea faida yetu, na katika juhudi zetu za kwanza kujikuta tumekosa ufahamu wa kweli na fadhila ya kweli, lakini hata hivyo kuendelea kwa usalama, hadi tuanguke katika uharibifu? Lakini hii ndiyo itakayokuwa hatima ya wote wanaotegemea ufanisi wa fadhila yao wenyewe. Kwa hiyo yeyote anayewasikiliza walimu kama hao wanaotuburudisha kwa onyesho tupu la fadhila zetu, hatapiga hatua yoyote katika kujijua mwenyewe, bali atazama katika ujinga wa hatari kupita yote.II. This is what the truth of God directs us to seek in the examination of ourselves: it requires a knowledge that will abstract us from all confidence in our own ability, deprive us of every cause of boasting, and reduce us to submission. We must observe this rule, if we wish to reach the proper point of knowledge and action. I am aware of the superior plausibility of that opinion, which invites us rather to a consideration of our goodness, than to a view of our miserable poverty and ignominy, which ought to overwhelm us with shame. For there is nothing more desired by the human mind than soothing flatteries; and therefore, it listens with extreme credulity, to hear its excellences magnified. Wherefore it is the less wonderful that the majority of mankind have fallen into such a pernicious error. For, an immoderate self-love being innate in all men, they readily persuade themselves that there is nothing in them which justly deserves to be an object of aversion. Thus, without any extraneous support, this very false opinion, that man has in himself sufficient ability to insure his own virtue and happiness, generally prevails. But if some prefer more modest sentiments, though they concede something to God, in order to avoid the appearance of arrogating every thing to themselves, yet they make such a distribution, that the principal cause of boasting and confidence always remains with them. If they hear any discourse that flatters the pride already operating spontaneously in their hearts, nothing can gratify them more. Therefore every one who in his preaching has kindly extolled the excellence of human nature, has received great applause from almost all ages. But such a commendation of human excellence as teaches man to be satisfied with himself, only enamours him of his own amiableness, and thus produces an illusion which involves those who assent to it in most dreadful perdition. For to what purpose is it for us, relying on every vain confidence, to deliberate, to determine, and to attempt things which we think tend to our advantage, and in our first efforts, to find ourselves destitute of sound understanding and true virtue, yet securely to proceed, till we fall into destruction? But this must be the fate of all who confide in the efficacy of their own virtue. Whosoever, therefore, attends to such teachers as amuse us with a mere exhibition of our virtues, will make no progress in the knowledge of himself, but will be absorbed in the most pernicious ignorance.

III. Kwa hiyo, ingawa kweli ya Mungu inakubaliana katika hili na makubaliano ya kawaida ya wanadamu wote, kwamba tawi la pili la hekima linakaa katika kujijua sisi wenyewe, hata hivyo kuhusu maarifa yenyewe kuna kutofautiana si kidogo. Maana, kulingana na ufahamu wa kimwili, mtu hudhaniwa kujijua vizuri, anapojiamini katika akili na unyofu wake mwenyewe, kuchukua ujasiri wa kiburi, kujichochea kutenda wajibu wa fadhila, na kutangaza vita dhidi ya ubaya, kutumia juhudi zake zote kushikamana na lililo haki na la heshima. Lakini yule anayejichunguza na kujipima kwa kipimo cha hukumu ya Mungu, hapati kitu chochote kinachoweza kuinua akili yake hadi kujiamini kwa kweli; na kadiri anavyojichunguza kikamilifu, ndivyo huzuni yake inavyoongezeka; hadi, akiacha kabisa kujiamini kote, hajiachii uwezo wowote wa kuendesha maisha yake ipasavyo. Hata hivyo si mapenzi ya Mungu kwamba tusahau heshima ya kwanza aliyomkirimia baba yetu Adamu, ambayo kwa haki inapaswa kutuamsha kufuata haki na wema. Maana hatuwezi kutafakari hali yetu ya awali, na kusudi la kuumbwa kwetu, bila kuchochewa kutafakari kutokufa, na kutamani ufalme wa Mungu. Lakini tafakari hii iko mbali na kutuvimbisha kwa kiburi, bali huzaa unyenyekevu. Maana hali hiyo ya awali ni nini? Ile ambayo tumeanguka kutoka kwake. Kusudi hilo la kuumbwa ni nini? Lile ambalo tumeondoka kabisa kutoka kwake; hata tuombolezee taabu za hali yetu ya sasa, na katikati ya maombolezo yetu, tutamani heshima tuliyoipoteza. Sasa, tunaposema kwamba mwanadamu hapaswi kuona ndani yake kitu chochote kitakachomvimbisha kwa kiburi, tunamaanisha kwamba hakuna kitu ndani yake ambacho kuwa na imani nacho kungempa haki ya kujivuna. Kwa hiyo tunaweza kugawanya maarifa ambayo mwanadamu anapaswa kuwa nayo juu yake mwenyewe katika sehemu hizi mbili. Kwanza, anapaswa kuzingatia lengo la kuumbwa kwake na kupewa vipawa vya thamani hivyo; tafakari ambayo yaweza kumchochea kufikiria ibada ya Mungu, na maisha yajayo. Pili, anapaswa kuchunguza uwezo wake mwenyewe, au bora kusema ukosefu wake wa uwezo, ambao kuutazama kunaweza kumfadhaisha na karibu kumfuta. Tafakari ya kwanza inafaa kumjulisha wajibu wake, ya pili uwezo wake wa kuutimiza. Tutashughulikia yote mawili kwa mpangilio.III. Therefore, whilst the truth of God agrees in this point with the common consent of all mankind, that the second branch of wisdom consists in the knowledge of ourselves, yet with respect to the knowledge itself there is no small disagreement. For, according to carnal apprehension, a man is thought to be well acquainted with himself, when, confiding in his own understanding and integrity, he assumes a presumptuous boldness, incites himself to the duties of virtue, and, declaring war against vice, uses his most strenuous endeavours to adhere to what is fair and honourable. But he, who inspects and examines himself by the rule of the Divine judgment, finds nothing that can raise his mind to a genuine confidence; and the more fully he has examined himself, the greater is his dejection; till, entirely discarding all confidence, he leaves himself no ability for the proper conduct of his life. Yet it is not the will of God that we should forget the primitive dignity conferred by him on our father Adam, which ought justly to awaken us to the pursuit of righteousness and goodness. For we cannot reflect on our original condition, and on the end of our creation, without being excited to meditate on immortality, and to aspire after the kingdom of God. But this reflection is so far from elating us with pride, that it rather produces humility. For what is that original condition? That from which we are fallen. What is that end of our creation? That from which we are wholly departed; so that we should lament the miseries of our present state, and in the midst of our lamentation, aspire after the dignity which we have lost. Now, when we say that man should behold in himself nothing that might elate him with pride, we mean that there is nothing in him in the confidence of which he ought to be proud. Wherefore we may divide the knowledge man ought to have of himself into these two parts. First, he should consider the end of his being created and endued with such estimable gifts; a reflection which may excite him to the consideration of Divine worship, and of a future life. Secondly, he should examine his own ability, or rather his want of ability, the view of which may confound and almost annihilate him. The former consideration is adapted to acquaint him with his duty, the latter with his power to perform it. We shall treat of them both in regular order.

IV. Lakini kwa kuwa haingeweza kuwa kosa dogo, bali lazima uwe uhalifu wa kuchukiza, uliopata adhabu kali hivyo kutoka kwa Mungu, ni lazima tuzingatie asili ya dhambi ya Adamu, iliyowasha mwali wa kutisha wa ghadhabu ya Mungu dhidi ya jamii yote ya wanadamu. Maoni ya kawaida juu ya kutokuwa na kiasi kwa ulafi ni ya kitoto kabisa; kana kwamba jumla na kiini cha fadhila zote kilikuwa katika kujizuia na aina moja tu ya tunda, ilhali pande zote zilikuwa zimejaa starehe zote zilizowezekana kutamanika, na rutuba ya furaha ya dunia ilitoa wingi na aina mbalimbali za vyakula vitamu. Kwa hiyo yatupasa kuangalia mbali zaidi, kwa sababu katazo la mti wa ujuzi wa mema na mabaya lilikuwa jaribio la utii, ili Adamu athibitishe kunyenyekea kwake kwa hiari kwa utawala wa Mungu. Na jina lenyewe linaonyesha kwamba agizo hilo lilitolewa kwa kusudi lisilo lingine ila aridhike na hali yake, na asilenge kwa tamaa ya uhalifu kitu cha juu zaidi. Lakini ahadi iliyomruhusu kutarajia uzima wa milele, maadamu angekula mti wa uzima, na kwa upande mwingine tishio la kutisha la kifo, mara atakapoonja mti wa ujuzi wa mema na mabaya, vilikusudiwa kwa kupima na kuzoeza imani yake. Kutokana na hili ni rahisi kuhitimisha kwa njia gani Adamu alichochea ghadhabu ya Mungu dhidi yake. Augustino, kwa kweli, anasema vizuri kwamba kiburi kilikuwa cha kwanza cha maovu yote; kwa sababu, kama tamaa ya cheo isingemvimbisha mwanadamu zaidi ya kile kilichoruhusiwa na kilicho haki, angeweza kudumu katika hali yake ya heshima. Lakini tunaweza kupata ufafanuzi kamili zaidi kutokana na asili ya jaribu kama lilivyoelezwa na Musa. Maana kwa kuwa mwanamke, kwa ujanja wa nyoka, alidanganywa kulitilia shaka neno la Mungu, ni dhahiri kwamba anguko lilianza katika kutotii. Hili linathibitishwa pia na Paulo, anayesema kwamba watu wote waliharibiwa kwa kutotii kwa mmoja. Lakini inapaswa pia kuzingatiwa kwamba, mtu wa kwanza alipoasi dhidi ya utawala wa Mungu, hakunaswa tu na vishawishi vya Shetani, bali aliidharau kweli, na kugeukia uongo. Na hakika hakuwezi kubaki hofu yoyote ya Mungu mahali ambapo neno lake linadharauliwa; kwa kuwa tunahifadhi hisia ya ukuu wake na usafi wa ibada yake, kwa muda tu tunaposikiliza sauti yake kwa utii kamili. Kutokuamini, kwa hiyo, ndiko kulikuwa mzizi wa uasi huo. Lakini kutoka hapo yalizuka tamaa ya cheo, kiburi, na kutoshukuru, kwa kuwa Adamu, kwa kutamani zaidi ya alichopewa, aliutendea tusi wema wa Mungu, uliomtajirisha sana. Sasa, ulikuwa ni ufidhuli wa kutisha kwamba mwana wa udongo asiridhike kuumbwa kwa mfano wa Mungu, isipokuwa pia aweze kuwa sawa naye. Ikiwa uasi, ambao unajumuisha kuasi utawala wa Muumba na kukataa mamlaka yake kwa ukaidi, ni uhalifu wa kudharauliwa na wa kuchukiza, ni jaribio la bure kupunguza dhambi ya Adamu. Ingawa kosa la wazazi wetu wa kwanza halikuwa uasi tu rahisi; walikuwa na hatia pia ya matusi mabaya dhidi ya Mungu, kwa kukubali uongo wa Shetani, aliyemshtaki Mungu kwa uongo, wivu na nia mbaya. Hatimaye, kutokuamini kulifungua mlango kwa tamaa ya cheo, na tamaa ya cheo ikazaa ukaidi, hata wakatupilia mbali hofu ya Mungu, na kujitupa kokote walikokuvutwa na tamaa zao zisizo na sheria. Kwa haki, basi, Bernardo anafundisha kwamba mlango wa wokovu unafunguliwa kwetu, tunapoipokea Injili leo kwa masikio yetu, kama mauti ilivyoingia kwa milango hiyo hiyo mara moja ilipokuwa wazi kwa Shetani. Maana Adamu asingethubutu kamwe kupinga mamlaka ya Mungu, kama hakulidharau neno lake. Hiki kilikuwa hakika kizuizi bora cha kudhibiti ipasavyo mapenzi yote, kwamba wema mkuu unakaa katika kutenda haki, katika kutii amri za Mungu; na kwamba lengo la mwisho la maisha yenye baraka ni kupendwa naye. Alipodanganywa, basi, na kufuru za Ibilisi, alifanya yote yaliyokuwa katika uwezo wake kuelekea kuangamiza kabisa utukufu wa Mungu.IV. But, since it could not have been a trivial offence, but must have been a detestable crime, that was so severely punished by God, we must consider the nature of Adam’s sin, which kindled the dreadful flame of Divine wrath against the whole human race. The vulgar opinion concerning the intemperance of gluttony is quite puerile; as though the sum and substance of all virtues consisted in an abstinence from one particular kind of fruit, when there were diffused on every side all the delights which could possibly be desired, and the happy fecundity of the earth afforded an abundance and variety of dainties. We must therefore look further, because the prohibition of the tree of knowledge of good and evil was a test of obedience, that Adam might prove his willing submission to the Divine government. And the name itself shows that the precept was given for no other purpose than that he might be contented with his condition, and not aim with criminal cupidity at any higher. But the promise which authorized him to expect eternal life, as long as he should eat of the tree of life, and, on the other hand, the dreadful denunciation of death, as soon as he should taste of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, were calculated for the probation and exercise of his faith. Hence it is easy to infer by what means Adam provoked the wrath of God against him. Augustine, indeed, properly observes, that pride was the first of all evils; because, if ambition had not elated man beyond what was lawful and right, he might have continued in his honourable situation. But we may obtain a more complete definition from the nature of the temptation as described by Moses. For as the woman, by the subtlety of the serpent, was seduced to discredit the word of God, it is evident that the fall commenced in disobedience. This is also confirmed by Paul, who states that all men were ruined by the disobedience of one. But it is also to be observed, that when the first man rebelled against the government of God, he not only was ensnared by the allurements of Satan, but despised the truth, and turned aside to falsehood. And there certainly can be no reverence of God left, where his word is contemned; for we preserve a sense of his majesty and the purity of his worship, no longer than we implicitly attend to his voice. Infidelity, therefore, was the root of that defection. But hence sprang ambition, pride, and ingratitude, since Adam, by coveting more than was granted, offered an indignity to the Divine goodness, which had so greatly enriched him. Now, it was monstrous impiety, that a son of the earth should not be satisfied with being made after the similitude of God, unless he could also be equal to him. If apostasy, which consists in revolting from the government of the Creator, and petulantly rejecting his authority, be a base and execrable crime, it is a vain attempt to extenuate the sin of Adam. Though the transgression of our first parents was not simple apostasy; they were also guilty of vile reproaches against God, in consenting to the calumnies of Satan, who accused God of falsehood, envy, and malignity. Finally, infidelity opened the gate to ambition, and ambition produced obstinacy, so that they cast off the fear of God, and precipitated themselves whithersoever they were led by their lawless desires. With propriety, therefore, Bernard teaches that the gate of salvation is opened to us, when in the present day we receive the Gospel with our ears, as death was once admitted at the same doors when they lay open to Satan. For Adam had never dared to resist the authority of God, if he had not discredited his word. This was certainly the best check for a due regulation of all the affections, that the chief good consists in the practice of righteousness, in obedience to the commands of God; and that the ultimate end of a happy life is to be beloved by him. Being seduced, therefore, by the blasphemies of the devil, he did all that was in his power towards a total annihilation of the glory of God.

V. Kama vile uzima wa kiroho wa Adamu ulivyokuwa katika kuungana na Muumba wake, ndivyo kutengwa naye kulivyokuwa mauti ya roho yake. Wala si ajabu kwamba aliwaangamiza wazao wake kwa uasi wake, ulioupotosha utaratibu wote wa asili mbinguni na duniani. “Viumbe vyote vinaugulia,” asema Paulo, “kwa kuwa vimetiwa chini ya ubatili, si kwa hiari.” Ikiwa sababu inatafutwa, bila shaka ni kwamba vinachukua sehemu ya adhabu inayostahili makosa ya mwanadamu, ambaye matumizi yake viliumbwa. Na kwa kuwa hatia yake ndiyo asili ya laana hiyo inayoenea kila sehemu ya ulimwengu, ni busara kuhitimisha kuenea kwake kwa wazao wake wote. Kwa hiyo, wakati sura ya Mungu ndani yake ilipofutwa, na akaadhibiwa kwa kupoteza hekima, nguvu, utakatifu, kweli, na haki, alivyokuwa amevikwa, lakini ambavyo vilifuatiwa na tauni za kutisha za ujinga, kutokuwa na uwezo, uchafu, ubatili, na uovu, hakuteseka peke yake, bali aliwahusisha wazao wake wote pamoja naye, na kuwatumbukiza katika taabu zile zile. Huu ndio uharibifu huo wa kurithi ambao mababu wa kanisa waliuita dhambi ya asili; wakimaanisha kwa dhambi, kupotoshwa kwa asili iliyokuwa nzuri na safi hapo awali; juu ya mada ambayo walibishana sana, kwa kuwa hakuna kitu kilicho mbali zaidi na akili ya asili kuliko kwamba wote washitakiwe kwa sababu ya hatia ya mmoja, na hivyo dhambi yake ikawa ya wote; jambo ambalo linaonekana kuwa sababu ya walimu wa kale kabisa wa Kanisa kugusia hoja hii kwa utata tu, au angalau kuieleza kwa uwazi mdogo kuliko ilivyohitaji. Hata hivyo woga huu haukuweza kumzuia Pelagio kuinuka, ambaye kwa kufuru alijifanya kwamba dhambi ya Adamu ilimwangamiza yeye mwenyewe tu, wala haikuwadhuru wazao wake. Kwa kuuficha ugonjwa huo kwa udanganyifu huu, Shetani alijaribu kuufanya usiponyeke. Lakini ilipothibitishwa kwa ushuhuda ulio wazi wa Maandiko kwamba dhambi ilienezwa kutoka mtu wa kwanza kwa wazao wake wote, alihoji kwa hila kwamba ilienezwa kwa kuiga, si kwa kuzaana. Kwa hiyo watu wema, na zaidi ya wote Augustino, wamejitahidi kuonyesha kwamba hatuharibiwi kwa njia yoyote ya nje, bali tunarithi upotovu wa ndani tangu kuzaliwa kwetu kwenyewe. Kukana hili ulikuwa mfano wa ufidhuli uliokithiri. Lakini kuthubutu kwa Wapelagio na Wasilestio hakutaonekana kuwa ajabu kwa yeyote anayeona kutoka kwa maandishi ya Augustino jinsi walivyokosa unyenyekevu katika kila jambo lingine. Hakika hakuna utata katika ungamo la Daudi kwamba alizaliwa katika uovu, na mama yake alimchukua mimba katika dhambi. Hapo hafichui dhambi za mama yake wala za baba yake; bali ili kuongeza sifa zake kwa wema wa Mungu kwake, anaanza ungamo la upotovu wake tangu wakati wa kuchukuliwa mimba. Kwa kuwa ni dhahiri kwamba hili halikuwa la Daudi peke yake, inahitimishwa kwa haki kwamba kisa chake kinaonyesha hali ya kawaida ya wanadamu. Kila mzao, kwa hiyo, wa chemchemi hiyo najisi, huzaliwa akiwa ameambukizwa na maambukizi ya dhambi; na hata kabla hatujaona nuru ya uzima, tuko machoni pa Mungu tumenajisika na kuchafuka. Kwa maana “ni nani awezaye kutoa kitu safi katika kitu najisi?” Kitabu cha Ayubu kinatuambia, “Hakuna hata mmoja.”V. As the spiritual life of Adam consisted in a union to his Maker, so an alienation from him was the death of his soul. Nor is it surprising that he ruined his posterity by his defection, which has perverted the whole order of nature in heaven and earth. “The creatures groan,” says Paul, “being made subject to vanity, not willingly.” If the cause be inquired, it is undoubtedly that they sustain part of the punishment due to the demerits of man, for whose use they were created. And his guilt being the origin of that curse which extends to every part of the world, it is reasonable to conclude its propagation to all his offspring. Therefore, when the Divine image in him was obliterated, and he was punished with the loss of wisdom, strength, sanctity, truth, and righteousness, with which he had been adorned, but which were succeeded by the dreadful pests of ignorance, impotence, impurity, vanity, and iniquity, he suffered not alone, but involved all his posterity with him, and plunged them into the same miseries. This is that hereditary corruption which the fathers called original sin; meaning by sin, the depravation of a nature previously good and pure; on which subject they had much contention, nothing being more remote from natural reason, than that all should be criminated on account of the guilt of one, and thus his sin become common; which seems to have been the reason why the most ancient doctors of the Church did but obscurely glance at this point, or at least explained it with less perspicuity than it required. Yet this timidity could not prevent Pelagius from arising, who profanely pretended, that the sin of Adam only ruined himself, and did not injure his descendants. By concealing the disease with this delusion, Satan attempted to render it incurable. But when it was evinced by the plain testimony of the Scripture, that sin was communicated from the first man to all his posterity, he sophistically urged that it was communicated by imitation, not by propagation. Therefore good men, and beyond all others Augustine, have laboured to demonstrate that we are not corrupted by any adventitious means, but that we derive an innate depravity from our very birth. The denial of this was an instance of consummate impudence. But the temerity of the Pelagians and Celestians will not appear surprising to him who perceives from the writings of Augustine, what a want of modesty they discover in every thing else. There is certainly no ambiguity in the confession of David, that he was shapen in iniquity, and in sin his mother conceived him. He is not there exposing the sins of his mother or of his father; but to enhance his commendations of the Divine goodness towards him, he commences the confession of his depravity from the time of his conception. As it is evident that this was not peculiar to David, it is fairly concluded, that his case exemplifies the common condition of mankind. Every descendant, therefore, from the impure source, is born infected with the contagion of sin; and even before we behold the light of life, we are in the sight of God defiled and polluted. For “who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean?” The book of Job tells us, “Not one.”

VI. Tumesikia kwamba uchafu wa wazazi unahamishiwa watoto kiasi kwamba wote, bila ubaguzi hata mmoja, wananajisika mara tu wanapokuwapo. Lakini hatutaupata asili ya unajisi huu, isipokuwa tupande hadi kwa mzazi wa kwanza wa sisi sote, kama kwenye chemchemi inayotoa vijito vyote. Hivyo ni hakika kwamba Adamu hakuwa tu babu, bali kama ilivyokuwa mzizi wa wanadamu, na kwa hiyo jamii yote ililazimika kuharibika katika uharibifu wake. Mtume anaeleza hili kwa kulinganisha yeye na Kristo: “Kama,” asema, “kwa mtu mmoja dhambi iliingia ulimwenguni, na kwa dhambi mauti, na hivyo mauti ikawaenea watu wote, kwa sababu wote wamefanya dhambi,” vivyo hivyo, kwa neema ya Kristo, haki na uzima vimerudishwa kwetu. Wapelagio wataleta pingamizi gani hapa? Kwamba dhambi ya Adamu ilienezwa kwa kuiga? Basi hatupokei faida nyingine yoyote kutokana na haki ya Kristo ila kupendekezewa mfano wa kuuiga? Nani awezaye kuvumilia kufuru kama hiyo? Lakini ikiwa haiwezi kupingwa kwamba haki ya Kristo ni yetu kwa kushirikishwa, na uzima kama matokeo yake, ni dhahiri vilevile kwamba yote mawili yalipotea katika Adamu, kwa namna ile ile yalivyorejeshwa katika Kristo, na kwamba dhambi na mauti ziliingizwa na Adamu, kwa namna ile ile zinavyofutwa na Kristo. Hakuna utata katika tamko kwamba wengi wanafanywa wenye haki kwa utii wa Kristo, kama walivyofanywa wenye dhambi kwa kutotii kwa Adamu. Na, kwa hiyo, kati ya watu hawa wawili kuna uhusiano huu, kwamba mmoja alituangamiza kwa kutuhusisha katika uangamivu wake, mwingine kwa neema yake ametuokoa kwa wokovu. Uthibitisho mrefu zaidi au wa kuchosha wa kweli inayoungwa mkono na ushahidi ulio wazi hivyo, lazima, nadhani, usiwe wa lazima. Vivyo hivyo pia katika Waraka wa Kwanza kwa Wakorintho, kwa nia ya kuwathibitisha wacha Mungu katika tumaini la ufufuo, anaonyesha kwamba uzima uliopotea katika Adamu ulirejeshwa katika Kristo. Yeye anayetangaza kwamba sisi sote tulikufa katika Adamu, wakati huo huo anatangaza wazi kwamba tulihusishwa katika hatia ya dhambi yake. Maana hakuna hukumu ya adhabu ingeweza kuwafikia wale walio huru kabisa na shtaka lolote la uovu. Lakini maana yake haiwezi kueleweka vizuri zaidi kuliko kutoka uhusiano wa sehemu ile nyingine ya sentensi, ambapo anatujulisha kwamba tumaini la uzima limerejeshwa katika Kristo. Lakini inajulikana wazi kwamba hilo hutimia tu Kristo, kwa kushirikisha kwa ajabu, anapomimina ndani yetu uweza wa haki yake; kama inavyosemwa mahali pengine, “Roho ni uzima kwa sababu ya haki.” Hakuna maelezo mengine, kwa hiyo, yanayoweza kutolewa juu ya kusemwa kwamba tulikufa katika Adamu, ila kwamba kosa lake halikumletea taabu na uangamivu yeye mwenyewe tu, bali pia lilitupa asili yetu katika uangamivu kama huo. Wala si kwa hatia yake binafsi kama mtu mmoja, ambayo haituhusu, bali kwa sababu aliwaambukiza wazao wake wote uharibifu alioanguka ndani yake. Vinginevyo hapangekuwa na kweli katika kauli ya Paulo kwamba wote kwa asili ni watoto wa ghadhabu, kama hawakuwa tayari chini ya laana hata kabla ya kuzaliwa kwao. Sasa, inahitimishwa kwa urahisi kwamba asili yetu inaelezwa hapo, si kama ilivyoumbwa na Mungu, bali kama ilivyoharibiwa katika Adamu; kwa sababu haingekuwa busara kumfanya Mungu mwandishi wa mauti. Adamu, kwa hiyo, alijiharibu kwa namna ambayo maambukizi yamehamishwa kutoka kwake kwa wazao wake wote. Na Kristo mwenyewe, Hakimu wa mbinguni, anatangaza, kwa maneno yasiyo na utata hata kidogo, kwamba wote huzaliwa katika hali ya upotovu na uharibifu, anapofundisha kwamba “kilichozaliwa na mwili ni mwili,” na kwamba, kwa hiyo, mlango wa uzima umefungwa dhidi ya wote ambao hawajazaliwa mara ya pili.VI. We have heard that the impurity of the parents is so transmitted to the children, that all, without a single exception, are polluted as soon as they exist. But we shall not find the origin of this pollution, unless we ascend to the first parent of us all, as to the fountain which sends forth all the streams. Thus it is certain that Adam was not only the progenitor, but as it were the root of mankind, and therefore that all the race were necessarily vitiated in his corruption. The Apostle explains this by a comparison between him and Christ: “As,” says he, “by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned,” so, by the grace of Christ, righteousness and life have been restored to us. What cavil will the Pelagians raise here? That the sin of Adam was propagated by imitation? Do we then receive no other advantage from the righteousness of Christ than the proposal of an example for our imitation? Who can bear such blasphemy? But if it cannot be controverted that the righteousness of Christ is ours by communication, and life as its consequence, it is equally evident that both were lost in Adam, in the same manner in which they were recovered in Christ, and that sin and death were introduced by Adam, in the same manner in which they are abolished by Christ. There is no obscurity in the declaration that many are made righteous by the obedience of Christ, as they had been made sinners by the disobedience of Adam. And, therefore, between these two persons there is this relation, that the one ruined us by involving us in his destruction, the other by his grace has restored us to salvation. Any more prolix or tedious proof of a truth supported by such clear evidence must, I think, be unnecessary. Thus also in the First Epistle to the Corinthians, with a view to confirm the pious in a confidence of the resurrection, he shows, that the life which had been lost in Adam, was recovered in Christ. He, who pronounces that we were all dead in Adam, does also at the same time plainly declare, that we were implicated in the guilt of his sin. For no condemnation could reach those who were perfectly clear from all charge of iniquity. But his meaning cannot be better understood than from the relation of the other member of the sentence, where he informs us that the hope of life is restored in Christ. But that is well known to be accomplished, only when Christ, by a wonderful communication, transfuses into us the virtue of his righteousness; as it is elsewhere said, “The Spirit is life, because of righteousness.” No other explanation therefore can be given of our being said to be dead in Adam, than that his transgression not only procured misery and ruin for himself, but also precipitated our nature into similar destruction. And that not by his personal guilt as an individual, which pertains not to us, but because he infected all his descendants with the corruption into which he had fallen. Otherwise there would be no truth in the assertion of Paul, that all are by nature children of wrath, if they had not been already under the curse even before their birth. Now, it is easily inferred that our nature is there characterized, not as it was created by God, but as it was vitiated in Adam; because it would be unreasonable to make God the author of death. Adam, therefore, corrupted himself in such a manner, that the contagion has been communicated from him to all his offspring. And Christ himself, the heavenly Judge, declares, in the most unequivocal terms, that all are born in a state of pravity and corruption, when he teaches, that “whatsoever is born of the flesh is flesh,” and that, therefore, the gate of life is closed against all who have not been regenerated.

VII. Wala, ili tuweze kuelewa mada hii, hatuhitaji kuingia katika mabishano yale ya kuchosha, ambayo mababu wa kanisa walichanganyikiwa nayo si kidogo, kama roho ya mwana hutokana kwa kuzaliwa au kuhamishwa kutoka roho ya baba, kwa sababu roho ndiyo kiti kikuu cha unajisi. Tunapaswa kuridhika na hili, kwamba Bwana alimwekea Adamu amana ya vipawa alivyochagua kuvitoa kwa asili ya mwanadamu; na kwa hiyo kwamba alipopoteza fadhili alizopokea, hakuzipoteza kwa ajili yake mwenyewe tu, bali kwa ajili yetu sote. Nani atakayehangaika juu ya kuhamishwa kwa roho, anaposikia kwamba Adamu alipokea mapambo aliyoyapoteza, si kwa ajili yetu pungufu kuliko kwa ajili yake mwenyewe? kwamba yalitolewa, si kwa mtu mmoja tu, bali kwa asili yote ya mwanadamu? Kwa hiyo hakuna upuuzi, ikiwa, kutokana na kunyang’anywa heshima zake, asili hiyo ni maskini na haina kitu; ikiwa, kutokana na kunajisiwa na dhambi, asili yote imeambukizwa na maambukizi. Kutoka katika mzizi ulioharibika, basi, yamechipuka matawi yaliyooza, ambayo yamehamishia uozo wao kwa matawi ya mbali zaidi. Kwa maana watoto waliharibiwa hivyo katika mzazi wao, hata wakawa maambukizi kwa wazao wao: kulikuwa katika Adamu chemchemi ya uharibifu kiasi kwamba humiminwa kutoka kwa wazazi kwenda kwa watoto katika mkondo wa daima. Lakini sababu ya maambukizi haiko katika dutu ya mwili au ya roho; bali kwa sababu iliamriwa na Mungu, kwamba vipawa alivyomkirimia mtu wa kwanza vihifadhiwe au vipotezwe naye kwa ajili yake mwenyewe na kwa ajili ya wazao wake wote. Lakini pingamizi la Wapelagio, kwamba haiwezekani kwamba watoto wapokee uharibifu kutoka kwa wazazi wacha Mungu, ilhali wangepaswa badala yake kutakaswa kwa usafi wao, linakanushwa kwa urahisi. Kwa maana wanashuka kutoka kuzaliwa kwao kimwili, si kuzaliwa kwao kiroho. Kwa hiyo, kama asemavyo Augustino, “Wala asiyeamini mwenye hatia, wala mwamini aliyehesabiwa haki, hazai watoto wasio na hatia, bali wenye hatia, kwa sababu kuzaliwa kwa wote wawili ni kutoka asili iliyoharibika.” Wakishiriki kwa kiasi fulani utakatifu wa wazazi wao, hiyo ni baraka ya pekee ya watu wa Mungu, ambayo haiondoi laana ya kwanza na ya wote iliyotangazwa awali juu ya asili ya mwanadamu. Kwa maana hatia yao ni kutoka kwa asili, lakini utakaso wao ni kutoka kwa neema ya juu ya asili.VII. Nor, to enable us to understand this subject, have we any need to enter on that tedious dispute, with which the fathers were not a little perplexed, whether the soul of a son proceeds by derivation or transmission from the soul of the father, because the soul is the principal seat of the pollution. We ought to be satisfied with this, that the Lord deposited with Adam the endowments he chose to confer on the human nature; and therefore that when he lost the favours he had received, he lost them not only for himself, but for us all. Who will be solicitous about a transmission of the soul, when he hears that Adam received the ornaments that he lost, no less for us than for himself? that they were given, not to one man only, but to the whole human nature? There is nothing absurd therefore, if, in consequence of his being spoiled of his dignities, that nature be destitute and poor; if, in consequence of his being polluted with sin, the whole nature be infected with the contagion. From a putrefied root, therefore, have sprung putrid branches, which have transmitted their putrescence to remoter ramifications. For the children were so vitiated in their parent, that they became contagious to their descendants: there was in Adam such a spring of corruption, that it is transfused from parents to children in a perpetual stream. But the cause of the contagion is not in the substance of the body or of the soul; but because it was ordained by God, that the gifts which he conferred on the first man should by him be preserved or lost both for himself and for all his posterity. But the cavil of the Pelagians, that it is improbable that children should derive corruption from pious parents, whereas they ought rather to be sanctified by their purity, is easily refuted. For they descend from their carnal generation, not from their spiritual generation. Therefore, as Augustine says, “Neither the guilty unbeliever, nor the justified believer, generates innocent, but guilty children, because the generation of both is from corrupted nature.” If they in some measure participate of the sanctity of their parents, that is the peculiar benediction of the people of God, which supersedes not the first and universal curse previously denounced on the human nature. For their guilt is from nature, but their sanctification from supernatural grace.

VIII. Ili kuondoa shaka na kutoelewana kote juu ya mada hii, tuifafanue dhambi ya asili. Si nia yangu kujadili ufafanuzi wote uliotolewa na waandishi; nitatoa mmoja tu, ninaouona unalingana kikamilifu na kweli. Dhambi ya asili, kwa hiyo, inaonekana kuwa upotovu na uharibifu wa kurithi wa asili yetu, ulioenea katika sehemu zote za roho, unaotufanya tuwe chini ya hatari ya ghadhabu ya Mungu, na kuzaa ndani yetu zile kazi ambazo Maandiko huziita “matendo ya mwili.” Na hili kwa kweli ndilo ambalo Paulo mara nyingi analiita dhambi. Matendo yatokayo hapo, kama uzinzi, uasherati, wizi, chuki, mauaji, ulevi wa karamu, anayaita kwa namna hiyo hiyo “matunda ya dhambi;” ingawa pia huitwa “dhambi” katika vifungu vingi vya Maandiko, na hata na yeye mwenyewe. Mambo haya mawili, kwa hiyo, yanapaswa kuzingatiwa kwa wazi: kwanza, kwamba asili yetu ikiwa imeharibiwa na kupotoshwa kabisa hivyo, sisi, kwa sababu ya uharibifu huu wenyewe, tunahesabiwa kuwa tumehukumiwa na kuhukumiwa kwa haki machoni pa Mungu, ambaye hakuna kinachokubalika kwake ila haki, kutokuwa na hatia, na usafi. Na hatari hii ya adhabu haitokani na kosa la mwingine; kwa kuwa inaposemwa kwamba dhambi ya Adamu inatufanya tuwe chini ya hukumu ya Mungu, haipaswi kueleweka kana kwamba sisi, tukiwa wasio na hatia, tulibebeshwa bila kustahili hatia ya dhambi yake; bali, kwa kuwa sote tuko chini ya laana, kwa sababu ya kosa lake, kwa hiyo inasemwa kwamba alitutia hatiani. Hata hivyo tunarithi kutoka kwake, si adhabu tu, bali pia unajisi ambao adhabu inastahili kwa haki. Kwa hiyo Augustino, ingawa mara nyingi anaiita dhambi ya mwingine, ili kuonyesha wazi zaidi kuenea kwake kwetu kwa uzao, hata hivyo wakati huo huo anathibitisha pia kuwa ni ya kila mtu binafsi kwa kweli. Na Mtume mwenyewe anatangaza waziwazi kwamba “mauti iliwaenea watu wote, kwa sababu wote wamefanya dhambi;” yaani, wamehusika katika dhambi ya asili, na kunajisika na madoa yake. Na kwa hiyo hata watoto wachanga, kwa kuwa wanaleta hukumu yao ulimwenguni pamoja nao, wanafanywa chini ya hatari ya adhabu kwa dhambi yao wenyewe, si kwa dhambi ya mwingine. Maana ingawa bado hawajazaa matunda ya uovu wao, hata hivyo wana mbegu yake ndani yao; hata asili yao yote ni kama mbegu ya dhambi, na kwa hiyo haiwezi kuepuka kuwa ya kuchukiza na ya kudharauliwa na Mungu. Kutokana na hili inafuata kwamba inahesabiwa kwa haki kuwa dhambi machoni pa Mungu, kwa sababu hakuwezi kuwapo hatia bila uhalifu. Jambo lingine la kuzingatiwa ni kwamba upotovu huu hauachi kamwe ndani yetu, bali daima huzaa matunda mapya, yale matendo ya mwili tuliyoyaeleza hapo awali, kama utoaji wa mwali na cheche kutoka tanuru iliyopashwa moto, au kama vijito vya maji kutoka chemchemi isiyokauka. Kwa hiyo wale waliofafanua dhambi ya asili kama kunyang’anywa haki ya kwanza, ambayo tunapaswa kuwa nayo, ingawa wanajumuisha mada nzima, hata hivyo hawakutumia lugha inayoeleza vya kutosha utendaji wake na ushawishi wake. Maana asili yetu si tu imekosa kila jema, bali ina rutuba kubwa katika maovu yote hata haiwezi kubaki bila kutenda. Wale walioiita tamaa mbaya walitumia usemi usiofaa, kama tu ingeongezwa, jambo ambalo liko mbali na kukubaliwa na watu wengi, kwamba kila kitu ndani ya mwanadamu, ufahamu na utashi, roho na mwili, vimenajisika na kumezwa na tamaa hii mbaya; au, kuieleza kwa ufupi zaidi, kwamba mwanadamu kwa nafsi yake si kitu kingine ila tamaa mbaya.VIII. To remove all uncertainty and misunderstanding on this subject, let us define original sin. It is not my intention to discuss all the definitions given by writers; I shall only produce one, which I think perfectly consistent with the truth. Original sin, therefore, appears to be an hereditary pravity and corruption of our nature, diffused through all the parts of the soul, rendering us obnoxious to the Divine wrath, and producing in us those works which the Scripture calls “works of the flesh.” And this is indeed what Paul frequently denominates sin. The works which proceed thence, such as adulteries, fornications, thefts, hatreds, murders, revellings, he calls in the same manner “fruits of sin;” although they are also called “sins” in many passages of Scripture, and even by himself. These two things therefore should be distinctly observed: first, that our nature being so totally vitiated and depraved, we are, on account of this very corruption, considered as convicted and justly condemned in the sight of God, to whom nothing is acceptable but righteousness, innocence, and purity. And this liableness to punishment arises not from the delinquency of another; for when it is said that the sin of Adam renders us obnoxious to the Divine judgment, it is not to be understood as if we, though innocent, were undeservedly loaded with the guilt of his sin; but, because we are all subject to a curse, in consequence of his transgression, he is therefore said to have involved us in guilt. Nevertheless we derive from him, not only the punishment, but also the pollution to which the punishment is justly due. Wherefore Augustine, though he frequently calls it the sin of another, the more clearly to indicate its transmission to us by propagation, yet, at the same time, also asserts it properly to belong to every individual. And the Apostle himself expressly declares, that “death has therefore passed upon all men, for that all have sinned;” that is, have been involved in original sin, and defiled with its blemishes. And therefore infants themselves, as they bring their condemnation into the world with them, are rendered obnoxious to punishment by their own sinfulness, not by the sinfulness of another. For though they have not yet produced the fruits of their iniquity, yet they have the seed of it within them; even their whole nature is as it were a seed of sin, and therefore cannot but be odious and abominable to God. Whence it follows, that it is properly accounted sin in the sight of God, because there could be no guilt without crime. The other thing to be remarked is, that this depravity never ceases in us, but is perpetually producing new fruits, those works of the flesh, which we have before described, like the emission of flame and sparks from a heated furnace, or like the streams of water from a never failing spring. Wherefore those who have defined original sin as a privation of the original righteousness, which we ought to possess, though they comprise the whole of the subject, yet have not used language sufficiently expressive of its operation and influence. For our nature is not only destitute of all good, but is so fertile in all evils that it cannot remain inactive. Those who have called it concupiscence have used an expression not improper, if it were only added, which is far from being conceded by most persons, that every thing in man, the understanding and will, the soul and body, is polluted and engrossed by this concupiscence; or, to express it more briefly, that man is of himself nothing else but concupiscence.

IX. Kwa hiyo nimethibitisha kwamba dhambi imezitawala nguvu zote za roho, tangu Adamu alipoondoka kwenye chemchemi ya haki. Maana mwanadamu hakunaswa tu na tamaa za chini, bali ufidhuli wa kuchukiza umenyakua ngome yenyewe ya akili yake, na kiburi kimepenya katika vyumba vya ndani kabisa vya moyo wake; hata ni udhaifu na upumbavu kudhibiti uharibifu uliotoka hapo kwa kile kinachoitwa mapenzi ya kimwili, au kuuita kichocheo kinachovutia, kusisimua, na kuvuta kwenye dhambi, kile tu wanachokiita sehemu ya kimwili. Katika hili ujinga mkubwa kuliko wote umegunduliwa na Petro Lombardo, ambaye, akichunguza kiti chake, anasema kwamba kiko katika mwili, kulingana na ushuhuda wa Paulo, si kwa kujizuia peke yake, bali kwa sababu kinaonekana hasa katika mwili; kana kwamba Paulo alitaja sehemu tu ya roho, na si asili yetu yote, iliyo kinyume cha neema ya juu ya asili. Sasa, Paulo anaondoa kila shaka kwa kutufahamisha kwamba uharibifu haukai katika sehemu moja tu, bali kwamba hakuna kitu safi na kisichonajisika na maambukizi yake ya mauti. Maana, anapobishana juu ya asili iliyoharibika, hahukumu tu misukumo isiyo ya kiasi ya tamaa, bali hasa anasisitiza upofu wa akili, na upotovu wa moyo; na sura ya tatu ya Waraka wake kwa Warumi si kitu kingine ila maelezo ya dhambi ya asili. Hili linaonekana wazi zaidi kutokana na kufanywa upya kwetu. Maana “Roho,” aliye kinyume cha “mtu wa kale” na “mwili,” hamaanishi tu neema inayosahihisha sehemu ya chini au ya kimwili ya roho, bali inajumuisha marekebisho kamili ya nguvu zake zote. Na kwa hiyo Paulo hatuamrishi tu kuyafisha tamaa zetu za kimwili, bali anatuhimiza kufanywa upya katika roho ya akili zetu; na mahali pengine anatuelekeza tugeuzwe kwa kufanywa upya akili zetu. Kutokana na hili inafuata kwamba sehemu ile inayoonyesha hasa ubora na heshima ya roho, si tu imejeruhiwa, bali imeharibika hata inahitaji, si kuponywa tu, bali kupokea asili mpya. Kiasi gani dhambi inakaa katika akili na moyo, tutaona hivi karibuni. Nia yangu hapa ilikuwa tu kudokeza, kwa njia fupi, kwamba mwanadamu amezidiwa kabisa hivyo, kama kwa gharika, hata hakuna sehemu iliyo huru kutoka dhambi; na kwa hiyo chochote kinachotoka kwake kinahesabiwa kuwa dhambi; kama Paulo anavyosema kwamba mapenzi yote au mawazo ya mwili ni uadui juu ya Mungu, na kwa hiyo mauti.IX. Wherefore I have asserted that sin has possessed all the powers of the soul, since Adam departed from the fountain of righteousness. For man has not only been ensnared by the inferior appetites, but abominable impiety has seized the very citadel of his mind, and pride has penetrated into the inmost recesses of his heart; so that it is weak and foolish to restrict the corruption which has proceeded thence, to what are called the sensual affections, or to call it an incentive which allures, excites, and attracts to sin, only what they style the sensual part. In this the grossest ignorance has been discovered by Peter Lombard, who, when investigating the seat of it, says that it is in the flesh, according to the testimony of Paul, not indeed exclusively, but because it principally appears in the flesh; as though Paul designated only a part of the soul, and not the whole of our nature, which is opposed to supernatural grace. Now, Paul removes every doubt by informing us that the corruption resides not in one part only, but that there is nothing pure and uncontaminated by its mortal infection. For, when arguing respecting corrupt nature, he not only condemns the inordinate motions of the appetites, but principally insists on the blindness of the mind, and the depravity of the heart; and the third chapter of his Epistle to the Romans is nothing but a description of original sin. This appears more evident from our renovation. For “the Spirit,” which is opposed to “the old man” and “the flesh,” not only denotes the grace, which corrects the inferior or sensual part of the soul, but comprehends a complete reformation of all its powers. And therefore Paul not only enjoins us to mortify our sensual appetites, but exhorts us to be renewed in the spirit of our mind; and in another place he directs us to be transformed by the renewing of our mind. Whence it follows, that that part, which principally displays the excellence and dignity of the soul, is not only wounded, but so corrupted, that it requires not merely to be healed, but to receive a new nature. How far sin occupies both the mind and the heart, we shall presently see. My intention here was only to hint, in a brief way, that man is so totally overwhelmed, as with a deluge, that no part is free from sin; and therefore that whatever proceeds from him is accounted sin; as Paul says that all the affections or thoughts of the flesh are enmity against God, and therefore death.

X. Sasa, tuwaache wale wanaothubutu kumshtaki Mungu kwa uharibifu wao, kwa sababu tunasema kwamba wanadamu kwa asili wameharibika. Wanakosea kutafuta kazi ya Mungu katika unajisi wao wenyewe, ilhali wangepaswa badala yake kuitafuta katika asili ya Adamu alipokuwa bado hana hatia na hajaharibika. Uangamivu wetu kwa hiyo unatokana na dhambi ya mwili wetu, si na Mungu; ukiwa ni matokeo tu ya kuharibika kwetu kutoka hali yetu ya kwanza. Wala asinung’unike mtu kwamba Mungu angeweza kufanya maandalizi bora zaidi kwa usalama wetu, kwa kuzuia anguko la Adamu. Maana pingamizi kama hilo linapaswa kuchukiwa na akili zote za kimungu, kama la udadisi wa kiburi kupita kiasi; na pia linahusu siri ya kuchagua mapema, ambayo itashughulikiwa baadaye mahali pake. Kwa hiyo na tukumbuke kwamba uharibifu wetu lazima uhusishwe na uharibifu wa asili yetu, ili tusimshtaki Mungu mwenyewe, mwandishi wa asili. Kwamba jeraha hili la kuua limo ndani ya asili yetu, ni kweli; lakini ni swali muhimu, kama lilikuwapo ndani yake tangu mwanzo, au lilitokana na sababu fulani ya nje. Lakini ni dhahiri kwamba lilisababishwa na dhambi. Kwa hiyo hatuna sababu ya kulalamika, ila juu yetu wenyewe; jambo ambalo limeelezwa wazi katika Maandiko. Maana Mhubiri anasema, “Tazama, hili tu nimeliona, kwamba Mungu alimfanya mwanadamu mnyofu; lakini wamezitafuta hila nyingi.” Ni wazi kwamba taabu ya mwanadamu lazima ihusishwe naye peke yake, kwa kuwa alikirimiwa unyofu kwa wema wa Mungu, lakini ameteleza hadi ubatili kwa upumbavu wake mwenyewe.X. Now, let us dismiss those who dare to charge God with their corruptions, because we say that men are naturally corrupt. They err in seeking for the work of God in their own pollution, whereas they should rather seek it in the nature of Adam while yet innocent and uncorrupted. Our perdition therefore proceeds from the sinfulness of our flesh, not from God; it being only a consequence of our degenerating from our primitive condition. And let no one murmur that God might have made a better provision for our safety, by preventing the fall of Adam. For such an objection ought to be abominated, as too presumptuously curious, by all pious minds; and it also belongs to the mystery of predestination, which shall afterwards be treated in its proper place. Wherefore let us remember, that our ruin must be imputed to the corruption of our nature, that we may not bring an accusation against God himself, the author of nature. That this fatal wound is inherent in our nature, is indeed a truth; but it is an important question, whether it was in it originally, or was derived from any extraneous cause. But it is evident that it was occasioned by sin. We have therefore no reason to complain, but of ourselves; which in the Scripture is distinctly remarked. For the Preacher says, “This only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions.” It is clear that the misery of man must be ascribed solely to himself, since he was favoured with rectitude by the Divine goodness, but has lapsed into vanity through his own folly.

XI. Tunasema, basi, kwamba mwanadamu ameharibiwa kwa upotovu wa asili, lakini ambao haukuanzia katika asili. Tunakana kwamba ulitoka kwa asili, kuonyesha kwamba ni sifa iliyoongezeka au ajali, kuliko mali ya msingi iliyozaliwa nayo tangu mwanzo. Hata hivyo tunauita wa asili, ili mtu yeyote asidhani kwamba kila mmoja anaupata kutokana na tabia mbovu, ilhali unawatawala wote kwa haki ya kurithi. Wala maelezo haya yetu hayakosi mamlaka. Kwa sababu hiyo hiyo Mtume anasema kwamba sisi sote kwa asili tu watoto wa ghadhabu. Mungu, anayependezwa na kazi zake zote hata za chini kabisa, angewezaje kukasirikia kiumbe chake bora zaidi? Lakini anakasirika zaidi na uharibifu wa kazi yake kuliko na kazi yake yenyewe. Kwa hiyo, ikiwa, kwa sababu ya uharibifu wa asili ya mwanadamu, mwanadamu anasemwa kwa haki kuwa wa kuchukiza kwa Mungu kwa asili, anaweza pia kusemwa kwa kweli kuwa mpotovu na aliyeharibika kwa asili; kama Augustino, kwa sababu ya uharibifu wa asili, hasiti kuziita asili dhambi zile zinazotawala kwa lazima katika mwili wetu, mahali ambapo hazizuiwi na neema ya Mungu. Hivyo unatoweka mfumo wa kipumbavu na usio na maana wa Wamani, ambao, wakiwa wamebuni ndani ya mwanadamu uovu wa msingi, walijiruhusu kumbunia muumba mpya, ili wasionekane kumpa Mungu mwenye haki sababu na asili ya uovu.XI. We say, therefore, that man is corrupted by a natural depravity, but which did not originate from nature. We deny that it proceeded from nature, to signify that it is rather an adventitious quality or accident, than a substantial property originally innate. Yet we call it natural, that no one may suppose it to be contracted by every individual from corrupt habit, whereas it prevails over all by hereditary right. Nor is this representation of ours without authority. For the same reason the Apostle says, that we are all by nature the children of wrath. How could God, who is pleased with all his meanest works, be angry with the noblest of all his creatures? But he is angry rather with the corruption of his work, than with his work itself. Therefore, if, on account of the corruption of human nature, man be justly said to be naturally abominable to God, he may also be truly said to be naturally depraved and corrupt; as Augustine, in consequence of the corruption of nature, hesitates not to call those sins natural, which necessarily predominate in our flesh, where they are not prevented by the grace of God. Thus vanishes the foolish and nugatory system of the Manichæans, who, having imagined in man a substantial wickedness, presumed to invent for him a new creator, that they might not appear to assign the cause and origin of evil to a righteous God.

Kitabu cha II. Sura ya II. Mwanadamu, Katika Hali Yake ya Sasa, Amenyang’anywa Uhuru wa Utashi, na Ametiwa Chini ya Utumwa wa Kusikitisha.Book II. Chapter II. Man, in His Present State, Despoiled of Freedom of Will, and Subjected to a Miserable Slavery.

Kwa kuwa tumeona kwamba utawala wa dhambi, tangu wakati wa kumtiisha mtu wa kwanza, haukuenea tu juu ya jamii yote, bali pia unaimiliki kila roho peke yake, sasa inabaki kuchunguzwa kwa karibu zaidi, kama tumenyang’anywa uhuru wote, na, ikiwa chembe yoyote yake bado imebaki, nguvu yake inafika wapi. Lakini, ili tuweze kugundua kwa urahisi zaidi ukweli wa swali hili, kwanza nitaweka njiani alama, ambayo kwayo mwenendo wetu wote utaongozwa. Njia bora ya kujilinda dhidi ya kosa ni kuzingatia hatari zinazotutishia kila upande. Maana mwanadamu anapotangazwa kuwa hana unyofu wowote, mara hufanya hilo sababu ya uvivu; na kwa sababu anasemwa kuwa hana nguvu ndani yake ya kufuata haki, huidharau kabisa, kana kwamba haimhusu hata kidogo. Kwa upande mwingine, hawezi kujidai kitu chochote, hata kidogo kiasi gani, bila Mungu kunyang’anywa heshima yake, na yeye mwenyewe kuhatarishwa na jeuri ya kiburi. Kwa hiyo, ili kuepuka kugonga mojawapo ya miamba hii, njia itakayofuatwa ni hii—kwamba mwanadamu, akifundishwa kwamba hana kitu chochote kizuri kilichobaki mikononi mwake, na akiwa amezungukwa kila upande na hali ya lazima ya kusikitisha sana, hata hivyo afundishwe kutamani wema ambao hana, na uhuru ambao amenyang’anywa; na aamshwe kutoka uvivu kwa bidii zaidi, kuliko kama angedhaniwa kuwa na nguvu kuu zaidi. Umuhimu wa pili ni wazi kwa kila mtu. Wa kwanza, naona, unatiliwa shaka na wengi kuliko inavyopaswa. Maana kwa kuwa hili limewekwa nje ya mabishano yote, kwamba mwanadamu hapaswi kunyang’anywa kitu chochote kinachomhusu kwa haki, ni lazima pia kuwe wazi umuhimu wa kuzuiwa asijisifu kwa uongo. Maana kama hata wakati ule hakuruhusiwa kujisifu ndani yake mwenyewe, alipopambwa kwa wema wa Mungu kwa mapambo bora kabisa, je, atapaswa kunyenyekezwa kiasi gani sasa, ambapo, kwa sababu ya kutoshukuru kwake, ametupwa kutoka kilele cha utukufu hadi kuzimu ya fedheha! Wakati ule, nasema, alipoinuliwa hadi cheo cha heshima kuu, Maandiko hayamhusishi na kitu kingine ila kwamba aliumbwa kwa sura ya Mungu; ambayo hakika inamaanisha kwamba furaha yake haikuwa katika wema wake mwenyewe, bali katika kushiriki Mungu. Basi, ni nini kinachobaki kwake sasa, aliyenyang’anywa utukufu wote, ila amkiri Mungu ambaye wema wake hakuweza kushukuru, alipokuwa na wingi wa utajiri wa fadhili zake? na kwamba sasa, angalau, kwa kukiri umaskini wake, ampe utukufu yeye ambaye hakumtukuza kwa kukiri baraka zake? Pia ni muhimu kwa faida yetu si pungufu kuliko kwa utukufu wa Mungu, kwamba sifa yote ya hekima na nguvu iondolewe kwetu; hivyo wale wanaotuhusisha na kitu chochote zaidi ya kinachotuhusu kwa kweli wanaongeza kufuru kwenye anguko letu. Maana ni matokeo gani mengine, tunapofundishwa kushindana kwa nguvu zetu wenyewe, ila kwamba tunainuliwa hewani juu ya unyasi, ambao ukivunjika upesi, tunaanguka chini. Ingawa nguvu zetu zinawekwa katika mtazamo mzuri sana tunapozilinganisha na unyasi. Maana si kitu ila moshi, chochote kile ambacho wanadamu wa bure wamekibuni na kujifanya juu yake. Kwa hiyo si bila sababu kwamba usemi ule wa ajabu hurudiwa mara nyingi na Augustino, kwamba utashi huru unapinduliwa badala ya kuimarishwa hata na watetezi wake wenyewe. Ilikuwa lazima kutangulia kusema mambo haya kwa ajili ya wengine, ambao, wanaposikia kwamba nguvu za wanadamu zinapinduliwa kabisa ili nguvu za Mungu zithibitishwe ndani ya mwanadamu, huchukia kwa ukaidi hoja hii yote, kama ya hatari na isiyo na faida; ambayo hata hivyo inaonekana kuwa ya manufaa makubwa kwetu, na muhimu kwa dini ya kweli.Since we have seen that the domination of sin, from the time of its subjugation of the first man, not only extends over the whole race, but also exclusively possesses every soul, it now remains to be more closely investigated, whether we are despoiled of all freedom, and, if any particle of it yet remain, how far its power extends. But, that we may the more easily discover the truth of this question, I will first set up by the way a mark, by which our whole course must be regulated. The best method of guarding against error is to consider the dangers which threaten us on every side. For when man is declared to be destitute of all rectitude, he immediately makes it an occasion of slothfulness; and because he is said to have no power of himself for the pursuit of righteousness, he totally neglects it, as though it did not at all concern him. On the other hand, he cannot arrogate any thing to himself, be it ever so little, without God being robbed of his honour, and himself being endangered by presumptuous temerity. Therefore, to avoid striking on either of these rocks, this will be the course to be pursued—that man, being taught that he has nothing good left in his possession, and being surrounded on every side with the most miserable necessity, should, nevertheless, be instructed to aspire to the good of which he is destitute, and to the liberty of which he is deprived; and should be roused from indolence with more earnestness, than if he were supposed to be possessed of the greatest strength. The necessity of the latter is obvious to every one. The former, I perceive, is doubted by more than it ought to be. For this being placed beyond all controversy, that man must not be deprived of any thing that properly belongs to him, it ought also to be manifest how important it is that he should be prevented from false boasting. For if he was not even then permitted to glory in himself, when by the Divine beneficence he was decorated with the noblest ornaments, how much ought he now to be humbled, when, on account of his ingratitude, he has been hurled from the summit of glory to the abyss of ignominy! At that time, I say, when he was exalted to the most honourable eminence, the Scripture attributes nothing to him, but that he was created after the image of God; which certainly implies that his happiness consisted not in any goodness of his own, but in a participation of God. What, then, remains for him now, deprived of all glory, but that he acknowledge God, to whose beneficence he could not be thankful, when he abounded in the riches of his favour? and that he now, at least, by a confession of his poverty, glorify him, whom he glorified not by an acknowledgment of his blessings? It is also no less conducive to our interests than to the Divine glory, that all the praise of wisdom and strength be taken away from us; so that they join sacrilege to our fall, who ascribe to us any thing more than truly belongs to us. For what else is the consequence, when we are taught to contend in our own strength, but that we are lifted into the air on a reed, which being soon broken, we fall to the ground. Though our strength is placed in too favourable a point of view, when it is compared to a reed. For it is nothing but smoke, whatever vain men have imagined and pretend concerning it. Wherefore it is not without reason, that that remarkable sentence is so frequently repeated by Augustine, that free will is rather overthrown than established even by its own advocates. It was necessary to premise these things for the sake of some, who, when they hear that human power is completely subverted in order that the power of God may be established in man, inveterately hate this whole argument, as dangerous and unprofitable; which yet appears to be highly useful to us, and essential to true religion.

[Sehemu za II–XI zimeachwa.][Sections II–XI omitted.]

XII. Na kwa kweli, ninakubaliana sana na tamko lile la kawaida lililokopwa kutoka kwa Augustino, kwamba vipawa vya asili ndani ya mwanadamu vimeharibiwa na dhambi, lakini kwamba vya juu ya asili amenyang’anywa kabisa. Maana kwa vya pili vinakusudiwa, nuru ya imani na haki, ambavyo vingetosha kupata maisha ya mbinguni na furaha ya milele. Kwa hiyo, alipoasi dhidi ya utawala wa Mungu, wakati huo huo alinyang’anywa vipawa hivyo vya juu ya asili, alivyopewa kwa tumaini la wokovu wa milele. Kutokana na hili inafuata kwamba amehamishwa kutoka ufalme wa Mungu kwa namna ambayo mapenzi yote yanayohusu maisha ya furaha ya roho yamezimwa ndani yake, mpaka ayarudishe kwa neema ya kuzaliwa upya. Hayo ni imani, upendo kwa Mungu, upendo kwa jirani zetu, na kuambatana na utakatifu na haki. Yote haya, yakirejeshwa na Kristo, huhesabiwa kuwa yaliyoongezwa na yasiyo ya asili; na kwa hiyo tunahitimisha kwamba yalikuwa yamepotea. Tena, afya ya akili na unyofu wa moyo viliharibiwa pia; na huu ndio uharibifu wa vipawa vya asili. Maana ingawa tunabaki na sehemu fulani ya ufahamu na hukumu pamoja na utashi, hatuwezi kusema kwamba akili yetu ni kamilifu na yenye afya, iliyokandamizwa na udhaifu na kuzamishwa katika giza nene; na upotovu wa utashi wetu unajulikana vya kutosha. Akili, kwa hiyo, ambayo kwayo mwanadamu hutofautisha mema na mabaya, ambayo kwayo huelewa na kuhukumu, kwa kuwa ni kipawa cha asili, haikuweza kuharibiwa kabisa, bali imedhoofishwa kwa sehemu, na kuharibiwa kwa sehemu, hata isionyeshe kitu ila ubaya na uharibifu. Kwa maana hii Yohana anasema kwamba “nuru” bado “yang’aa gizani,” lakini kwamba “giza halikuiweza.” Katika kifungu hiki mawazo yote mawili yameonyeshwa wazi—kwamba chembe fulani zinaendelea kung’aa katika asili ya mwanadamu, hata katika hali yake iliyoharibika na kudhoofika, ambazo zinathibitisha kuwa ni kiumbe mwenye akili, tofauti na wanyama, kwa kuwa amepewa ufahamu; na hata hivyo kwamba nuru hii imezimwa na ujinga mwingi hata haiwezi kutenda kwa ufanisi wowote. Vivyo hivyo utashi, usiotenganishika na asili ya mwanadamu, haujafutwa; lakini umefungwa na tamaa zilizoharibika na zisizo na kiasi, hata hauwezi kutamani kitu chochote kilicho chema. Huu, kwa kweli, ni ufafanuzi kamili, lakini unahitaji maelezo mapana zaidi. Kwa hiyo, ili mpangilio wa hotuba yetu uendelee kulingana na tofauti tuliyoitaja, ambamo tuligawanya roho katika ufahamu na utashi, tuchunguze kwanza nguvu ya ufahamu. Kuuhukumu kwa upofu wa daima, hata usibaki na akili katika jambo lolote, kunapingana si tu na neno la Mungu, bali pia na uzoefu wa akili ya kawaida. Maana tunaona katika akili ya mwanadamu hamu fulani ya kuchunguza kweli, ambayo asingekuwa na mwelekeo kuelekea kwake, isipokuwa kwa ladha fulani ya kweli aliyokuwa nayo hapo awali. Kwa hiyo inaonyesha uwazi fulani katika ufahamu wa mwanadamu, kwamba unavutwa na upendo wa kweli; kutoijali kwa wanyama kunathibitisha hisia mbovu pasipo akili; ingawa hamu hii, ndogo kama ilivyo, huzimia hata kabla ya kuingia katika mwendo wake, kwa sababu mara huishia katika ubatili. Maana ujinga wa akili ya mwanadamu huifanya isiweze kufuata njia sahihi ya kuchunguza kweli; hutangatanga kati ya makosa mbalimbali, na kupapasa, kama ilivyokuwa, katika vivuli vya giza, mara nyingi hujikwaa, hadi hatimaye hupotea katika matangatanga yake; hivyo, katika kutafuta kweli, inafichua kutokuwa na uwezo wake wa kuitafuta na kuipata. Pia inateseka kwa ugonjwa mwingine mzito, mara nyingi bila kutambua mambo hayo ni nini ambayo maarifa ya kweli yake yangefaa kupatikana, na kwa hiyo hujitesa kwa udadisi wa kuchekesha katika uchunguzi usio na matunda na usio na maana. Mambo yanayohitajika kujulikana zaidi, ama haiyatilii maanani kamwe, au huyapuuza kwa dharau na mara chache; lakini karibu kamwe hayasomi kwa bidii ya dhati. Upotovu huu ukiwa ni malalamiko ya kawaida kwa waandishi wapagani, watu wote wanathibitishwa wazi kuwa wamehusika ndani yake. Kwa hiyo Sulemani, katika Mhubiri wake, baada ya kuorodhesha shughuli zile ambazo watu wanajiona kuonyesha hekima ya juu, anamalizia kwa kuzitangaza kuwa ni ubatili na mambo ya upuuzi.XII. And, indeed, I much approve of that common observation which has been borrowed from Augustine, that the natural talents in man have been corrupted by sin, but that of the supernatural ones he has been wholly deprived. For by the latter are intended, both the light of faith and righteousness, which would be sufficient for the attainment of a heavenly life and eternal felicity. Therefore, when he revolted from the Divine government, he was at the same time deprived of those supernatural endowments, which had been given him for the hope of eternal salvation. Hence it follows, that he is exiled from the kingdom of God, in such a manner, that all the affections relating to the happy life of the soul, are also extinguished in him, till he recovers them by the grace of regeneration. Such are faith, love to God, charity towards our neighbours, and an attachment to holiness and righteousness. All these things, being restored by Christ, are esteemed adventitious and preternatural; and therefore we conclude that they had been lost. Again, soundness of mind and rectitude of heart were also destroyed; and this is the corruption of the natural talents. For although we retain some portion of understanding and judgment together with the will, yet we cannot say that our mind is perfect and sound, which is oppressed with debility and immersed in profound darkness; and the depravity of our will is sufficiently known. Reason, therefore, by which man distinguishes between good and evil, by which he understands and judges, being a natural talent, could not be totally destroyed, but is partly debilitated, partly vitiated, so that it exhibits nothing but deformity and ruin. In this sense John says, that “the light” still “shineth in darkness,” but that “the darkness comprehendeth it not.” In this passage both these ideas are clearly expressed—that some sparks continue to shine in the nature of man, even in its corrupt and degenerate state, which prove him to be a rational creature, and different from the brutes, because he is endued with understanding; and yet that this light is smothered by so much ignorance, that it cannot act with any degree of efficacy. So the will, being inseparable from the nature of man, is not annihilated; but it is fettered by depraved and inordinate desires, so that it cannot aspire after any thing that is good. This, indeed, is a complete definition, but requires more diffuse explication. Therefore, that the order of our discourse may proceed according to the distinction we have stated, in which we divided the soul into understanding and will, let us first examine the power of the understanding. To condemn it to perpetual blindness, so as to leave it no intelligence in any thing, is repugnant, not only to the Divine word, but also to the experience of common sense. For we perceive in the mind of man some desire of investigating truth, towards which he would have no inclination, but from some relish of it previously possessed. It therefore indicates some perspicuity in the human understanding, that it is attracted with a love of truth; the neglect of which in the brutes argues gross sense without reason; although this desire, small as it is, faints even before its entrance on its course, because it immediately terminates in vanity. For the dulness of the human mind renders it incapable of pursuing the right way of investigating the truth; it wanders through a variety of errors, and groping, as it were, in the shades of darkness, often stumbles, till at length it is lost in its wanderings; thus, in its search after truth, it betrays its incapacity to seek and find it. It also labours under another grievous malady, frequently not discerning what those things are, the true knowledge of which it would be proper to attain, and therefore torments itself with a ridiculous curiosity in fruitless and unimportant inquiries. To things most necessary to be known it either never adverts, or contemptuously and rarely digresses; but scarcely ever studies them with serious application. This depravity being a common subject of complaint with heathen writers, all men are clearly proved to have been implicated in it. Wherefore Solomon, in his Ecclesiastes, after having enumerated those pursuits in which men consider themselves as displaying superior wisdom, concludes with pronouncing them to be vain and frivolous.

[Sehemu za XIII–XXV zimeachwa.][Sections XIII–XXV omitted.]

XXVI. Sasa tuendelee na uchunguzi wa utashi, ambao hasa unahusu uhuru wa kuchagua; kwa kuwa tumeona hapo awali kwamba uteuzi unahusu utashi zaidi kuliko ufahamu. Kwanza, ili maoni yaliyotolewa na wanafalsafa, na kupokelewa kwa makubaliano ya jumla, kwamba vitu vyote, kwa silika ya asili, vinatamani kilicho chema, yasidhaniwe kuthibitisha unyofu wa utashi wa mwanadamu, tuzingatie kwamba uwezo wa kuchagua kwa uhuru haupaswi kutafakariwa katika aina ile ya tamaa, inayotokana na mwelekeo wa asili kuliko na mashauriano ya akili. Maana hata wanashule wanakiri kwamba hakuna kitendo cha kuchagua kwa uhuru, ila wakati akili inapoona na kutafakari vitu hasimu vilivyowekwa mbele yake; wakimaanisha kwamba kitu cha tamaa lazima kiwe kile kinachoweza kuchaguliwa, na kwamba mashauriano hutangulia na kuleta uchaguzi. Na kwa kweli, ukichunguza tamaa ya wema ambayo ni ya asili kwa mwanadamu, utagundua kwamba anayo kwa pamoja na wanyama. Maana wao pia hutamani kuwa na furaha, na kufuata kila mwonekano wa kupendeza unaovutia hisia zao. Lakini mwanadamu hachagui kwa akili kama lengo la kufuata kile kilicho chema kwake kweli, kulingana na ubora wa asili yake isiyokufa, wala hachukui shauri la akili, wala kutumia ipasavyo ufahamu wake; bali bila akili, bila kutafakari, hufuata mwelekeo wake wa asili, kama makundi ya mashambani. Kwa hiyo si hoja ya uhuru wa utashi, kwamba mwanadamu huongozwa na silika ya asili kutamani kilicho chema; bali ni lazima atambue kilicho chema kulingana na akili sahihi; kwamba mara anapokijua, akichague; na mara anapokichagua, akifuate. Ili kuondoa kila ugumu, tunapaswa kuzingatia mifano miwili ya hoja za uongo. Maana tamaa inayokusudiwa hapa si mwendo halisi wa utashi, bali ni mwelekeo wa asili; na wema unaozungumziwa haulengi fadhila wala haki, bali hali; kama tunaposema mtu yu mzima au ana afya njema. Mwishowe, ingawa mwanadamu ana tamaa kubwa kabisa ya kile kilicho chema, hata hivyo hakifuati. Hakuna mtu ambaye furaha ya milele haikaribishwi kwake, lakini hakuna mtu anayeitamani bila ushawishi wa Roho. Kwa hiyo, kwa kuwa tamaa ya furaha ya asili kwa mwanadamu haitoi hoja ya uhuru wa utashi, kama vile mwelekeo wa madini na mawe kuelekea ukamilifu wa asili yao haudhihirishi uhuru ndani yake, tuzingatie, katika mambo mengine kadhaa, kama utashi katika kila sehemu umeharibiwa na kupotoshwa kabisa hivyo hata hauwezi kuzaa kitu ila kilicho kibaya; au kama unabaki na sehemu ndogo isiyojeruhiwa ambayo yaweza kuwa chanzo cha tamaa njema.XXVI. We must now proceed to the examination of the will, to which principally belongs the liberty of choice; for we have before seen that election belongs rather to the will than to the understanding. In the first place, that the opinion advanced by philosophers, and received by general consent, that all things, by a natural instinct, desire what is good, may not be supposed to prove the rectitude of the human will, let us observe, that the power of free choice is not to be contemplated in that kind of appetite, which proceeds rather from the inclination of the nature than from the deliberation of the mind. For even the schoolmen confess that there is no action of free choice, but when reason sees and considers the rival objects presented to it; meaning that the object of appetite must be such as is the subject of choice, and that deliberation precedes and introduces choice. And in fact, if you examine the desire of good which is natural to man, you will find that he has it in common with the brutes. For they also desire to be happy, and pursue every agreeable appearance which attracts their senses. But man neither rationally chooses as the object of his pursuit that which is truly good for him, according to the excellency of his immortal nature, nor takes the advice of reason, nor duly exerts his understanding; but without reason, without reflection, follows his natural inclination, like the herds of the field. It is therefore no argument for the liberty of the will, that man is led by natural instinct to desire that which is good; but it is necessary that he discern what is good according to right reason; that as soon as he knows it, he choose it; and as soon as he has chosen it, he pursue it. To remove every difficulty, we must advert to two instances of false argumentation. For the desire here intended is not a proper motion of the will, but a natural inclination; and the good in question relates not to virtue or righteousness, but to condition; as when we say a man is well or in good health. Lastly, though man has the strongest desire after what is good, yet he does not pursue it. There is no man to whom eternal felicity is unwelcome, yet no man aspires to it without the influence of the Spirit. Since, therefore, the desire of happiness natural to man furnishes no argument for the liberty of the will, any more than a tendency in metals and stones towards the perfection of their nature argues liberty in them, let us consider, in some other particulars, whether the will be in every part so entirely vitiated and depraved that it can produce nothing but what is evil; or whether it retain any small part uninjured which may be the source of good desires.

XXVII. Wale wanaohusisha na neema ya kwanza ya Mungu kwamba tunaweza kutaka kwa ufanisi, wanaonekana, kinyume chake, kudokeza kwamba roho ina uwezo wa kutamani kwa hiari kile kilicho chema, lakini ni dhaifu mno kuinuka hadi mapenzi thabiti, au kuamsha jitihada yoyote. Na hakuna shaka kwamba wanashule kwa jumla wameikumbatia maoni haya, yaliyokopwa kutoka kwa Origeni na baadhi ya mababu, kwa kuwa mara nyingi humtazama mwanadamu katika mambo ya asili tupu, kama wanavyojieleza, kulingana na maelezo yaliyotolewa na Mtume kwa maneno haya: “Jema nilipendalo, silitendi; bali ovu nisilolipenda, ndilo nilitendalo. Kutaka kuko kwangu; bali jinsi ya kutenda lililo jema, siipati.” Lakini huu ni upotoshaji wa kusikitisha na kamili wa hoja ambayo Paulo anaifuata katika kifungu hicho. Maana anashughulikia mapambano ya Mkristo, ambayo anayadokeza kwa ufupi zaidi kwa Wagalatia; mapambano ambayo waaminifu huyapata daima ndani yao katika mashindano kati ya mwili na roho. Sasa, roho haitokani na asili, bali na kuzaliwa upya. Lakini kwamba Mtume anasema juu ya waliozaliwa upya, ni dhahiri kutokana na kauli yake kwamba ndani yake hakukaa jema lolote, ikifuatiwa mara na maelezo kwamba alimaanisha mwili wake. Na kwa hiyo anathibitisha kwamba si yeye atendaye ubaya, bali dhambi ikaayo ndani yake. Maana ya marekebisho haya ni nini, “ndani yangu, yaani, ndani ya mwili wangu?” Ni kana kwamba alijieleza kwa namna ifuatayo: Hakuna jema linalokaa ndani yangu likitokana na mimi mwenyewe, maana katika mwili wangu hakuna lolote jema linaloweza kupatikana. Kutokana na hili inafuata namna ile ya kujitetea: “Sitendi ubaya, bali dhambi ikaayo ndani yangu;” ambayo haiwezi kutumika kwa yeyote ila waliozaliwa upya, wanaolenga lililo jema kwa mwelekeo mkuu wa roho zao. Sasa, hitimisho linaloongezwa linaweka yote haya katika mwanga ulio wazi: “Kwa maana napendezwa na sheria ya Mungu kulingana na utu wa ndani; lakini naona sheria nyingine katika viungo vyangu, ikishindana na sheria ya akili yangu.” Nani ana mgawanyiko kama huo ndani yake, ila yule, akiwa amezaliwa upya na Roho wa Mungu, anayebeba pamoja naye mabaki ya mwili wake? Kwa hiyo Augustino, ingawa wakati mmoja alidhani hotuba ile inahusu hali ya asili ya mwanadamu, aliifuta tafsiri yake, kama ya uongo na isiyofaa. Na kwa kweli, tukikubali kwamba watu wasio na neema wana misukumo fulani kuelekea wema wa kweli, hata iwe dhaifu kiasi gani, tutajibu nini kwa Mtume, anayekana kwamba sisi tunatosha wenyewe hata kuwaza wazo jema? Tutajibu nini kwa Bwana, anayetangaza kwa kinywa cha Musa kwamba kila kusudi la moyo wa mwanadamu ni baya tu? Kwa kuwa wamejikwaa juu ya tafsiri ya uongo ya kifungu kimoja, kwa hiyo hakuna sababu ya sisi kukaa juu ya maoni yao. Badala yake na tulipokee tamko hili la Kristo, “Kila mtu atendaye dhambi ni mtumwa wa dhambi.” Sisi sote ni wenye dhambi kwa asili; kwa hiyo sisi sote tumeshikwa chini ya nira ya dhambi. Sasa, ikiwa mtu mzima yuko chini ya utawala wa dhambi, utashi, ambao ndio kiti chake kikuu, lazima ufungwe kwa vifungo thabiti kuliko vyote. Wala tamko la Paulo, “kwamba Mungu ndiye atendaye kazi ndani yetu kutaka,” lisingekuwa na uthabiti vinginevyo, kama utashi wowote ungetangulia neema ya Roho. Kwaheri, basi, maoni yote ya bure ya waandishi wengi juu ya maandalizi; maana ingawa waaminifu wakati mwingine huomba mioyo yao ifanywe sawa na sheria ya Mungu, kama Daudi afanyavyo katika mahali pengi, hata hivyo inapaswa kuzingatiwa kwamba hata tamaa hii ya kuomba yatokana na Mungu. Hili tunaweza kulikusanya kutoka lugha ya Daudi; maana anapotaka moyo safi uumbwe ndani yake, hakika hajidai mwanzo wa uumbaji huo. Badala yake, kwa hiyo, na tuzingatie shauri hili la Augustino: “Mungu atakutangulia katika mambo yote: nawe pia mara nyingine mtangulie ghadhabu yake.” Vipi? “Ungama kwamba una mambo hayo yote kutoka kwa Mungu; kwamba wema wowote ulio nao, ni kutoka kwake; lakini ubaya wowote, ni kutoka kwako mwenyewe.” Na kidogo baadaye, “Hakuna chetu, ila dhambi.”XXVII. Those who attribute it to the first grace of God, that we are able to will effectually, seem, on the contrary, to imply that the soul has a faculty of spontaneously aspiring to what is good, but that it is too weak to rise into a solid affection, or to excite any endeavour. And there is no doubt that the schoolmen have in general embraced this opinion, which was borrowed from Origen and some of the fathers, since they frequently consider man in things purely natural, as they express themselves, according to the description given by the Apostle in these words: “The good that I would, I do not; but the evil which I would not, that I do. To will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good, I find not.” But this is a miserable and complete perversion of the argument which Paul is pursuing in that passage. For he is treating of the Christian conflict, which he more briefly hints at to the Galatians; the conflict which the faithful perpetually experience within themselves in the contention between the flesh and the spirit. Now, the spirit is not from nature, but from regeneration. But that the Apostle speaks concerning the regenerate, is evident from his assertion, that in himself dwelt nothing good, being immediately followed by an explanation that he meant it of his flesh. And therefore he affirms that it is not he that does evil, but sin that dwells in him. What is the meaning of this correction, “in me, that is, in my flesh?” It is as if he had expressed himself in the following manner: No good resides in me originating from myself, for in my flesh can be found nothing that is good. Hence follows that form of exculpation: “I do no evil, but sin that dwelleth in me;” which is inapplicable to any but the regenerate, who, with the prevailing bias of their souls, aim at what is good. Now, the conclusion which is subjoined places all this in a clear point of view: “I delight,” says he, “in the law of God after the inward man; but I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind.” Who has such a dissension in himself, but he who, being regenerated by the Divine Spirit, carries about with him the relics of his flesh? Therefore Augustine, though he had at one time supposed that discourse to relate to the natural state of man, retracted his interpretation, as false and inconsistent. And, indeed, if we allow that men destitute of grace have some motions towards true goodness, though ever so feeble, what answer shall we give to the Apostle, who denies that we are sufficient of ourselves to entertain even a good thought? What reply shall we make to the Lord, who pronounces, by the mouth of Moses, that every imagination of the human heart is only evil? Since they have stumbled on a false interpretation of one passage, therefore, there is no reason why we should dwell on their opinion. Rather let us receive this declaration of Christ, “Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.” We are all sinners by nature; therefore we are all held under the yoke of sin. Now, if the whole man be subject to the dominion of sin, the will, which is the principal seat of it, must necessarily be bound with the firmest bonds. Nor would there otherwise be any consistency in the assertion of Paul, “that it is God that worketh in us to will,” if any will preceded the grace of the Spirit. Farewell, then, all the idle observations of many writers concerning preparation; for although the faithful sometimes petition that their hearts may be conformed to the Divine law, as David does in many places, yet it should be remarked that even this desire of praying originates from God. This we may gather from the language of David; for when he wishes a clean heart to be created within him, he certainly does not arrogate to himself the beginning of such a creation. Let us rather, therefore, attend to this advice of Augustine: “God will prevent you in all things: do you also sometimes prevent his wrath.” How? “Confess that you have all those things from God; that whatever good you have, it is from him; but whatever evil, from yourself.” And a little after, “Nothing is ours, but sin.”

5. Bawaba Kuu ya Dini: Kuhesabiwa Haki kwa Imani5. The Main Hinge of Religion: Justification by Faith

John Calvin, Taasisi za Dini ya Kikristo (toleo la mwisho la Kilatini, 1559; tafsiri ya Kiingereza ya John Allen, 1813; Project Gutenberg #45001), Kitabu cha III, sura ya XI, sehemu za I–IV na XIII–XXIII (sehemu za V–XII, juu ya Osiander, zimeachwa); sura ya XII, sehemu ya I (sehemu za II–VIII zimeachwa); na sura ya XIII, sehemu za I–III (sehemu za IV–V zimeachwa): kuhesabiwa haki kunafafanuliwa kama kukubaliwa na Mungu kwa msamaha wa dhambi na kuhesabiwa kwa haki ya Kristo, kunakopokelewa kwa imani peke yake. Fundisho la Calvin juu ya maisha ya Kikristo linaendelea nje ya kiasi hiki. Chanzo cha msingi; tafsiri ni za mwandishi.John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (final Latin edition, 1559; English translation by John Allen, 1813; Project Gutenberg #45001), Book III, chapter XI, sections I–IV and XIII–XXIII (sections V–XII, on Osiander, omitted); chapter XII, section I (sections II–VIII omitted); and chapter XIII, sections I–III (sections IV–V omitted): justification defined as acceptance with God through the forgiveness of sins and the imputation of Christ’s righteousness, received by faith alone. Calvin’s treatment of the Christian life continues beyond this volume. Primary source; the interpretations are the author’s.

> Maelezo ya CTS: Kuhesabiwa haki ndilo lilikuwa mgogoro mkuu wa Matengenezo ya Kanisa. “Kuhesabu haki” (to justify) ni neno la mahakamani: kumtangaza mtu kuwa mwenye haki na kumwachilia huru. “Kuhesabu” (to impute) ni kuweka kitu kwenye akaunti ya mtu. Mazingira ya kihistoria: sehemu zilizoachwa V–XII zinamjibu Andreas Osiander (alikufa 1552), mwanateolojia Mlutheri aliyefundisha kwamba tunakuwa wenye haki kwa kukaa ndani yetu kwa asili ya kimungu ya Kristo. “Sophists” (wanasofisti), “schoolmen” (wanashule) na “Papists” (wafuasi wa Papa) yalikuwa majina ya kubishana ya wakati huo kwa wanateolojia wa vyuo vikuu vya Kikatoliki cha Roma, hasa katika Sorbonne mjini Paris; Azimio la Mtaguso wa Trento juu ya Kuhesabiwa Haki (1547) liliwajibu Wanamatengenezo kwa maneno makali vilevile. Lugha kama hiyo haipaswi kurudiwa katika mazungumzo ya Kikristo leo. Mwaka 1999 wawakilishi wa Walutheri na Wakatoliki wa Roma walitia saini Tamko la Pamoja juu ya Fundisho la Kuhesabiwa Haki, wakitambua kiini cha pamoja huku wakitaja tofauti zinazoendelea. Calvin mwenyewe anasisitiza kwamba imani ihesabuyo haki haiko peke yake kamwe, bali daima huzaa matunda ya utakatifu (utakaso), ambao anaushughulikia katika sura zilizotangulia hii.CTS note: Justification was the central dispute of the Reformation. To “justify” is a courtroom word: to declare someone righteous and acquit him. To “impute” is to credit to someone’s account. Historical context: the omitted sections V–XII answer Andreas Osiander (d. 1552), a Lutheran theologian who taught that we are righteous by the indwelling of Christ’s divine essence. “Sophists,” “schoolmen” and “Papists” were the polemical labels of the time for Roman Catholic university theologians, especially at the Sorbonne in Paris; the Council of Trent’s Decree on Justification (1547) answered the Reformers in equally strong terms. Such language should not be repeated in Christian conversation today. In 1999 Lutheran and Roman Catholic representatives signed a Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification recognizing a shared core while noting continuing differences. Calvin himself insists that the faith which justifies is never alone, but always bears the fruit of holiness (sanctification), which he treats in the chapters before this one.

Kitabu cha III. Sura ya XI. Kuhesabiwa Haki kwa Imani. Jina na Jambo Lenyewe Vimefafanuliwa.Book III. Chapter XI. Justification by Faith. The Name and Thing Defined.

Nadhani nimekwisha kueleza kwa uangalifu wa kutosha jinsi wanadamu, kwa kuwa wako chini ya laana ya sheria, hawana njia iliyobaki ya kupata wokovu ila kwa imani peke yake; na pia imani yenyewe ni nini, ni baraka zipi za kimungu inazompa mwanadamu, na ni matokeo gani inayozaa ndani yake. Kiini cha niliyoyasema ni kwamba Kristo, aliyepewa sisi kwa wema wa Mungu, hushikwa na kumilikiwa nasi kwa imani, na kwa kushiriki naye tunapokea hasa faida mbili. Kwanza, tukipatanishwa na Mungu kwa kutokuwa na hatia kwake, tunakuwa na baba mwenye fadhili mbinguni badala ya hakimu; pili, tukitakaswa na Roho wake, tunajitoa kwa kutokuwa na hatia na usafi wa maisha. Juu ya kuzaliwa upya, ambayo ni faida ya pili, nimesema yale niliyodhani yanatosha. Njia ya kuhesabiwa haki imeguswa kidogo tu, kwa sababu ilikuwa lazima kwanza kuelewa kwamba imani, ambayo kwayo peke yake tunapata kuhesabiwa haki bure kwa rehema ya Mungu, haikosi matendo mema, na asili ya matendo mema ya watakatifu ni nini, ambayo sehemu ya swali hili iko ndani yake. Kwa hiyo mada ya kuhesabiwa haki sasa lazima ijadiliwe kikamilifu, na ijadiliwe kwa kukumbuka kwamba ndiyo bawaba kuu ambayo kwayo dini inategemezwa, ili tuitilie mkazo kwa uangalifu na bidii zaidi. Maana isipokuwa kwanza tuelewe tuko katika hali gani kuhusu Mungu, na hukumu yake juu yetu ni nini, hatuna msingi wa uhakika wa wokovu, wala wa mazoezi ya utauwa kwa Mungu. Lakini umuhimu wa kujua mada hii utaonekana wazi zaidi kutokana na maarifa yenyewe.I think I have already explained, with sufficient care, how that men, being subject to the curse of the law, have no means left of attaining salvation but through faith alone; and also what faith itself is, what Divine blessings it confers on man, and what effects it produces in him. The substance of what I have advanced is, that Christ, being given to us by the goodness of God, is apprehended and possessed by us by faith, by a participation of whom we receive especially two benefits. In the first place, being by his innocence reconciled to God, we have in heaven a propitious father instead of a judge; in the next place, being sanctified by his Spirit, we devote ourselves to innocence and purity of life. Of regeneration, which is the second benefit, I have said what I thought was sufficient. The method of justification has been but slightly touched, because it was necessary, first to understand that the faith, by which alone we attain gratuitous justification through the Divine mercy, is not unattended with good works, and what is the nature of the good works of the saints, in which part of this question consists. The subject of justification, therefore, must now be fully discussed, and discussed with the recollection that it is the principal hinge by which religion is supported, in order that we may apply to it with the greater attention and care. For unless we first of all apprehend in what situation we stand with respect to God, and what his judgment is concerning us, we have no foundation either for a certainty of salvation, or for the exercise of piety towards God. But the necessity of knowing this subject will be more evident from the knowledge itself.

II. Lakini ili tusijikwae mlangoni, (jambo ambalo lingetokea tukianza kubishana juu ya mada tusiyoielewa,) tuanze kwa kueleza maana ya misemo hii. Kuhesabiwa haki mbele za Mungu, Kuhesabiwa haki kwa imani au kwa matendo. Mtu husemwa kuwa amehesabiwa haki mbele za Mungu ambaye katika hukumu ya Mungu anahesabiwa kuwa mwadilifu, na kukubaliwa kwa sababu ya haki yake; kwa maana kama vile uovu unavyochukiza kwa Mungu, ndivyo mwenye dhambi yeyote hawezi kupata kibali mbele zake, kama mwenye dhambi, au maadamu anahesabiwa kuwa hivyo. Popote palipo na dhambi, kwa hiyo, huambatana na ghadhabu na kisasi cha Mungu. Anahesabiwa haki yule anayehesabiwa si kama mwenye dhambi, bali kama mtu mwenye haki, na kwa sababu hiyo anasimama salama mbele ya kiti cha hukumu cha Mungu, ambapo wenye dhambi wote wanaaibishwa na kuangamizwa. Kama vile, mtu asiye na hatia akiletwa mbele ya kiti cha hakimu mwenye haki chini ya shtaka, hukumu ikitolewa kulingana na kutokuwa na hatia kwake, husemwa kuwa ametangazwa mwenye haki au ameachiliwa huru mbele ya hakimu, ndivyo anavyohesabiwa haki mbele za Mungu yule ambaye, bila kuhesabiwa miongoni mwa wenye dhambi, ana Mungu kuwa shahidi na mtetezi wa haki yake. Kwa hiyo anapaswa kusemwa kuwa amehesabiwa haki kwa matendo yule ambaye maisha yake yanaonyesha usafi na utakatifu kiasi cha kustahili sifa ya haki mbele ya kiti cha enzi cha Mungu; au ambaye, kwa unyofu wa matendo yake, anaweza kujibu na kuridhisha hukumu ya kimungu. Kwa upande mwingine, atahesabiwa haki kwa imani yule ambaye, akiwa ametengwa na haki ya matendo, anaishika kwa imani haki ya Kristo, na akiwa amevikwa hiyo, anaonekana, mbele za Mungu, si kama mwenye dhambi, bali kama mtu mwenye haki. Hivyo tunaeleza tu kuhesabiwa haki kuwa ni kukubaliwa, ambako kwako Mungu hutupokea katika kibali chake, na kutuhesabu kuwa watu wenye haki; na tunasema kwamba kunajumuisha msamaha wa dhambi na kuhesabiwa kwetu kwa haki ya Kristo.II. But that we may not stumble at the threshold, (which would be the case were we to enter on a disputation concerning a subject not understood by us,) let us first explain the meaning of these expressions. To be justified in the sight of God, To be justified by faith or by works. He is said to be justified in the sight of God who in the Divine judgment is reputed righteous, and accepted on account of his righteousness; for as iniquity is abominable to God, so no sinner can find favour in his sight, as a sinner, or so long as he is considered as such. Wherever sin is, therefore, it is accompanied with the wrath and vengeance of God. He is justified who is considered not as a sinner, but as a righteous person, and on that account stands in safety before the tribunal of God, where all sinners are confounded and ruined. As, if an innocent man be brought under an accusation before the tribunal of a just judge, when judgment is passed according to his innocence, he is said to be justified or acquitted before the judge, so he is justified before God, who, not being numbered among sinners, has God for a witness and asserter of his righteousness. Thus he must be said, therefore, to be justified by works, whose life discovers such purity and holiness, as to deserve the character of righteousness before the throne of God; or who, by the integrity of his works, can answer and satisfy the divine judgment. On the other hand, he will be justified by faith, who, being excluded from the righteousness of works, apprehends by faith the righteousness of Christ, invested in which, he appears, in the sight of God, not as a sinner, but as a righteous man. Thus we simply explain justification to be an acceptance, by which God receives us into his favour, and esteems us as righteous persons; and we say that it consists in the remission of sins and the imputation of the righteousness of Christ.

III. Kwa kuthibitisha jambo hili zipo shuhuda mwingi wa Maandiko ulio wazi. Kwanza kabisa, kwamba hii ndiyo maana inayofaa na ya kawaida zaidi ya neno hilo, haiwezi kukanushwa. Lakini kwa kuwa ingechosha kukusanya vifungu vyote na kuvilinganisha pamoja, itoshe kumdokezea msomaji; kwa kuwa ataliona kwa urahisi mwenyewe. Nitaleta tu mahali pachache, ambapo kuhesabiwa haki huku tunakozungumzia kunashughulikiwa waziwazi. Kwanza, mahali Luka anaposimulia kwamba “watu wote waliomsikia Kristo walimhesabia Mungu haki;” na mahali Kristo anapotamka kwamba “hekima imehesabiwa haki na watoto wake wote.” Kumhesabia Mungu haki, katika kifungu cha kwanza, haimaanishi kumpa haki, ambayo daima inabaki kamilifu ndani yake, ingawa ulimwengu wote ujitahidi kumnyang’anya; wala, katika kifungu cha pili, kuhesabiwa haki kwa hekima haimaanishi kuufanya mafundisho ya wokovu kuwa ya haki, ambayo ni hivyo yenyewe; bali vifungu vyote viwili vinamaanisha kumpa Mungu na mafundisho yake sifa wanayostahili. Tena, Kristo anapowakemea Mafarisayo kwa “kujihesabia haki,” hamaanishi kwamba walipata haki kwa kufanya yaliyo sawa, bali kwamba walijitahidi kwa majivuno kujipatia sifa ya haki, ambayo walikuwa hawana. Hili linaeleweka vizuri zaidi na watu wenye ujuzi wa lugha ya Kiebrania; ambayo huwapa jina la wenye dhambi, si wale tu wanaojua dhambi ndani yao, bali watu walio chini ya hukumu waliohukumiwa. Kwa maana Bathsheba, anaposema, “mimi na mwanangu Sulemani tutahesabiwa kuwa wakosaji,” au wenye dhambi, hakiri uhalifu wowote, bali analalamika kwamba yeye na mwanawe watakuwa wazi kwa aibu ya kuhesabiwa miongoni mwa wahalifu waliohukumiwa. Na inaonekana kutoka katika muktadha kwamba neno hili, hata katika tafsiri, haliwezi kueleweka kwa maana nyingine ila ya kulinganisha, na kwamba haliashirii tabia halisi. Lakini kuhusu mada ya sasa, ambapo Paulo anasema, “Maandiko, kwa kuwa yaliona tangu zamani ya kuwa Mungu atawahesabia Mataifa haki kwa imani,” tunaweza kuelewa nini, ila kwamba Mungu huhesabu haki kwa imani? Tena, anaposema kwamba Mungu “humhesabia haki yeye asiye na utauwa, amwaminiye Yesu,” maana yake inaweza kuwa nini, ila kwamba anamwokoa, kwa baraka ya imani, kutoka hukumu inayostahiliwa na ukosefu wake wa utauwa? Anasema kwa uwazi zaidi bado katika hitimisho, anapopaza sauti hivi: “Ni nani atakayewashtaki wateule wa Mungu? Mungu ndiye anayehesabia haki. Ni nani atakayewahukumu? Kristo Yesu ndiye aliyekufa; naam, zaidi ya hayo, aliyefufuka, ambaye pia anawaombea.” Maana ni kama kwamba alisema, Ni nani atakayewashtaki wale ambao Mungu anawaachilia? Ni nani atakayewahukumu wale ambao Kristo anawaombea? Kuhesabiwa haki, kwa hiyo, si kitu kingine ila kuachiliwa kutoka hatia kwa yule aliyeshtakiwa, kana kwamba kutokuwa na hatia kwake kumethibitishwa. Kwa kuwa Mungu, kwa hiyo, anatuhesabia haki kwa upatanishi wa Kristo, anatuachilia, si kwa kukubali kutokuwa na hatia kwetu binafsi, bali kwa kuhesabu haki; hata sisi, tusio na haki ndani yetu wenyewe, tunahesabiwa kuwa wenye haki katika Kristo. Hili ndilo fundisho lililohubiriwa na Paulo katika sura ya kumi na tatu ya Matendo: “Kwa mtu huyu mnahubiriwa msamaha wa dhambi; na kwa yeye kila aaminiye ameondolewa hatia ya mambo yote, ambayo hamkuweza kuondolewa hatia yake kwa sheria ya Musa.” Tunaona kwamba baada ya msamaha wa dhambi, kuhesabiwa haki huku kunatajwa, kana kwamba kwa njia ya maelezo: tunaona wazi kwamba kunamaanisha kuachiliwa; kwamba kumetenganishwa na matendo ya sheria; kwamba ni fadhili tupu ya Kristo; kwamba kunashikwa kwa imani: tunaona, hatimaye, kuingilia kati kwa kuridhika, anaposema kwamba tunahesabiwa haki kutoka dhambi na Kristo. Hivyo, inaposemwa kwamba mtoza ushuru “alishuka kwenda nyumbani kwake amehesabiwa haki,” hatuwezi kusema kwamba alipata haki kwa stahili yoyote ya matendo. Maana yake, kwa hiyo, ni kwamba baada ya kupata msamaha wa dhambi zake, alihesabiwa kuwa mwenye haki mbele za Mungu. Alikuwa mwenye haki, kwa hiyo, si kwa kukubaliwa kwa matendo yake, bali kwa msamaha wa neema wa Mungu. Kwa hiyo Ambrosi anaita kwa uzuri kuungama dhambi, kuhesabiwa haki halali.III. For the confirmation of this point there are many plain testimonies of Scripture. In the first place, that this is the proper and most usual signification of the word, cannot be denied. But since it would be too tedious to collect all the passages and compare them together, let it suffice to have suggested it to the reader; for he will easily observe it of himself. I will only produce a few places, where this justification, which we speak of, is expressly handled. First, where Luke relates that “the people that heard Christ justified God;” and where Christ pronounces that “wisdom is justified of all her children.” To justify God, in the former passage, does not signify to confer righteousness, which always remains perfect in him, although the whole world endeavour to rob him of it; nor, in the latter passage, does the justifying of wisdom denote making the doctrine of salvation righteous, which is so of itself; but both passages imply an ascription to God and to his doctrine of the praise which they deserve. Again, when Christ reprehends the Pharisees for “justifying themselves,” he does not mean that they attained righteousness by doing what was right, but that they ostentatiously endeavoured to gain the character of righteousness, of which they were destitute. This is better understood by persons who are skilled in the Hebrew language; which gives the appellation of sinners, not only to those who are conscious to themselves of sin, but to persons who fall under a sentence of condemnation. For Bathsheba, when she says, “I and my son Solomon shall be counted offenders,” or sinners, confesses no crime, but complains, that she and her son will be exposed to the disgrace of being numbered among condemned criminals. And it appears from the context, that this word, even in the translation, cannot be understood in any other than a relative sense, and that it does not denote the real character. But with respect to the present subject, where Paul says, “The Scripture foresaw that God would justify the heathen through faith,” what can we understand, but that God imputes righteousness through faith? Again, when he says that God “justifieth the ungodly which believeth in Jesus,” what can be the meaning, but that he delivers him by the blessing of faith from the condemnation deserved by his ungodliness? He speaks still more plainly in the conclusion, when he thus exclaims: “Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who also maketh intercession for us.” For it is just as if he had said, Who shall accuse them whom God absolves? Who shall condemn those for whom Christ intercedes? Justification, therefore, is no other than an acquittal from guilt of him who was accused, as though his innocence had been proved. Since God, therefore, justifies us through the mediation of Christ, he acquits us, not by an admission of our personal innocence, but by an imputation of righteousness; so that we, who are unrighteous in ourselves, are considered as righteous in Christ. This is the doctrine preached by Paul in the thirteenth chapter of the Acts: “Through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins; and by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.” We see that after remission of sins, this justification is mentioned, as if by way of explanation: we see clearly that it means an acquittal; that it is separated from the works of the law; that it is a mere favour of Christ; that it is apprehended by faith: we see, finally, the interposition of a satisfaction, when he says that we are justified from sins by Christ. Thus, when it is said, that the publican “went down to his house justified,” we cannot say that he obtained righteousness by any merit of works. The meaning therefore is, that after he had obtained the pardon of his sins, he was considered as righteous in the sight of God. He was righteous, therefore, not through any approbation of his works, but through God’s gracious absolution. Wherefore Ambrose beautifully styles confession of sins, a legitimate justification.

IV. Lakini tukiacha mabishano yote juu ya neno hilo, tukizingatia jambo lenyewe kama tunavyoelezwa, kila shaka litaondolewa. Kwa maana Paulo hakika anaeleza kuhesabiwa haki kama kukubaliwa, anaposema kwa Waefeso, “alituchagua tangu zamani, tuwe wanawe kwa Yesu Kristo, kwa kupenda kwa mapenzi yake, ili kuusifu utukufu wa neema yake, aliyotukirimia katika huyo Mpendwa.” Maana ya kifungu hiki ni sawa na pale mahali pengine tunaposemwa “kuhesabiwa haki bure kwa neema yake.” Lakini katika sura ya nne ya Warumi, kwanza anataja kuhesabiwa kwa haki, na mara anaonyesha kuwa inajumuisha msamaha wa dhambi. “Daudi,” asema, “anaeleza baraka ya mtu yule ambaye Mungu humhesabia haki pasipo matendo, akisema, Heri waliosamehewa makosa yao,” n.k. Hapo, kwa kweli, habishani juu ya tawi, bali juu ya kuhesabiwa haki kote. Pia analeta ufafanuzi wake uliotolewa na Daudi, anapotangaza kuwa wamebarikiwa wale wanaopokea msamaha wa bure wa dhambi zao; kutokana na hili inaonekana kwamba haki hii anayoizungumzia inapingana tu na hatia. Lakini kifungu kikubwa zaidi kuliko vyote juu ya jambo hili, ni pale anapotufundisha kwamba kusudi kuu la huduma ya Injili ni kwamba “tupatanishwe na Mungu,” kwa sababu anapenda kutupokea katika kibali chake kwa Kristo, “asiwahesabie makosa yao.” Msomaji achunguze kwa makini muktadha wote; maana anapoongeza mara baadaye, kwa njia ya maelezo, ili kueleza njia ya upatanisho, kwamba Kristo, “ambaye hakujua dhambi,” alifanywa “dhambi kwa ajili yetu,” bila shaka anamaanisha kwa neno “upatanisho,” si kitu kingine ila kuhesabiwa haki. Wala hapangekuwa na ukweli katika yale anayoyathibitisha mahali pengine, kwamba “tumefanywa wenye haki kwa utii wa Kristo,” isipokuwa tunahesabiwa kuwa wenye haki mbele za Mungu, ndani yake, na nje yetu wenyewe.IV. But leaving all contention about the term, if we attend to the thing itself, as it is described to us, every doubt will be removed. For Paul certainly describes justification as an acceptance, when he says to the Ephesians, “God hath predestinated us to the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted.” The meaning of this passage is the same as when in another place we are said to be “justified freely by his grace.” But in the fourth chapter to the Romans, he first mentions an imputation of righteousness, and immediately represents it as consisting in remission of sins. “David,” says he, “describeth the blessedness of the man unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven,” &c. He there, indeed, argues not concerning a branch, but the whole of justification. He also adduces the definition of it given by David, when he pronounces them to be blessed who receive the free forgiveness of their sins; whence it appears, that this righteousness of which he speaks is simply opposed to guilt. But the most decisive passage of all on this point, is where he teaches us that the grand object of the ministry of the gospel is, that we may “be reconciled to God,” because he is pleased to receive us into his favour through Christ, “not imputing” our “trespasses unto” us. Let the reader carefully examine the whole context; for when, by way of explanation, he just after adds, in order to describe the method of reconciliation, that Christ, “who knew no sin,” was “made sin for us,” he undoubtedly means by the term “reconciliation,” no other than justification. Nor would there be any truth in what he affirms in another place, that we are “made righteous by the obedience of Christ,” unless we are reputed righteous before God, in him, and out of ourselves.

[Sehemu za V–XII zimeachwa.][Sections V–XII omitted.]

XIII. Lakini kwa kuwa watu wengi wanafikiri haki kuwa imeundwa kwa imani na matendo, na tuthibitishe pia, kabla hatujaendelea, kwamba haki ya imani ni tofauti sana na ile ya matendo, hata moja ikithibitishwa, nyingine lazima ipinduliwe. Mtume anasema, “Nayahesabu yote kuwa hasara tu, ili nimpate Kristo, na kuonekana ndani yake, nisiwe na haki yangu mwenyewe iliyo ya sheria, bali ile ipatikanayo kwa imani ya Kristo, haki itokayo kwa Mungu kwa imani.” Hapa tunaona ulinganisho wa vinyume viwili, na dokezo kwamba haki yake mwenyewe lazima iachwe na yule anayetaka kupata haki ya Kristo. Kwa hiyo, mahali pengine, anaeleza hii kuwa ndiyo sababu ya uangamivu wa Wayahudi, kwamba, “wakitafuta kuimarisha haki yao wenyewe, hawakujitiisha kwa haki ya Mungu.” Ikiwa, kwa kuimarisha haki yetu wenyewe, tunaikataa haki ya Mungu, basi, ili kupata ya pili, ya kwanza lazima bila shaka iachwe kabisa. Anaeleza hisia hiyo hiyo anapothibitisha kwamba, “kujisifu kumeondolewa. Kwa sheria ipi? ya matendo? La; bali kwa sheria ya imani.” Kutokana na hili inafuata kwamba, maadamu inabaki chembe ndogo kabisa ya haki katika matendo yetu, tunabaki na sababu fulani ya kujisifu. Lakini ikiwa imani inaondoa kujisifu kote, haki ya matendo haiwezi kwa njia yoyote kuunganishwa na haki ya imani. Kwa kusudi hili anasema waziwazi katika sura ya nne ya Warumi, hata hakubaki nafasi ya pingamizi wala ukwepaji. “Ikiwa Abrahamu (asema) alihesabiwa haki kwa matendo, anacho cha kujisifia.” Anaongeza, “lakini” hana “cha” kujisifia “mbele za Mungu.” Inafuata, kwa hiyo, kwamba hakuhesabiwa haki kwa matendo. Kisha analeta hoja nyingine kutoka vinyume viwili. “Mtu atendaye kazi, ijara yake haihesabiwi kuwa ni neema, bali ni stahili.” Lakini haki inahusishwa na imani kwa neema. Kwa hiyo haitokani na stahili ya matendo. Kwaheri, basi, wazo la kubuni la wale wanaofikiri haki iliyochanganywa ya imani na matendo.XIII. But as many persons imagine righteousness to be composed of faith and works, let us also prove, before we proceed, that the righteousness of faith is so exceedingly different from that of works, that if one be established, the other must necessarily be subverted. The apostle says, “I count all things but dung, that I may win Christ, and be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith.” Here we see a comparison of two opposites, and an implication that his own righteousness must be forsaken by him who wishes to obtain the righteousness of Christ. Wherefore, in another place, he states this to have been the cause of the ruin of the Jews, that, “going about to establish their own righteousness, they have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.” If, by establishing our own righteousness, we reject the righteousness of God, then, in order to obtain the latter, the former must doubtless be entirely renounced. He conveys the same sentiment when he asserts, that “boasting is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay; but by the law of faith.” Whence it follows, that as long as there remains the least particle of righteousness in our works, we retain some cause for boasting. But if faith excludes all boasting, the righteousness of works can by no means be associated with the righteousness of faith. To this purpose he speaks so clearly in the fourth chapter to the Romans, as to leave no room for cavil or evasion. “If Abraham (says he) were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory.” He adds, “but” he hath “not” whereof to glory “before God.” It follows, therefore, that he was not justified by works. Then he advances another argument from two opposites. “To him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.” But righteousness is attributed to faith through grace. Therefore it is not from the merit of works. Adieu, therefore, to the fanciful notion of those who imagine a righteousness compounded of faith and works.

XIV. Wasofisti, wanaojiburudisha na kujifurahisha kwa kupotosha Maandiko na mabishano ya bure, wanadhani wamepata kimbilio bora kuliko vyote, wanapoeleza matendo, katika vifungu hivi, kumaanisha yale ambayo wanadamu ambao bado hawajazaliwa upya hufanya bila neema ya Kristo, kwa juhudi tupu zisizosaidiwa za utashi wao huru; na kukana kwamba yanahusu matendo ya kiroho. Hivyo, kulingana nao, mtu anahesabiwa haki kwa imani na kwa matendo, ila tu matendo si yake mwenyewe kwa kweli, bali ni vipawa vya Kristo na matunda ya kuzaliwa upya. Maana wanasema kwamba Paulo alisema hivyo, ili tu Wayahudi, waliotegemea nguvu zao wenyewe, wahakikishwe upumbavu wao katika kujidai haki, ilhali inatolewa kwetu na Roho wa Kristo peke yake, si kwa jitihada yoyote ya kwetu kwa kweli. Lakini hawatambui kwamba, katika tofauti ya haki ya kisheria na ya kiinjili, ambayo Paulo anaileta mahali pengine, matendo yote yametengwa, kwa jina lolote yanayoweza kutofautishwa. Kwa maana anafundisha kwamba hii ndiyo haki ya sheria, kwamba yule aliyetimiza amri ya sheria atapata wokovu; lakini kwamba haki ya imani inakaa katika kuamini kwamba Kristo amekufa na amefufuka. Zaidi ya hayo, tutaona, tunavyoendelea, mahali pake, kwamba utakaso na haki ni baraka tofauti za Kristo. Kutokana na hili inafuata kwamba hata matendo ya kiroho hayahesabiwi, nguvu ya kuhesabu haki inapohusishwa na imani. Na tamko la Paulo, mahali pale pale palipotajwa, kwamba Abrahamu hana cha kujisifia mbele za Mungu, kwa kuwa hakuhesabiwa haki kwa matendo, halipaswi kudhibitiwa kwa mwonekano wowote wa kisheria au maonyesho ya nje ya fadhila, au kwa jitihada zozote za utashi huru; bali ingawa maisha ya baba huyo wa imani yalikuwa ya kiroho, na karibu ya kimalaika, hata hivyo matendo yake hayakuwa na stahili ya kutosha kumhesabia haki mbele za Mungu.XIV. The sophists, who amuse and delight themselves with perversion of the Scripture and vain cavils, think they have found a most excellent subterfuge, when they explain works, in these passages, to mean those which men yet unregenerate perform without the grace of Christ, merely through the unassisted efforts of their own free-will; and deny that they relate to spiritual works. Thus, according to them, a man is justified both by faith and by works, only the works are not properly his own, but the gifts of Christ and the fruits of regeneration. For they say that Paul spoke in this manner, only that the Jews, who relied on their own strength, might be convinced of their folly in arrogating righteousness to themselves, whereas it is conferred on us solely by the Spirit of Christ, not by any exertion properly our own. But they do not observe, that in the contrast of legal and evangelical righteousness, which Paul introduces in another place, all works are excluded, by what title soever they may be distinguished. For he teaches that this is the righteousness of the law, that he who has fulfilled the command of the law shall obtain salvation; but that the righteousness of faith consists in believing that Christ has died and is risen again. Besides, we shall see, as we proceed, in its proper place, that sanctification and righteousness are separate blessings of Christ. Whence it follows, that even spiritual works are not taken into the account, when the power of justifying is attributed to faith. And the assertion of Paul, in the place just cited, that Abraham has not whereof to glory before God, since he was not justified by works, ought not to be restricted to any literal appearance or external display of virtue, or to any efforts of free-will; but though the life of the patriarch was spiritual, and almost angelic, yet his works did not possess sufficient merit to justify him before God.

XV. Makosa ya wanashule, wanaochanganya maandalizi yao, ni mazito zaidi kiasi fulani; lakini wanawatia wasio na ujuzi na wasiojihadhari fundisho lililoharibika vilevile, huku wakifunika, kwa kisingizio cha Roho na neema, rehema ya Mungu, ambayo peke yake inaweza kutuliza hofu za dhamiri. Tunakiri, kwa kweli, pamoja na Paulo, kwamba “watendao sheria watahesabiwa haki mbele za Mungu;” lakini kwa kuwa sisi sote tuko mbali na kuwa watekelezaji wa sheria, tunahitimisha kwamba matendo yale ambayo yangepaswa kutusaidia hasa katika kuhesabiwa haki, hayatupatii msaada, kwa sababu tunayakosa. Kuhusu wafuasi wa kawaida wa Papa, au wanashule, wanadanganyika maradufu katika jambo hili; wote wawili katika kuiita imani uhakika wa dhamiri katika kutarajia thawabu ya stahili kutoka kwa Mungu, na katika kueleza neema ya Mungu kuwa si kuhesabiwa kwa haki ya bure, bali Roho anayesaidia kufuata utakatifu. Wanasoma kwa mtume, “Kwa maana yeye amwendeaye Mungu hana budi kuamini kwamba yuko, na kwamba huwapa thawabu wale wanaomtafuta kwa bidii.” Lakini hawazingatii namna ya kumtafuta. Na kwamba wanakosea maana ya neno “neema,” ni dhahiri kutokana na maandishi yao. Maana Lombardo anaeleza kuhesabiwa haki na Kristo kama kunatolewa kwetu kwa njia mbili. Anasema, “Kifo cha Kristo kinatuhesabia haki, kwanza, kwa sababu kinaamsha upendo mioyoni mwetu, ambao kwao tunafanywa kweli wenye haki; pili, kwa sababu kinaharibu dhambi, ambayo kwayo Ibilisi alituweka mateka, hata sasa haiwezi kutuhukumu.” Tunaona jinsi anavyoona neema ya Mungu katika kuhesabiwa haki kuwa inakaa katika kuelekezwa kwetu kwenye matendo mema kwa neema ya Roho Mtakatifu. Alitaka, kwa kweli, kufuata maoni ya Augustino; lakini anamfuata kwa umbali mkubwa, na hata anapotoka sana na kumwiga kwa karibu; kwa kuwa chochote anachokiona kimeelezwa wazi naye, anakitia giza, na chochote anachokiona safi ndani yake, anakiharibu. Shule zimekuwa zikikimbilia makosa mabaya zaidi na zaidi, hadi hatimaye zimejitumbukiza katika aina ya Upelagio. Wala, kwa kweli, maoni ya Augustino, au angalau namna yake ya kujieleza, haipaswi kukubaliwa kabisa. Maana ingawa kwa uzuri anamnyang’anya mwanadamu sifa yote ya haki, na kuihusisha yote na neema ya Mungu, hata hivyo anaihusisha neema na utakaso, ambao ndani yake tunazaliwa upya na Roho kwa uzima mpya.XV. The errors of the schoolmen, who mingle their preparations, are rather more gross; but they instil into the simple and incautious a doctrine equally corrupt, while under the pretext of the Spirit and of grace, they conceal the mercy of God, which alone can calm the terrors of the conscience. We confess, indeed, with Paul, that “the doers of the law are justified before God;” but since we are all far from being observers of the law, we conclude, that those works which should be principally available to justification, afford us no assistance, because we are destitute of them. With respect to the common Papists, or schoolmen, they are in this matter doubly deceived; both in denominating faith a certainty of conscience in expecting from God a reward of merit, and in explaining the grace of God to be, not an imputation of gratuitous righteousness, but the Spirit assisting to the pursuit of holiness. They read in the apostle, “He that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.” But they do not consider the manner of seeking him. And that they mistake the sense of the word “grace,” is evident from their writings. For Lombard represents justification by Christ as given us in two ways. He says, “The death of Christ justifies us, first, because it excites charity in our hearts, by which we are made actually righteous; secondly, because it destroys sin, by which the devil held us in captivity, so that now it cannot condemn us.” We see how he considers the grace of God in justification to consist in our being directed to good works by the grace of the Holy Spirit. He wished, indeed, to follow the opinion of Augustine; but he follows him at a great distance, and even deviates considerably from a close imitation of him; for whatever he finds clearly stated by him, he obscures, and whatever he finds pure in him, he corrupts. The schools have always been running into worse and worse errors, till at length they have precipitated themselves into a kind of Pelagianism. Nor, indeed, is the opinion of Augustine, or at least his manner of expression, to be altogether admitted. For though he excellently despoils man of all the praise of righteousness, and ascribes the whole to the grace of God, yet he refers grace to sanctification, in which we are regenerated by the Spirit to newness of life.

XVI. Maandiko, yanaposema juu ya haki ya imani, yanatuongoza kwa jambo tofauti sana. Yanatufundisha kwamba, tukigeuzwa kutoka kutafakari matendo yetu wenyewe, hatupaswi kuangalia kitu ila rehema ya Mungu na ukamilifu wa Kristo. Maana yanasema huu ndio mpangilio wa kuhesabiwa haki; kwamba tangu mwanzo Mungu anaona vema kumkumbatia mwenye dhambi kwa wema wake safi wa bure, bila kuona ndani yake kitu cha kuamsha rehema ila taabu yake; (kwa kuwa Mungu anamwona amekosa kabisa matendo mema yote;) akitoa kutoka kwake mwenyewe sababu ya kumbariki, ili amgusie mwenye dhambi mwenyewe hisia ya wema wake mkuu, ambaye, akipoteza kujiamini kote katika matendo yake mwenyewe, anategemeza wokovu wake wote juu ya rehema ya Mungu. Hii ndiyo hisia ya imani, ambayo kwayo mwenye dhambi hufikia kufurahia wokovu wake, anapojua kutoka fundisho la Injili kwamba amepatanishwa na Mungu; kwamba, baada ya kupata msamaha wa dhambi, amehesabiwa haki kwa kuingilia kati kwa haki ya Kristo; na ingawa amezaliwa upya na Roho wa Mungu, anafikiri juu ya haki ya milele iliyowekewa akiba kwa ajili yake, si katika matendo mema anayojitoa kwayo, bali katika haki ya Kristo peke yake. Mambo haya yote yatakapochunguzwa moja moja, yatatoa maelezo wazi ya maoni yetu. Hata hivyo, yatapangwa vizuri zaidi kwa mpangilio tofauti na ule yalioletwa. Lakini ni jambo dogo, mradi yameunganishwa kwa namna hiyo hata tuwe na mada nzima kuelezwa vizuri na kuthibitishwa vyema.XVI. The Scripture, when speaking of the righteousness of faith, leads us to something very different. It teaches us, that being diverted from the contemplation of our own works, we should regard nothing but the mercy of God and the perfection of Christ. For it states this to be the order of justification; that from the beginning God deigns to embrace sinful man with his pure and gratuitous goodness, contemplating nothing in him to excite mercy, but his misery; (for God beholds him utterly destitute of all good works;) deriving from himself the motive for blessing him, that he may affect the sinner himself with a sense of his supreme goodness, who, losing all confidence in his own works, rests the whole of his salvation on the Divine mercy. This is the sentiment of faith, by which the sinner comes to the enjoyment of his salvation, when he knows from the doctrine of the gospel that he is reconciled to God; that having obtained remission of sins, he is justified by the intervention of the righteousness of Christ; and though regenerated by the Spirit of God, he thinks on everlasting righteousness reserved for him, not in the good works to which he devotes himself, but solely in the righteousness of Christ. When all these things shall have been particularly examined, they will afford a perspicuous explication of our opinion. They will, however, be better digested in a different order from that in which they have been proposed. But it is of little importance, provided they are so connected with each other, that we may have the whole subject rightly stated and well confirmed.

XVII. Hapa inafaa kukumbusha uhusiano tuliousema hapo awali kati ya imani na injili; kwa kuwa sababu ya kusemwa kwamba imani inahesabu haki, ni kwamba inapokea na kukumbatia haki inayotolewa katika injili. Lakini kutolewa kwake na injili kunaondoa kabisa kila fikira ya matendo. Paulo anaonyesha hili wazi mno katika matukio mbalimbali; na hasa katika vifungu viwili. Katika Waraka wake kwa Warumi, akilinganisha sheria na injili, anasema, “Musa anaandika kuhusu haki itokanayo na sheria, kwamba mtu afanyaye hayo ataishi kwayo. Lakini haki itokayo kwa imani inasema hivi: Ukiungama kwa kinywa chako, Yesu ni Bwana, na kuamini moyoni mwako kwamba Mungu alimfufua katika wafu, utaokoka.” Je, unaona jinsi anavyotofautisha sheria na injili, kwamba ya kwanza inahusisha haki na matendo, lakini ya pili inaitoa bure, bila msaada wa matendo? Ni kifungu cha ajabu, na kinaweza kutusaidia kutoka katika wingi wa ugumu, tukielewa kwamba haki tunayopewa na injili iko huru na masharti yote ya kisheria. Hii ndiyo sababu anayopinga kwa nguvu mara zaidi ya moja ahadi dhidi ya sheria. “Maana kama urithi ni wa sheria, si wa ahadi tena;” na zaidi katika sura hiyo hiyo kwa kusudi hilo hilo. Ni hakika kwamba sheria nayo ina ahadi zake. Kwa hiyo, isipokuwa tukiri kwamba ulinganisho huo si sahihi, lazima kuwe na kitu tofauti na cha pekee katika ahadi za injili. Sasa, kitu hicho kinaweza kuwa nini, ila kwamba ni za bure na zinategemea rehema ya Mungu peke yake, ilhali ahadi za sheria zinategemea sharti la matendo? Wala mtu asipinge kwamba ni haki tu ile ambayo wanadamu wangeitwika Mungu kutokana na nguvu zao za asili na utashi wao huru ndiyo inayokataliwa; kwa kuwa Paulo anafundisha kama kweli ya ulimwengu mzima kwamba maagizo ya sheria hayafai, kwa sababu, si miongoni mwa watu wa kawaida tu, bali hata miongoni mwa walio bora kabisa, hakuna hata mmoja awezaye kuyatimiza. Upendo hakika ndio tawi kuu la sheria: Roho wa Mungu anapotuumba kwake, kwa nini haufanyi sehemu yoyote ya haki yetu, ila kwa sababu hata kwa watakatifu hauna ukamilifu, na kwa hiyo wenyewe haustahili thawabu?XVII. Here it is proper to recall to remembrance the relation we have before stated between faith and the gospel; since the reason why faith is said to justify, is, that it receives and embraces the righteousness offered in the gospel. But its being offered by the gospel absolutely excludes all consideration of works. This Paul very clearly demonstrates on various occasions; and particularly in two passages. In his Epistle to the Romans, contrasting the law and the gospel, he says, “Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, that the man which doeth those things shall live by them. But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise: That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.” Do you perceive how he thus discriminates between the law and the gospel, that the former attributes righteousness to works, but the latter bestows it freely, without the assistance of works? It is a remarkable passage, and may serve to extricate us from a multitude of difficulties, if we understand that the righteousness which is given us by the gospel is free from all legal conditions. This is the reason why he more than once strongly opposes the promise to the law. “If the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise;” and more in the same chapter to the same purpose. It is certain that the law also has its promises. Wherefore, unless we will confess the comparison to be improper, there must be something distinct and different in the promises of the gospel. Now, what can that be, but that they are gratuitous and solely dependent on the Divine mercy, whilst the promises of the law depend on the condition of works? Nor let any one object, that it is only the righteousness which men would obtrude on God from their own natural powers and free-will that is rejected; since Paul teaches it as a universal truth, that the precepts of the law are unprofitable, because, not only among the vulgar, but even among the very best of men, there is not one who can fulfil them. Love is certainly the principal branch of the law: when the Spirit of God forms us to it, why does it not constitute any part of our righteousness, but because even in the saints it is imperfect, and therefore of itself deserves no reward?

XVIII. Kifungu kingine ni hiki: “Kwamba hakuna mtu ahesabiwaye haki mbele za Mungu kwa sheria, ni dhahiri; kwa maana, Mwenye haki ataishi kwa imani. Na sheria si ya imani; bali, Mtu atendaye hayo ataishi katika hayo.” Hoja hii ingewezaje kuungwa mkono, isipokuwa ni hakika kwamba matendo hayaingii katika hesabu ya imani, bali yatengwe nayo kabisa? Sheria, asema, ni tofauti na imani. Kwa nini? Kwa sababu matendo yanahitajika kwa haki ya sheria. Inafuata, kwa hiyo, kwamba matendo hayahitajiki kwa haki ya imani. Kutokana na kauli hii inaonekana kwamba wale wanaohesabiwa haki kwa imani, wanahesabiwa haki bila stahili ya matendo, na zaidi ya stahili ya matendo; kwa maana imani inapokea haki ile ambayo injili inaitoa; na injili hutofautiana na sheria katika jambo hili, kwamba haiwekei haki kwa matendo, bali huiweka kabisa juu ya rehema ya Mungu. Anabishana kwa namna hiyo hiyo kwa Warumi kwamba “Abrahamu hakuwa na cha kujisifia; kwa maana alimwamini Mungu, ikahesabiwa kwake kuwa haki;” na kwa njia ya uthibitisho anaongeza kwamba nafasi ya haki ya imani ipo wakati hakuna matendo yanayostahili thawabu yoyote. Anatuambia kwamba mahali penye matendo, hupokea thawabu “kama deni,” lakini kile kinachotolewa kwa imani ni “kwa neema;” kwa maana huu ndio maana wazi ya lugha anayoitumia pale. Anapoongeza, kidogo baadaye, “Kwa hiyo ni kwa imani” kwamba tunapata urithi, ili “iwe kwa neema,” anahitimisha kwamba urithi ni wa bure, kwa sababu unapokelewa kwa imani: na kwa nini hivyo, ila kwa sababu imani, bila msaada wowote wa matendo, inategemea kabisa rehema ya Mungu? Na kwa maana hiyo hiyo bila shaka anatufundisha mahali pengine kwamba “haki ya Mungu pasipo sheria imedhihirishwa, ikishuhudiwa na torati na manabii;” kwa sababu, kwa kuitenga sheria, anakana kwamba haki inasaidiwa na matendo, au kwamba tunaipata kwa kutenda, lakini anathibitisha kwamba tunakuja mikono mitupu ili kuipokea.XVIII. The other passage is as follows: “That no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident; for, The just shall live by faith. And the law is not of faith; but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.” How could this argument be supported, unless it were certain that works do not come into the account of faith, but are to be entirely separated from it? The law, he says, differs from faith. Why? Because works are required to the righteousness of the law. It follows, therefore, that works are not required to the righteousness of faith. From this statement it appears, that they who are justified by faith, are justified without the merit of works, and beyond the merit of works; for faith receives that righteousness which the gospel bestows; and the gospel differs from the law in this respect, that it does not confine righteousness to works, but rests it entirely on the mercy of God. He argues in a similar manner to the Romans, that “Abraham had not whereof to glory; for he believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness;” and by way of confirmation he subjoins, that then there is room for the righteousness of faith when there are no works which merit any reward. He tells us, that where there are works, they receive a reward “of debt,” but that what is given to faith is “of grace;” for this is the clear import of the language which he there uses. When he adds, a little after, “Therefore it is of faith” that we obtain the inheritance, in order “that it might be by grace,” he infers that the inheritance is gratuitous, because it is received by faith: and why is this, but because faith, without any assistance of works, depends wholly on the Divine mercy? And in the same sense undoubtedly he elsewhere teaches us, that “the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;” because, by excluding the law, he denies that righteousness is assisted by works, or that we obtain it by working, but asserts that we come empty in order to receive it.

XIX. Msomaji sasa atagundua kwa haki gani wasofisti wa leo wanapinga mafundisho yetu, tunaposema kwamba mtu anahesabiwa haki kwa imani peke yake. Kwamba mtu anahesabiwa haki kwa imani, hawakatai, kwa sababu Maandiko hulitangaza mara nyingi; lakini kwa kuwa hapasemwi popote waziwazi kwamba ni kwa imani peke yake, hawawezi kuvumilia nyongeza hii. Lakini watajibu nini kwa maneno haya ya Paulo, anaposhindana kwamba “haki si ya imani isipokuwa iwe ya bure?” Kitu cha bure kinawezaje kukaa pamoja na matendo? Na kwa mabishano gani watakwepa anachothibitisha mahali pengine, kwamba katika injili “haki ya Mungu hufunuliwa?” Ikiwa haki inafunuliwa katika injili, hakika si ya kupunguzwa na ya sehemu, bali kamili na timilifu. Sheria, kwa hiyo, haina sehemu ndani yake. Na kuhusu neno hili la kutenga, peke yake, wanategemea kukwepa ambako si kwa uongo tu, bali ni kwa kuchekesha waziwazi. Maana je, yule anayekana kila kitu kwa matendo hahusishi kila kitu kwa imani peke yake kabisa? Maneno haya ya Paulo yanamaanisha nini? “Haki imedhihirishwa pasipo sheria,” “tukihesabiwa haki bure kwa neema yake,” “kuhesabiwa haki pasipo matendo ya sheria.” Hapa wana kimbilio la ujanja, ambalo, ingawa si ubunifu wao wenyewe, bali limekopwa kutoka kwa Origeni na baadhi ya wa kale, hata hivyo ni la kipuuzi kabisa. Wanajifanya kwamba matendo yanayotengwa ni matendo ya kiibada ya sheria, si matendo ya kimaadili. Wamefanya maendeleo kiasi hicho kwa mabishano yao yasiyokoma, hata wamesahau misingi ya kwanza ya mantiki. Je, wanadhani mtume alikuwa kichaa, alipoleta vifungu hivi kuthibitisha fundisho lake? “Mtu atendaye hayo ataishi kwayo;” na “Amelaaniwa kila mtu asiyedumu katika mambo yote yaliyoandikwa katika kitabu cha torati, ayatende.” Wakiwa na akili timamu, hawatasema kwamba uzima uliahidiwa kwa wanaoshika taratibu, na laana kutangazwa juu ya wavunjaji wake tu. Ikiwa mahali hapa panapaswa kueleweka kuhusu sheria ya maadili, hakuna shaka kwamba matendo ya kimaadili pia yametengwa kutoka uwezo wa kuhesabu haki. Kwa kusudi hilo hilo ni hoja hizi anazozitumia: “Kwa maana kwa sheria ni maarifa ya dhambi;” kwa hiyo si haki. “Kwa sababu sheria hufanya ghadhabu,” kwa hiyo si haki. Kwa kuwa sheria haiwezi kuhakikishia dhamiri zetu, haiwezi pia kutoa haki. Kwa kuwa imani inahesabiwa kuwa haki, kwa hiyo haki si thawabu ya matendo, bali inatolewa bure. Kwa kuwa tunahesabiwa haki kwa imani, kujisifu kumezuiwa. “Kama ingalitolewa sheria iwezayo kuhuisha, hakika haki ingalikuwa kwa sheria. Lakini Maandiko yamevifungia vitu vyote chini ya dhambi, ili ahadi itokayo katika imani ya Yesu Kristo ipewe wale waaminio.” Na wajifanye bure, wakithubutu, kwamba haya yanatumika kwa taratibu, si kwa maadili; lakini hata watoto wangekataa ufidhuli huo uliokithiri. Kwa hiyo tunaweza kuwa na hakika kwamba, uwezo wa kuhesabu haki unapokataliwa kwa sheria, sheria nzima imejumuishwa.XIX. The reader will now discover, with what justice the sophists of the present day cavil at our doctrine, when we say that a man is justified by faith only. That a man is justified by faith, they do not deny, because the Scripture so often declares it; but since it is nowhere expressly said to be by faith only, they cannot bear this addition to be made. But what reply will they give to these words of Paul, where he contends that “righteousness is not of faith unless it be gratuitous?” How can any thing gratuitous consist with works? And by what cavils will they elude what he asserts in another place, that in the gospel “is the righteousness of God revealed?” If righteousness is revealed in the gospel, it is certainly not a mutilated and partial, but a complete and perfect one. The law, therefore, has no concern in it. And respecting this exclusive particle, only, they rest on an evasion which is not only false, but glaringly ridiculous. For does not he most completely attribute every thing to faith alone, who denies every thing to works? What is the meaning of these expressions of Paul? “Righteousness is manifested without the law,” “justified freely by his grace,” “justified without the deeds of the law.” Here they have an ingenious subterfuge, which, though it is not of their own invention, but borrowed from Origen and some of the ancients, is nevertheless very absurd. They pretend that the works excluded are the ceremonial works of the law, not the moral works. They have made such a proficiency by their perpetual disputations, that they have forgotten the first elements of logic. Do they suppose the apostle to have been insane, when he adduced these passages in proof of his doctrine? “The man that doeth them shall live in them;” and “Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.” If they be in their sober senses, they will not assert that life was promised to the observers of ceremonies, and the curse denounced merely on the transgressors of them. If these places are to be understood of the moral law, it is beyond a doubt, that moral works likewise are excluded from the power to justify. To the same purpose are these arguments which he uses: “For by the law is the knowledge of sin;” consequently not righteousness. “Because the law worketh wrath,” therefore not righteousness. Since the law cannot assure our consciences, neither can it confer righteousness. Since faith is counted for righteousness, consequently righteousness is not a reward of works, but is gratuitously bestowed. Since we are justified by faith, boasting is precluded. “If there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law. But the Scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.” Let them idly pretend, if they dare, that these are applicable to ceremonies, not to morals; but even children would explode such consummate impudence. We may therefore be assured, that when the power of justifying is denied to the law, the whole law is included.

XX. Mtu akishangaa kwa nini mtume hajiridhishi na kutaja tu matendo, bali anasema matendo ya sheria, sababu ni dhahiri. Kwa maana ingawa matendo yanaheshimiwa sana, thamani yake inatokana na kibali cha Mungu kuliko ubora wowote wa ndani yake. Maana nani anathubutu kujisifu mbele za Mungu kwa haki yoyote ya matendo, ila ile aliyoikubali? Nani anathubutu kudai thawabu yoyote kuwa inastahili kwa matendo, ila ile aliyoiahidi? Ni kwa fadhili ya Mungu, kwa hiyo, kwamba yanahesabiwa kustahili jina na thawabu ya haki; na hivyo yana thamani, tu yanapokusudiwa kama matendo ya utii kwa Mungu. Kwa hiyo mtume, mahali pengine, ili kuthibitisha kwamba Abrahamu hakuweza kuhesabiwa haki kwa matendo, anadai kwamba “sheria iliyokuja miaka mia nne na thelathini baadaye haiwezi kulifanya agano lililokwisha kuthibitishwa kuwa batili.” Watu wasio na ujuzi wangedhihaki hoja kama hiyo, kwa sababu huenda kulikuwa na matendo ya haki kabla ya kutangazwa kwa sheria; lakini kwa kujua kwamba matendo hayana thamani hiyo ya ndani, bila ushuhuda na kibali cha Mungu, amechukua kuwa ni hakika kwamba, kabla ya sheria, hayakuwa na uwezo wa kuhesabu haki. Tunajua kwa nini anataja waziwazi “matendo ya sheria,” anapokusudia kukana kuhesabiwa haki kwa matendo; ni kwa sababu hayo peke yake yanaweza kutoa nafasi ya mabishano. Hata hivyo, anayatenga pia matendo yote, bila kikomo, kama anaposema, “Daudi anaeleza baraka ya mtu yule ambaye Mungu humhesabia haki pasipo matendo.” Hawawezi, kwa hiyo, kwa ujanja wowote kutuzuia tusishike neno hili la jumla la kutenga. Ni bure pia kwamba wanashika ujanja mwingine wa kipuuzi, wakidai kwamba tunahesabiwa haki tu kwa “imani itendayo kazi kwa upendo;” kwa nia ya kuonyesha haki kama inayotegemea upendo. Tunakiri, kwa kweli, pamoja na Paulo, kwamba hakuna imani nyingine inayohesabu haki, ila ile “itendayo kazi kwa upendo;” lakini haipati uwezo wake wa kuhesabu haki kutokana na ufanisi wa upendo huo. Haihesabu haki kwa njia nyingine ila kwa kutuingiza katika kushiriki haki ya Kristo. Vinginevyo hoja ile iliyosisitizwa kwa nguvu na mtume isingekuwa na nguvu. “Mtu atendaye kazi,” asema, “ijara yake haihesabiwi kuwa ni neema, bali ni stahili. Bali yeye asiyetenda kazi, bali anamwamini yeye amhesabiaye haki asiye na utauwa, imani yake huhesabiwa kuwa haki.” Je, alikuwa na uwezo wa kusema kwa wazi zaidi kuliko kwa kuthibitisha kwamba hakuna haki ya imani, ila pale ambapo hakuna matendo yanayostahili thawabu yoyote; na kwamba imani inahesabiwa kuwa haki, tu wakati haki inapotolewa kwa neema isiyostahiliwa?XX. If any one should wonder why the apostle does not content himself with simply mentioning works, but says works of the law, the reason is obvious. For though works are so greatly esteemed, they derive their value from the Divine approbation rather than from any intrinsic excellence. For who can dare to boast to God of any righteousness of works, but what he has approved? Who can dare to claim any reward as due to them, but what he has promised? It is owing, therefore, to the Divine favour, that they are accounted worthy both of the title and of the reward of righteousness; and so they are valuable, only when they are intended as acts of obedience to God. Wherefore the apostle, in another place, in order to prove that Abraham could not be justified by works, alleges, that “the law was four hundred and thirty years after the covenant was confirmed.” Ignorant persons would ridicule such an argument, because there might have been righteous works before the promulgation of the law; but knowing that works have no such intrinsic worth, independently of the testimony and esteem of God, he has taken it for granted that, antecedently to the law, they had no power to justify. We know why he expressly mentions “the works of the law,” when he means to deny justification by works; it is because they alone can furnish any occasion of controversy. However, he likewise excludes all works, without any limitation, as when he says, “David describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works.” They cannot, therefore, by any subtleties prevent us from retaining this general exclusive particle. It is in vain, also, that they catch at another frivolous subtlety, alleging that we are justified only by that “faith which worketh by love;” with a view to represent righteousness as depending on love. We acknowledge, indeed, with Paul, that no other faith justifies, except that “which worketh by love;” but it does not derive its power to justify from the efficacy of that love. It justifies in no other way than as it introduces us into a participation of the righteousness of Christ. Otherwise there would be no force in the argument so strenuously urged by the apostle. “To him that worketh,” says he, “is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.” Was it possible for him to speak more plainly than by thus asserting, that there is no righteousness of faith, except where there are no works entitled to any reward; and that faith is imputed for righteousness, only when righteousness is conferred through unmerited grace?

XXI. Sasa, tuchunguze ukweli wa yaliyothibitishwa katika ufafanuzi, kwamba haki ya imani ni upatanisho na Mungu, unaojumuisha msamaha wa dhambi peke yake. Lazima tuurudie daima msingi huu—Kwamba ghadhabu ya Mungu inabaki juu ya wanadamu wote, maadamu wanaendelea kuwa wenye dhambi. Isaya ameeleza hili kwa uzuri kwa maneno haya: “Mkono wa Bwana haukupunguka hata usiweze kuokoa; wala sikio lake si zito hata lisiweze kusikia; lakini maovu yenu yametenga kati yenu na Mungu wenu, na dhambi zenu zimeuficha uso wake msiuone, hata asisikie.” Tunajulishwa kwamba dhambi hufanya mgawanyiko kati ya mwanadamu na Mungu, na kuugeuza uso wa Mungu mbali na mwenye dhambi. Wala haiwezi kuwa vinginevyo; kwa sababu haipatani na haki yake kuwa na ushirika wowote na dhambi. Kwa hiyo mtume anafundisha kwamba mwanadamu ni adui wa Mungu, mpaka apatanishwe naye kwa Kristo. Yule ambaye Bwana anampokea katika ushirika, kwa hiyo, husemwa kwamba anamhesabia haki; kwa sababu hawezi kumpokea mtu yeyote katika kibali, au katika ushirika naye, bila kumfanya kutoka mwenye dhambi kuwa mtu mwenye haki. Hili, tunaongeza, linatimizwa kwa msamaha wa dhambi. Maana kama wale ambao Bwana amewapatanisha naye wakihukumiwa kulingana na matendo yao, bado watapatikana kuwa kweli wenye dhambi; ambao, hata hivyo, lazima waachiliwe na kuwa huru kutoka dhambi. Inaonekana, basi, kwamba wale ambao Mungu anawapokea, wanafanywa wenye haki si kwa njia nyingine ila kwa kutakaswa kwa kusafishwa kutoka uchafu wao wote kwa msamaha wa dhambi zao; hata haki kama hiyo, kwa neno moja, inaweza kuitwa msamaha wa dhambi.XXI. Now, let us examine the truth of what has been asserted in the definition, that the righteousness of faith is a reconciliation with God, which consists solely in remission of sins. We must always return to this axiom—That the Divine wrath remains on all men, as long as they continue to be sinners. This Isaiah has beautifully expressed in the following words: “The Lord’s hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither is his ear heavy, that it cannot hear; but your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.” We are informed, that sin makes a division between man and God, and turns the Divine countenance away from the sinner. Nor can it be otherwise; because it is incompatible with his righteousness to have any communion with sin. Hence the apostle teaches, that man is an enemy to God, till he be reconciled to him through Christ. Whom, therefore, the Lord receives into fellowship, him he is said to justify; because he cannot receive any one into favour or into fellowship with himself, without making him from a sinner to be a righteous person. This, we add, is accomplished by the remission of sins. For if they, whom the Lord has reconciled to himself, be judged according to their works, they will still be found actually sinners; who, notwithstanding, must be absolved and free from sin. It appears, then, that those whom God receives, are made righteous no otherwise than as they are purified by being cleansed from all their defilements by the remission of their sins; so that such a righteousness may, in one word, be denominated a remission of sins.

XXII. Mambo haya yote mawili yamethibitishwa kikamilifu na lugha ya Paulo, ambayo nimekwisha kuinukuu. “Mungu alikuwa ndani ya Kristo, akiupatanisha ulimwengu na nafsi yake, asiwahesabie makosa yao; naye ametukabidhi neno la upatanisho.” Kisha anaongeza kiini cha huduma yake: “Yeye asiyejua dhambi alimfanya kuwa dhambi kwa ajili yetu; ili sisi tuwe haki ya Mungu ndani yake.” Maneno “haki” na “upatanisho” hapa anayatumia bila kutofautisha, kutufundisha kwamba yanajumuishana. Naye anaeleza njia ya kupata haki hii kuwa inakaa katika makosa yetu kutohesabiwa kwetu. Kwa hiyo hatuwezi tena kutilia shaka jinsi Mungu anavyohesabu haki, tunaposikia kwamba anatupatanisha naye kwa kutotuhesabia dhambi zetu. Hivyo, katika Waraka kwa Warumi, mtume anathibitisha kwamba “Mungu humhesabia mtu haki pasipo matendo,” kwa ushuhuda wa Daudi, anayetangaza, “Heri waliosamehewa makosa yao, na waliositiriwa dhambi zao. Heri mtu yule ambaye Bwana hatamhesabia dhambi.” Kwa “heri” katika kifungu hiki, bila shaka anamaanisha haki; kwa kuwa anaposema inakaa katika msamaha wa dhambi, hakuna sababu ya sisi kupokea ufafanuzi mwingine wowote. Kwa hiyo Zakaria, baba yake Yohana Mbatizaji, anaweka “elimu ya wokovu” katika “msamaha wa dhambi.” Na Paulo, akishika kanuni hiyo hiyo katika mahubiri aliyowahubiria watu wa Antiokia juu ya wokovu, anasemwa na Luka kwamba alihitimisha kwa njia ifuatayo: “Kwa mtu huyu mnahubiriwa msamaha wa dhambi; na kwa yeye kila aaminiye ameondolewa hatia ya mambo yote, ambayo hamkuweza kuondolewa hatia yake kwa sheria ya Musa.” Mtume huunganisha hivyo “msamaha wa dhambi” na “kuhesabiwa haki,” kuonyesha kwamba ni kitu kile kile; kutokana na hili anabishana kwa haki kwamba haki hii tunayopata kwa kibali cha Mungu inatolewa kwetu bure. Wala isidhaniwe kuwa usemi wa ajabu kwamba waumini wanahesabiwa haki mbele za Mungu, si kwa matendo yao, bali kwa kuwakubali kwake kwa neema; kwa kuwa unatokea mara nyingi katika Maandiko, na wakati mwingine pia kwa mababu wa kanisa. Augustino anasema, “Haki ya watakatifu, katika ulimwengu huu, inakaa katika msamaha wa dhambi zao kuliko katika ukamilifu wa fadhila zao.” Ambayo inalingana na usemi wa ajabu wa Bernardo: “Kutotenda dhambi hata kidogo, ni haki ya Mungu; lakini haki ya mwanadamu ni neema na rehema ya Mungu.” Alikuwa amesema hapo awali, “kwamba Kristo ni haki kwetu katika kuachiliwa, na kwa hiyo wale peke yao ni wenye haki ambao wamepata msamaha kwa rehema yake.”XXII. Both these points are fully established by the language of Paul, which I have already recited. “God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.” Then he adds the substance of his ministry: “He hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.” The terms “righteousness” and “reconciliation” are here used by him indiscriminately, to teach us that they are mutually comprehended in each other. And he states the manner of obtaining this righteousness to consist in our transgressions not being imputed to us. Wherefore we can no longer doubt how God justifies, when we hear that he reconciles us to himself by not imputing our sins to us. Thus, in the Epistle to the Romans, the apostle proves, that “God imputeth righteousness without works,” from the testimony of David, who declares, “Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.” By “blessedness,” in this passage, he undoubtedly means righteousness; for since he asserts it to consist in remission of sins, there is no reason for our adopting any other definition of it. Wherefore Zachariah, the father of John the Baptist, places “the knowledge of salvation” in “the remission of sins.” And Paul, observing the same rule in the sermon which he preached to the people of Antioch on the subject of salvation, is stated by Luke to have concluded in the following manner: “Through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins; and by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.” The apostle thus connects “forgiveness of sins” with “justification,” to show that they are identically the same; whence he justly argues, that this righteousness which we obtain through the favour of God is gratuitously bestowed upon us. Nor should it be thought a strange expression, that believers are justified before God, not by their works, but by his gracious acceptance of them; since it occurs so frequently in the Scripture, and sometimes also in the fathers. Augustine says, “The righteousness of the saints, in this world, consists rather in the remission of their sins than in the perfection of their virtues.” With which corresponds the remarkable observation of Bernard: “Not to sin at all, is the righteousness of God; but the righteousness of man is the Divine grace and mercy.” He had before asserted, “that Christ is righteousness to us in absolution, and therefore that they alone are righteous who have obtained pardon through his mercy.”

XXIII. Kutokana na hili pia ni dhahiri kwamba tunapata kuhesabiwa haki mbele za Mungu, kwa kuingilia kati kwa haki ya Kristo peke yake. Ambayo ni sawa na kusema kwamba mtu ni mwenye haki, si ndani yake mwenyewe, bali kwa sababu haki ya Kristo inashirikishwa kwake kwa kuhesabiwa; na hili ni jambo linalostahili kuzingatiwa kwa makini. Maana linaondoa wazo lile la bure, kwamba mtu anahesabiwa haki kwa imani, kwa sababu imani inampokea Roho wa Mungu ambaye kwake anafanywa mwenye haki; ambalo ni kinyume mno cha mafundisho yaliyotangulia, kuweza kupatanishwa nayo. Maana lazima awe amekosa haki yake mwenyewe yote yule anayefundishwa kutafuta haki nje yake. Hili limethibitishwa wazi kabisa na mtume, anaposema, “Yeye asiyejua dhambi alimfanya kuwa dhambi kwa ajili yetu; ili sisi tuwe haki ya Mungu ndani yake.” Tunaona kwamba haki yetu haiko ndani yetu, bali ndani ya Kristo; na kwamba haki yetu yote ya kuimiliki inategemea tu kuwa tumeshiriki Kristo; kwa maana tukimmiliki yeye, tunamiliki mali zake zote pamoja naye. Wala pingamizi halitokei kutoka kwa yale anayoyasema mahali pengine, kwamba “Mungu, akimtuma Mwanawe mwenyewe katika mfano wa mwili wa dhambi, na kwa ajili ya dhambi, alihukumu dhambi katika mwili; ili haki ya sheria itimizwe ndani yetu;” ambapo hakusudii kutimizwa kwingine ila kule tunakopata kwa kuhesabiwa. Maana Bwana Kristo anatushirikisha haki yake kwa namna hii, kwamba, kwa kurejea hukumu ya Mungu, anamimina uweza wake ndani yetu kwa njia ya ajabu sana. Kwamba mtume hakukusudia kingine kinaonekana wazi kutoka tamko jingine alilolitoa kabla tu: “Kama kwa kutotii kwa mtu mmoja wengi walifanywa wenye dhambi, vivyo hivyo kwa kutii kwa mmoja wengi watafanywa wenye haki.” Kuiweka haki yetu katika utii wa Kristo ni nini, ila kuthibitisha kwamba tunahesabiwa wenye haki tu kwa sababu utii wake unakubaliwa kwa ajili yetu kana kwamba ni wetu wenyewe? Kwa hiyo Ambrosi, kwangu, anaonekana kuwa ameonyesha kwa uzuri mkubwa haki hii katika baraka ya Yakobo; kwamba kama yeye, ambaye kwa sababu yake mwenyewe hakuwa na madai ya haki za mzaliwa wa kwanza, akiwa amefichwa katika vazi la ndugu yake, na kuvikwa vazi lake lililotoa harufu nzuri sana, alijipenyeza katika kibali cha baba yake, ili apokee baraka kwa faida yake mwenyewe, kwa jina la mwingine; vivyo hivyo sisi tunajificha chini ya usafi wa thamani wa Kristo ndugu yetu mkubwa, ili tupate ushuhuda wa haki machoni pa Mungu. Maneno ya Ambrosi ni, “Kwamba Isaka alinusa harufu ya mavazi, labda inaonyesha kwamba tunahesabiwa haki si kwa matendo, bali kwa imani; kwa kuwa udhaifu wa mwili ni kizuizi cha matendo, lakini mng’ao wa imani, unaostahili msamaha wa dhambi, unaficha kosa la vitendo vyetu.” Na hivyo kwa kweli ndivyo ilivyo; maana ili tuonekane mbele ya uso wa Mungu kwa wokovu, ni lazima tutiwe manukato ya harufu yake, na upotovu wetu wote ufichwe na kumezwa katika ukamilifu wake.XXIII. Hence, also, it is evident, that we obtain justification before God, solely by the intervention of the righteousness of Christ. Which is equivalent to saying, that a man is righteous, not in himself, but because the righteousness of Christ is communicated to him by imputation; and this is a point which deserves an attentive consideration. For it supersedes that idle notion, that a man is justified by faith, because faith receives the Spirit of God by whom he is made righteous; which is too repugnant to the foregoing doctrine, ever to be reconcilable to it. For he must certainly be destitute of all righteousness of his own, who is taught to seek a righteousness out of himself. This is most clearly asserted by the apostle, when he says, “He hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.” We see that our righteousness is not in ourselves, but in Christ; and that all our title to it rests solely on our being partakers of Christ; for in possessing him, we possess all his riches with him. Nor does any objection arise from what he states in another place, that “God, sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh; that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us;” where he intends no other fulfilment than what we obtain by imputation. For the Lord Christ so communicates his righteousness to us, that, with reference to the Divine judgment, he transfuses its virtue into us in a most wonderful manner. That the apostle intended no other, abundantly appears from another declaration, which he had made just before: “As by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.” What is placing our righteousness in the obedience of Christ, but asserting, that we are accounted righteous only because his obedience is accepted for us as if it were our own? Wherefore Ambrose appears to me to have very beautifully exemplified this righteousness in the benediction of Jacob; that as he, who had on his own account no claim to the privileges of primogeniture, being concealed in his brother’s habit, and invested with his garment, which diffused a most excellent odour, insinuated himself into the favour of his father, that he might receive the benediction to his own advantage, under the character of another; so we shelter ourselves under the precious purity of Christ our elder brother, that we may obtain the testimony of righteousness in the sight of God. The words of Ambrose are, “That Isaac smelled the odour of the garments, perhaps indicates, that we are justified not by works, but by faith; since the infirmity of the flesh is an impediment to works, but the brightness of faith, which merits the pardon of sin, conceals the error of our actions.” And such is indeed the real fact; for that we may appear before the face of God to salvation, it is necessary for us to be perfumed with his fragrance, and to have all our deformities concealed and absorbed in his perfection.

Kitabu cha III. Sura ya XII. Kuzingatia Kiti cha Hukumu cha Mungu Kunahitajika kwa Kusadikishwa kwa Dhati juu ya Kuhesabiwa Haki kwa Bure.Book III. Chapter XII. A Consideration of the Divine Tribunal, Necessary to a Serious Conviction of Gratuitous Justification.

Ingawa inaonekana, kutoka ushuhuda ulio wazi kabisa, kwamba mambo haya yote ni kweli kabisa, hatutagundua wazi jinsi yalivyo ya lazima, mpaka tuwe tumetazama kile ambacho kinapaswa kuwa msingi wa hoja hii yote. Kwanza, kwa hiyo, tunapaswa kutafakari kwamba hatushughulikii haki ya mahakama ya kibinadamu, bali ya kiti cha hukumu cha mbinguni; ili tusitumie kipimo chochote kidogo chetu wenyewe kukadiria unyofu wa mwenendo unaohitajika kuridhisha haki ya Mungu. Lakini ni ajabu, kwa jeuri na kiburi gani jambo hili huamuliwa kwa kawaida; na hata inaonekana kwamba hakuna watu wanaotupa hotuba za ujasiri au za kujivuna zaidi juu ya haki ya matendo kuliko wale wanaojulikana kuwa na hatia ya dhambi za wazi au wanaoshikwa na maovu ya siri. Hili linatokana na kutowahi kuwaza juu ya haki ya Mungu, ambayo hisia ndogo kabisa yake ingewazuia kuitendea kwa dharau hiyo. Na hakika inadharauliwa sana, isipokuwa ikiri kuwa kamilifu hata hakuna kinachoweza kukubalika kwake ila kilicho kamili kabisa na kisicho na doa, kama ambacho hakijapata wala hakitapata kamwe kuwezekana kupatikana katika mwanadamu aliyeanguka. Ni rahisi kwa mtu yeyote katika makao ya shule kujiruhusu kuwaza kwa bure juu ya stahili ya matendo ya kuwahesabia wanadamu haki; lakini anapokuja mbele za Mungu, lazima aage burudani hizi, kwa sababu huko shughuli hufanywa kwa uzito, na hapana mabishano ya kuchekesha ya maneno yanayofanywa. Kwa hiyo, uangalifu wetu lazima uelekezwe kwenye jambo hili, ikiwa tunataka kufanya uchunguzi wowote wenye manufaa juu ya haki ya kweli; jinsi tunavyoweza kumjibu Hakimu wa mbinguni, atakapotuita tutoe hesabu. Tumweke Hakimu huyo mbele ya macho yetu, si kulingana na mawazo ya hiari ya akili zetu, bali kulingana na maelezo aliyopewa katika Maandiko; ambayo yanamwonyesha kama yule ambaye mng’ao wake unafifisha nyota, ambaye uweza wake huyeyusha milima, ambaye hasira yake hutikisa dunia, ambaye hekima yake huwanasa wajanja katika hila zao wenyewe, ambaye usafi wake hufanya vitu vyote vionekane najisi, ambaye haki yake hata malaika hawawezi kuistahimili, ambaye hamwachilii mwenye hatia, ambaye kisasi chake, kinapowashwa mara moja, hupenya hata kuzimu ya jehanamu. Aketi, nasema, kwenye kiti cha hukumu, kuchunguza matendo ya wanadamu: nani atajitokeza bila hofu mbele ya kiti chake cha enzi? “Ni nani miongoni mwetu atakayekaa pamoja na moto ulao?” asema nabii. “Ni nani miongoni mwetu atakayekaa pamoja na mwako wa milele? Yeye aendaye kwa haki, na kusema kwa unyofu,” n.k. Sasa na aje mbele, yeyote atakayekuwa. Lakini jibu hili halimfanyi hata mmoja kutokea. Kwa maana, kinyume chake, tunasikia usemi huu wa kutisha, “Ee Bwana, ukihesabu maovu, Ee Bwana, ni nani atakayesimama?” Kwa kweli, wote lazima waangamie upesi, kama ilivyoandikwa mahali pengine, “Je! Mwanadamu mwenye kufa atakuwa mwenye haki kuliko Mungu? Mtu atakuwa safi kuliko Muumba wake? Tazama, hawatumainii watumishi wake; na malaika wake huwahesabia upumbavu; sembuse hao wakaao katika nyumba za udongo, ambazo misingi yake i mavumbini, wanaoangamizwa mbele ya nondo? Huharibiwa tangu asubuhi hata jioni.” Tena: “Tazama, hawatumainii watakatifu wake; naam, mbingu si safi machoni pake; sembuse mtu aliye mchukizo na mchafu, anywaye uovu kama maji!” Nakiri kwamba katika Kitabu cha Ayubu inatajwa haki iliyo kuu kuliko kushika sheria. Na itakuwa na faida kukumbuka tofauti hii; kwa sababu, ingawa mtu yeyote angeweza kuridhisha sheria, hata hapo asingeweza kustahimili uchunguzi wa haki ile inayopita ufahamu wote. Kwa hiyo, ingawa Ayubu anajua unyofu wake mwenyewe, hata hivyo amenyamaza kwa mshangao, anapoona kwamba Mungu hawezi kupendezwa hata na utakatifu wa malaika, kama angeingia katika uchunguzi mkali wa matendo yao. Kwa hiyo sasa nitaipita haki hiyo niliyoidokeza, kwa sababu haieleweki, na kuridhika kwa kusisitiza kwamba lazima tuwe wajinga kuliko mbumbumbu, kama, katika uchunguzi wa maisha yetu kwa kipimo cha sheria iliyoandikwa, hatutesekwi na hofu ya kutisha kwa sababu ya laana nyingi hivyo, ambazo Mungu amekusudia kutuamsha kwazo, na miongoni mwa nyingine hii ya jumla: “Amelaaniwa mtu yule asiyeyathibitisha maneno ya torati hii kuyafanya.” Kwa ufupi, mabishano haya yote hayatakuwa na maana wala faida, isipokuwa kila mtu ajionyeshe kama mhalifu mbele ya Hakimu wa mbinguni, na kwa hiari ajiangushe na kujinyenyekeza katika wasiwasi mkubwa juu ya kuachiliwa kwake.Though it appears, from the plainest testimonies, that all these things are strictly true, yet we shall not clearly discover how necessary they are, till we shall have taken a view of what ought to be the foundation of all this argument. In the first place, therefore, we should reflect that we are not treating of the righteousness of a human court, but of that of the heavenly tribunal; in order that we may not apply any diminutive standard of our own, to estimate the integrity of conduct required to satisfy the Divine justice. But it is wonderful, with what temerity and presumption this is commonly decided; and it is even observable, that no men give us more confident or pompous declamations concerning the righteousness of works, than those who are notoriously guilty of open sins or addicted to secret vices. This arises from their never thinking of the righteousness of God, the smallest sense of which would prevent them from treating it with such contempt. And certainly it is exceedingly undervalued, if it be not acknowledged to be so perfect that nothing can be acceptable to it but what is absolutely complete and immaculate, such as it never was, nor ever will be, possible to find in fallen man. It is easy for any one in the cloisters of the schools, to indulge himself in idle speculations on the merit of works to justify men; but when he comes into the presence of God, he must bid farewell to these amusements, for there the business is transacted with seriousness, and no ludicrous logomachy practised. To this point, then, must our attention be directed, if we wish to make any useful inquiry concerning true righteousness; how we can answer the celestial Judge, when he shall call us to an account. Let us place that Judge before our eyes, not according to the spontaneous imaginations of our minds, but according to the descriptions given of him in the Scripture; which represents him as one whose refulgence eclipses the stars, whose power melts the mountains, whose anger shakes the earth, whose wisdom takes the subtle in their own craftiness, whose purity makes all things appear polluted, whose righteousness even the angels are unable to bear, who acquits not the guilty, whose vengeance, when it is once kindled, penetrates even to the abyss of hell. Let him seat himself, I say, on the tribunal, to examine the actions of men: who will present himself fearless before his throne? “Who shall dwell with the devouring fire?” saith the prophet. “Who shall dwell with everlasting burnings? He that walketh righteously and speaketh uprightly,” &c. Now let him come forward, whoever he is. But this answer causes not one to appear. For, on the contrary, we hear this fearful speech, “If thou, Lord, shouldst mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand?” In truth, all must speedily perish, as it is written in another place, “Shall mortal man be more just than God? Shall a man be more pure than his Maker? Behold, he put no trust in his servants; and his angels he charged with folly; how much less in them that dwell in houses of clay, whose foundation is in the dust, which are crushed before the moth? They are destroyed from morning to evening.” Again: “Behold, he putteth no trust in his saints; yea, the heavens are not clean in his sight; how much more abominable and filthy is man, which drinketh iniquity like water?” I confess that in the Book of Job mention is made of a righteousness which is superior to the observance of the law. And it will be of use to remember this distinction; because, though any one could satisfy the law, he could not even then stand the scrutiny of that righteousness which exceeds all comprehension. Therefore, though Job is conscious of his own integrity, yet he is mute with astonishment, when he sees that God could not be pleased even with the sanctity of angels, if he were to enter into a strict examination of their works. I shall, therefore, now pass over that righteousness to which I have alluded, because it is incomprehensible, and content myself with asserting, that we must be worse than stupid, if, on an examination of our lives by the rule of the written law, we are not tormented with awful dread in consequence of so many maledictions, which God has designed to arouse us, and among the rest this general one: “Cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them.” In short, this whole controversy will be uninteresting and useless, unless every one present himself as a criminal before the celestial Judge, and voluntarily prostrate and humble himself in deep solicitude concerning his absolution.

[Sehemu za II–VIII zimeachwa.][Sections II–VIII omitted.]

Kitabu cha III. Sura ya XIII. Mambo Mawili Yanayopaswa Kuzingatiwa Katika Kuhesabiwa Haki kwa Bure.Book III. Chapter XIII. Two Things Necessary to Be Observed in Gratuitous Justification.

Hapa kuna mambo mawili ambayo hatuna budi kuyaangalia kwa makini sikuzote; kuuhifadhi utukufu wa Bwana bila kuharibika wala kupunguzwa, na kuhifadhi katika dhamiri zetu wenyewe utulivu wa amani na utulivu tulivu kuhusu hukumu ya Mungu. Tunaona jinsi mara nyingi na kwa bidii Maandiko yanavyotuhimiza kumtolea Mungu peke yake sifa, yanaposhughulikia kuhesabiwa haki. Na kwa kweli, mtume anatuhakikishia kwamba kusudi la Bwana katika kutupa haki ndani ya Kristo ni kudhihirisha haki yake mwenyewe. Asili ya udhihirisho huo anaiongeza mara moja: ni “ili yeye awe mwenye haki, tena amhesabuye haki yeye aliye na imani ya Yesu.” Haki ya Mungu, tunaona, haiangazi vya kutosha, isipokuwa yeye peke yake ahesabiwe mwenye haki, na kushirikisha neema ya kuhesabiwa haki kwa wasiostahili. Kwa sababu hii ni mapenzi yake “kila kinywa kizibwe, na ulimwengu wote uwe na hatia mbele za Mungu;” kwa sababu, maadamu mwanadamu ana kitu chochote cha kusema katika kujitetea mwenyewe, kinapunguza kitu fulani cha utukufu wa Mungu. Hivyo katika Ezekieli anatufundisha jinsi tunavyolitukuza jina lake kwa kukiri uovu wetu: “Mtazikumbuka njia zenu, (asema,) na matendo yenu yote, ambayo kwayo mmenajisika; nanyi mtajichukia machoni penu wenyewe kwa ajili ya maovu yenu yote mliyoyatenda. Nanyi mtajua ya kuwa mimi ndimi Bwana, nikiwatendea kwa ajili ya jina langu, si kwa kadiri ya njia zenu mbaya, wala kwa kadiri ya matendo yenu yaliyoharibika.” Ikiwa mambo haya yamo katika kumjua Mungu kwa kweli, kwamba, tukinyenyekezwa na fahamu ya uovu wetu, tumwone kuwa anatuhurumia kwa baraka tusizostahili, kwa nini tunajaribu, kwa madhara yetu makubwa, kuiba chembe ndogo kabisa ya sifa inayostahili wema wake wa bure? Vivyo hivyo Yeremia anapotangaza, “Mwenye hekima asijisifu kwa hekima yake, wala mwenye nguvu asijisifu kwa nguvu zake, wala tajiri asijisifu kwa utajiri wake; bali yeye anayejisifu ajisifu kwa Bwana;” je, hadokezi kwamba utukufu wa Mungu hupunguzwa kwa kiasi fulani, mtu yeyote akijisifu mwenyewe? Maneno haya yanatumiwa waziwazi na Paulo kwa matumizi haya, anaposema kwamba matawi yote ya wokovu wetu yamewekwa akiba kwa Kristo, ili tusijisifu isipokuwa katika Bwana. Maana anadokeza kwamba wale wanaodhani wana hata msingi mdogo kabisa wa kujisifu ndani yao wenyewe, wana hatia ya kuasi dhidi ya Mungu, na kutia giza utukufu wake.Here are two things to which we must always be particularly attentive; to maintain the glory of the Lord unimpaired and undiminished, and to preserve in our own consciences a placid composure and serene tranquillity with regard to the Divine judgment. We see how frequently and solicitously the Scripture exhorts us to render ascriptions of praise to God alone, when it treats of justification. And, indeed, the apostle assures us that the design of the Lord in conferring righteousness upon us in Christ, is to manifest his own righteousness. The nature of that manifestation he immediately subjoins: it is, “that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.” The righteousness of God, we see, is not sufficiently illustrious, unless he alone be esteemed righteous, and communicate the grace of justification to the unworthy. For this reason it is his will “that every mouth be stopped, and all the world become guilty before him;” because, as long as man has any thing to allege in his own defence, it detracts something from the glory of God. Thus in Ezekiel he teaches us how greatly we glorify his name by an acknowledgment of our iniquity: “Ye shall remember your ways, (saith he,) and all your doings, wherein ye have been defiled; and ye shall loathe yourselves in your own sight for all your evils that ye have committed. And ye shall know that I am the Lord, when I have wrought with you for my name’s sake, not according to your wicked ways, nor according to your corrupt doings.” If these things are contained in the true knowledge of God, that, humbled with a consciousness of our iniquity, we should consider him as indulging us with blessings of which we are unworthy, why do we attempt, to our own serious injury, to pilfer the smallest particle of the praise due to his gratuitous goodness? Thus also when Jeremiah proclaims, “Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, let not the rich man glory in his riches; but let him that glorieth glory in the Lord;” does he not suggest that the glory of God sustains some diminution, if any man glory in himself? To this use these words are clearly applied by Paul, when he states, that all the branches of our salvation are deposited with Christ, that we may not glory except in the Lord. For he intimates, that they who suppose themselves to have even the least ground for glorying in themselves, are guilty of rebelling against God, and obscuring his glory.

II. Kweli ni hii, basi, kwamba hatujisifu kwake kweli, mpaka tuwe tumeacha kabisa utukufu wetu wote. Kwa upande mwingine, hili linaweza kukubaliwa kama msingi wa kweli kwa wote, kwamba wale wanaojisifu wenyewe, wanajisifu kinyume cha Mungu. Maana Paulo ana maoni kwamba ulimwengu hauko “chini ya hukumu ya Mungu,” mpaka wanadamu wanyang’anywe kila msingi wa kujisifu. Kwa hiyo Isaya, anapotangaza kwamba “katika Bwana wazao wote wa Israeli watahesabiwa haki,” anaongeza pia, “na watajisifu;” kana kwamba alisema kwamba kusudi la Mungu katika kuwahesabia haki wateule lilikuwa kwamba wajisifu kwake yeye, na si kwa mwingine. Lakini jinsi tunavyopaswa kujisifu kwa Bwana, alikuwa ameeleza katika mstari uliotangulia: “Hakika mtu atasema, katika Bwana peke yake mna haki na nguvu.” Na tuzingatie kwamba kinachohitajika si ungamo rahisi, bali ungamo lililothibitishwa kwa kiapo; ili tusidhani kisingizio chochote cha kubuni cha unyenyekevu kinatosha. Hapa asiseme mtu kwamba hajisifu hata kidogo, anapoitambua haki yake mwenyewe bila majivuno; kwa kuwa maoni kama hayo hayawezi kuwapo bila kuzaa kujiamini, wala kujiamini bila kuambatana na kujisifu. Na tukumbuke, kwa hiyo, katika mabishano yote juu ya haki, kwamba lengo hili lazima litunzwe mbele ya macho, kwamba sifa yote yake ibaki kamilifu na isiyopunguzwa kwa Bwana; kwa sababu, kulingana na ushuhuda wa mtume, ametukirimia neema yake ili “aonyeshe haki yake; ili awe mwenye haki, tena amhesabuye haki yeye aliye na imani ya Yesu.” Kwa hiyo, mahali pengine, baada ya kutangaza kwamba Bwana ametupa wokovu ili kuonyesha “sifa ya utukufu wa neema yake,” akirudia, kama ilivyokuwa, hisia hiyo hiyo, anaongeza, “Maana kwa neema mmeokolewa kwa njia ya imani; wala hiyo haikutokana na nafsi zenu; ni kipawa cha Mungu; wala haikutokana na matendo, mtu awaye yote asije akajisifu.” Na Petro anapotuonya kwamba tumeitwa kwa tumaini la wokovu, “ili tuzitangaze fadhili (au sifa) zake yeye aliyewaita ninyi kutoka gizani mpaka nuru yake ya ajabu,” anamaanisha wazi kwamba sifa za Mungu peke yake zinapaswa kusikika masikioni mwa waumini, hata kuweka ukimya kamili juu ya kiburi chote cha mwili. Hitimisho la yote ni kwamba mwanadamu hawezi bila kufuru kujidai chembe ndogo ya haki, kwa sababu inapunguza na kudhoofisha utukufu wa haki ya Mungu kwa kiasi hicho.II. The truth, then, is, that we never truly glory in him, till we have entirely renounced all glory of our own. On the converse, this may be admitted as an axiom universally true, that they who glory in themselves, glory in opposition to God. For Paul is of opinion that the world is not “subject to the judgment of God,” till men are deprived of all foundation for glorying. Therefore Isaiah, when he announces, that “in the Lord shall all the seed of Israel be justified,” adds also, “and shall glory;” as though he had said, that the end of God in justifying the elect was, that they might glory in himself, and in no other. But how we should glory in the Lord, he had stated in the preceding verse: “Surely, shall one say, in the Lord have I righteousness and strength.” Let us observe, that what is required is not a simple confession, but a confession confirmed by an oath; that we may not suppose any fictitious pretence of humility to be sufficient. Here let no one plead that he does not glory at all, when without arrogance he recognizes his own righteousness; for such an opinion cannot exist without generating confidence, nor confidence without being attended with glorying. Let us remember, therefore, in the whole controversy concerning righteousness, that this end must be kept in view, that all the praise of it may remain perfect and undiminished with the Lord; because, according to the apostle’s testimony, he has bestowed his grace on us in order “to declare his righteousness; that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.” Wherefore, in another place, after having declared that the Lord has conferred salvation on us in order to display “the praise of the glory of his grace,” repeating, as it were, the same sentiment, he adds, “By grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God; not of works, lest any man should boast.” And when Peter admonishes us that we are called to the hope of salvation, “that we should show forth the praises (or virtues) of him who hath called us out of darkness into his marvellous light,” he evidently means that the praises of God alone should resound in the ears of believers, so as to impose total silence on all the presumption of the flesh. The conclusion of the whole is, that man cannot without sacrilege arrogate to himself the least particle of righteousness, because it is so much detracted and diminished from the glory of the righteousness of God.

III. Sasa, tukiuliza kwa njia gani dhamiri inaweza kupata amani mbele za Mungu, hatutapata nyingine ila kupokea haki ya bure kama kipawa chake cha bure. Na tukumbuke daima swali la Sulemani—“Ni nani awezaye kusema, Nimeusafisha moyo wangu, nimetakasika na dhambi yangu?” Ni hakika kwamba hakuna mtu asiyefunikwa na unajisi usio na kikomo. Mtu wa tabia kamilifu zaidi, basi, na ajiondoe katika dhamiri yake mwenyewe, na aingie katika uchunguzi wa matendo yake, na matokeo yatakuwa nini? Je, atahisi kuridhika kwa kiwango cha juu, kana kwamba kuna upatano kamili kati ya Mungu na yeye? au hatajeruhiwa badala yake kwa uchungu wa kutisha, anapoona ndani yake sababu nyingi za kuhukumiwa, ikiwa anahukumiwa kwa matendo yake? Dhamiri ikimtafakari Mungu, lazima ifurahie amani thabiti na hukumu yake, au izungukwe na vitisho vya jehanamu. Hatupati faida yoyote, kwa hiyo, katika majadiliano yetu juu ya jambo hili, isipokuwa tuthibitishe haki ambayo uthabiti wake utategemeza roho zetu chini ya uchunguzi wa hukumu ya Mungu. Roho zetu zitakapomiliki kile kitakachozifanya ziweze kuonekana kwa ujasiri mbele za Mungu, na kungoja na kupokea hukumu yake bila hofu yoyote, ndipo, na si kabla, tutakapoweza kuwa na hakika kwamba tumepata haki inayostahili jina hilo kweli. Si bila sababu, kwa hiyo, kwamba mada hii inasisitizwa sana na mtume, ambaye maneno yake ninayapendelea kuliko yangu: “Maana, ikiwa wale walio wa sheria ndio warithi, imani imekuwa bure, na ahadi imebatilika.” Kwanza anahitimisha kwamba imani inafutwa na kuondolewa, ikiwa ahadi ya haki inahusu stahili ya matendo yetu, au inategemea kushika kwetu sheria. Kwa kuwa hakuna mtu ambaye angeweza kamwe kuitegemea kwa usalama, kwa sababu hangeweza kamwe kujiamulia kwa uhakika kwamba ametimiza sheria, kwani kwa kweli hakuna mtu ambaye amewahi kuitimiza kikamilifu kwa matendo yake mwenyewe. Tusitafute mbali ushuhuda wa ukweli huu, kila mtu anaweza kuwa shahidi wake mwenyewe, atakayeingia bila upendeleo katika kujichunguza. Na kutokana na hili inaonekana katika mafichoni gani ya ndani na ya giza unafiki unazika akili za wanadamu, wanapojiruhusu kuwa na usalama mkubwa hivyo, na hawasiti kupinga kujipendeza kwao dhidi ya hukumu ya Mungu, kana kwamba wangezuia mwenendo wa kiti chake cha hukumu. Lakini waumini, wanaojichunguza kwa unyofu, wanasumbuliwa na kuhuzunishwa na wasiwasi wa aina tofauti kabisa. Akili za wanadamu wote, kwa hiyo, zinapaswa kuhisi kwanza kusita, kisha kukata tamaa, wakitafakari, kila mmoja kwa nafsi yake, ukubwa wa deni ambalo bado wanalibeba, na umbali wao mkubwa kutoka masharti waliyowekewa. Tazama, kujiamini kwao kumevunjika na kuzimwa tayari; kwa kuwa kuamini si kuyumba, kubadilikabadilika, kuvutwa huku na huko, kusita, kuwekwa katika mashaka, kuyumbayumba, na hatimaye kukata tamaa; bali ni kuiimarisha akili kwa kuridhika, uhakika, na usalama thabiti, na kuwa na mahali pa kusimama na kutulia.III. Now, if we inquire by what means the conscience can obtain peace before God, we shall find no other than our reception of gratuitous righteousness from his free gift. Let us always remember the inquiry of Solomon—“Who can say, I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin?” It is certain that there is no man who is not covered with infinite pollution. Let a man of the most perfect character, then, retire into his own conscience, and enter into a scrutiny of his actions, and what will be the result? Will he feel a high degree of satisfaction, as though there were the most entire agreement between God and him? or will he not rather be lacerated with terrible agonies, on perceiving in himself such ample cause for condemnation, if he be judged according to his works? If the conscience reflect on God, it must either enjoy a solid peace with his judgment, or be surrounded with the terrors of hell. We gain nothing, therefore, in our discussions of this point, unless we establish a righteousness, the stability of which will support our souls under the scrutiny of the Divine judgment. When our souls shall possess what will enable them to appear with boldness in the presence of God, and to await and receive his judgment without any fear, then, and not before, we may be assured that we have found a righteousness which truly deserves the name. It is not without reason, therefore, that this subject is so largely insisted on by the apostle, whose words I prefer to my own: “For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise is made of none effect.” He first infers, that faith is annulled and superseded, if the promise of righteousness respect the merit of our works, or depend on our observance of the law. For no man could ever securely rely on it, since he never would be able to determine with certainty for himself that he had fulfilled the law, as in fact no man ever does completely satisfy it by any works of his own. Not to seek far for testimonies of this fact, every individual may be his own witness of it, who will enter unprejudiced into an examination of himself. And hence it appears in what deep and dark recesses hypocrisy buries the minds of men, while they indulge themselves in such great security, and hesitate not to oppose their self-adulation to the judgment of God, as though they would stop the proceedings of his tribunal. But believers, who sincerely examine themselves, are troubled and distressed with a solicitude of a very different nature. The minds of men universally, therefore, ought to feel first hesitation, and then despair, while considering, every one for himself, the magnitude of the debt with which they are still oppressed, and their immense distance from the conditions prescribed to them. Behold their confidence already broken and extinguished; for to confide is not to fluctuate, to vary, to be hurried hither and thither, to hesitate, to be kept in suspense, to stagger, and finally to despair; but it is, to strengthen the mind with content, certainty, and solid security, and to have somewhat upon which to stand and to rest.

[Sehemu za IV–V zimeachwa.][Sections IV–V omitted.]