Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Loss of Grace · Book I: On Sin, Mortal and Venial
Chapter 7: The error of John Wyclif and John Calvin is refuted
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. V, De Amissione Gratiae et Statu Peccati, Book I. The Latin source text is public domain; this English rendering is released with the site. Scripture quotations follow Bellarmine's Vulgate citations, rendered in Douay-Rheims wording where he quotes exactly. Click “Show the Latin” for the original (raw OCR of the scan; scanning errors remain — the scan itself is the authority).
We have demonstrated thus far that there is some difference between sins, and that certain of them are rightly named deadly, certain venial. Now they must be refuted who admit that distinction, but deprave it by a perverse interpretation. And first present themselves John Wyclif and John Calvin, who (as we showed above) will have all the sins of the predestinated called venial, but all the sins of the reprobate mortal. Which judgment not only the Catholic Doctors, but even the Lutherans, confute by most firm reasoning from the examples of the Scriptures.
For assuredly Adam was predestinated, and now reigns in heaven with the blessed spirits; for among the heretics is numbered Tatian, who denied that Adam is saved — so Irenaeus, book 1, chapter 31, Tertullian in the book On the Prescription of Heretics, Epiphanius, heresy 46, and Augustine in the book On Heresies, chapter 25. And yet that the same Adam sinned deadly, and truly fell from the grace of God, no one has ever denied — since the Apostle says: by one man sin entered into this world, and by sin death, Romans 5; and since God had so openly threatened: in what day soever thou shalt eat of it, thou shalt die the death, Genesis 2 — which the holy Fathers teach is to be understood of the death not of the body only, but also of the soul: Ambrose, book On Paradise, chapter 9; Augustine, book 13 On the City of God, chapter 12; and Gregory, book 5, epistle 14 [al. 15]. Add too that Adam not only fell into the sin of deadly disobedience, but even lost faith — which Calvin judges cannot be lost. Hear Tertullian in the second book against Marcion: “Who will doubt to pronounce that very offense of Adam a heresy?” And below: “A right raw heretic was (Adam).” Hear St. Ambrose, in epistle 33 [al. 45] to his sister Marcellina: “Thou acknowledgest, Adam, that thou art naked, because thou hast lost the good garments of faith.” And book 7 on Luke he says that Adam was stripped of the garment of faith when first he sinned. Hear St. Augustine, book 14 On the City of God, chapter 17: “This, then, they came to know, which they would more happily have been ignorant of, if, believing God and obeying, they had not committed that which compelled them to experience what unbelief and disobedience would harm.” And book 1 against Julian, chapter 2 [al. 3], he proves the same by the testimony of St. Olympius, a Spanish bishop. Hear St. Prosper, in the response to the third doubt of the Genoese: “By believing the devil, Adam believed not God.” And below: “How should the faith lost in Adam be found in any of his sons, unless that same Spirit who works all in all should infuse it?” And below: “All therefore have lost what Adam lost. But he lost first faith — which we all, because we could lose it first, have first to receive.” Since therefore Adam, elect and predestinated, lost by sinning the faith once had, and was constituted guilty of eternal death, it is proved altogether false what Wyclif and Calvin, and before them Jovinian, asserted — that the sins of the predestinated cannot be deadly, above all if they have at some time had faith.
The second example is of the holy prophet David, whom no one can deny to have been predestinated, and so to be saved and holy, since the Lord says in the Gospel, Luke 13: when you shall see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God. For certainly, if all the Prophets will be in the kingdom of God, without doubt David will not be absent, who by excellence found the surname of Prophet. That the same was faithful and just before he slipped into the sin of adultery and murder is equally certain; for the Apostle Paul, Acts 13, speaks thus of him: he raised them up David to be king: to whom giving testimony, he said: I have found David, the son of Jesse, a man according to my own heart; and his Psalms openly indicate that David was full of faith and of the Holy Spirit. Further, that the same fell into mortal sins, and those most grave, and thereby shook out the Holy Spirit and fell from grace, can easily be proved. For first, David himself teaches this most openly in Psalm 50, where properly (as is agreed from the title) he bewails his adultery, and the murder committed on occasion of Bethsabee; where among other things he says: To thee only have I sinned, and have done evil before thee; and: Create a clean heart in me, O God: and renew a right spirit within my bowels. Nor assuredly would he ask that a clean heart be created in him, and a right spirit renewed, unless he believed that through sin he had lost the cleanness of heart and the rightness of spirit. And what is subjoined — and take not thy holy spirit from me — does not signify that in him sinning the Holy Spirit remained as indweller, who properly inhabits the just alone; but it signifies (Augustine witnessing) that the Spirit had begun again to be present to David, when he inspired him with penitence; and that therefore David, who was not ignorant of the gift of God, prayed of God that he would not take away that holy spirit stirring up in him the tears of penitence. And that David still awaited and asked reconciliation is clear from the words following: Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation. And again: To my hearing thou shalt give joy and gladness: and the bones that have been humbled shall rejoice. And: a contrite and humbled heart, O God, thou wilt not despise. To these come the testimonies of the Fathers. For St. Ambrose, in the book of the Apology of David, chapter 16 [al. 9], explaining that, “Deliver me from blood,” etc.: “It can be referred to the death of Urias, that, conscious of his commanded slaying, he asks pardon of so great an offense.” And below: “Desiring to be untied from these bonds, he prays for the divine help, that he may be cleansed from every stain of the perpetrated crime.” And below: “It is no wonder that he so gravely grieves that the sin of shedding innocent blood crept upon him; therefore he asked to be delivered from bloods, that is, from mortal sins.” By these words Ambrose teaches that David's adultery and murder were mortal sins, since he names them crimes, and bonds, and so great offenses, and expressly mortal sins. St. Augustine, in the tractate on Psalm 50 [al. 56], brings in David speaking thus: “Have mercy on me according to thy great mercy. Succor a grave wound according to thy great medicine. Grave is what I bear, but to the Almighty I flee. Of my so lethal wound I should despair, did I not find so great a physician.” And here thou seest David's sin named grave and lethal, and of such a kind that it could almost bring one to despair. St. Jerome, in the epistle to Oceanus on the death of Fabiola, describes the public penitence of David, such as is wont to be done in the Church for great crimes — whence he sufficiently indicates that David's sin was exceedingly grave. St. Gregory, book 22 of the Morals, chapter 13 [al. 15], writes that the sinner is like the dead Lazarus, who by the voice of the Lord is recalled to life; and bringing the example of David he says: “Whence the prophet David, coming to life again from that mass of so great a crime at the voice of the Lord, as it were came forth abroad, when, rebuked through Nathan, he accused what he had done.” From these things, then, it is manifest that David — predestinated, faithful, and just — fell into mortal sin, and again through penitence returned to the grace of the Lord; and hence that the judgment of Wyclif and Calvin is false, and even most openly false.
The third example is of the Apostle Peter, whom no one denies to have been predestinated, and now to be saved, holy, and blessed — since blessed John, at the end of his Gospel, rendered so bright a testimony to his blessed death. For when the Lord had said to Peter, when thou shalt be old… another shall gird thee, and lead thee whither thou wouldst not, the Evangelist subjoined: And this he said, signifying by what death he should glorify God. That the same Peter was faithful and just before he thrice denied the Lord, Christ himself is witness, who both in Matthew 16 called him blessed, and in John 13 said to him: He that is washed, needeth not but to wash his feet… And you are clean, but not all, etc. And that the same admitted a mortal sin, and that a most grave one, when at the voice of a maidservant he denied the Lord — and not only denied, but even confirmed the denial with an oath and with anathematizing — his tears and his penitence witness. For (as Matthew writes, chapter 26) after so great a crime committed he wept bitterly. The holy Fathers also witness this same thing everywhere; but, that we labor not in a matter clear, one Augustine will suffice in this place, who, tractate 66 on John, not only teaches this, but even contends that it is so, and that, the faith being kept safe, it cannot be said otherwise. Among other things he thus addresses Peter: “By fearing the death of thy flesh, thou wilt give death to thy soul; for as great a life as it is to confess Christ, so great a death is it to deny Christ.” And below: “In the soul of Peter there came to pass what he was offering in the body — yet not for the Lord, as he rashly presumed, did it go before, but otherwise than he thought; for before the death and resurrection of the Lord, he both died by denying and revived by weeping. But he died, who proudly presumed; and he revived, because He benignly looked upon him.” Behold how often Augustine repeats that Peter died in soul, and hence committed a mortal sin, when he denied Christ. And yet Calvin dares to say that the faithful predestinated cannot sin deadly.
To all these let there come a manifest reason drawn from the adversaries' own principles. That those actions of Adam, of David, of Peter were from their kind sins, no one can deny — unless the transgression of a special heavenly command, adultery, murder, the denial of Christ with execration and perjury, seem to someone not to be sins; and that those sins were committed by men knowing and willing, and so were voluntary, is beyond controversy. I ask, then, whether those sins could stand together with justifying faith in those men, Adam, David, Peter, or could not. For if they could not, they shook out justifying faith, and thereby were deadly — which is what we contend; nor can they themselves deny this, since by the common doctrine of the adversaries those are mortal sins which cannot stand with faith. But if Calvin say that those sins of Adam, of David, of Peter could stand with faith, it follows that men once justified can freely transgress the commandments of God, perpetrate adulteries and murders, deny Christ, with execration also and perjury added. For if these things remain in men once justified together with justifying faith itself, by that very fact they are not imputed by God, and are not so much venial and to-be-remitted as in fact condoned and dismissed, nor do they make one guilty of any penalty or punishment. And how absurd and pernicious this dogma is, everyone sees. To this point, then, the sum of the disputation is brought: that either Calvin is compelled to concede that faithful and predestinated men can sin deadly — and thereby that not all the sins of the predestinated, after faith once obtained, are venial; or he grants to the predestinated faithful — that is, the truly faithful — license to perpetrate adulteries, murders, perjuries, and other crimes of that kind with impunity and freely. And Calvin seems to choose this latter member. For although in the Antidote to the Council of Trent, session 6, canon 27, he wrote that where faith reigns there is no sin, yet at canon 28 he adds that the seed of faith — that is, true and living faith, but drowsing — remains with the gravest falls: “That some seed of faith remains in a man, though suffocated, even amid the gravest falls, I deny not; that, however little it be, I confess to be a particle of true faith — I add, even of living, since otherwise fruit could not arise from it. But since it appears not for a time, nor puts itself forth by the usual signs, it is held as though dead, as far as our sense goes.” And so, since he will have true and living faith remain in a man with the gravest falls, though it betray not itself outwardly, and since the adversaries have certainly persuaded themselves that faith justifies, and brings it about that no sins are imputed, it follows that Calvin believed that the gravest falls are not imputed to the faithful.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT VII. Refellitur error Joan. Wicleffi , et Joan. Calvini. Demonstravimus hactenus, esse discrimen aliquod inter peccata, et quaedam eorum lethalia, quaedam venialia recte nominari. Nunc ii refellendi sunt, qui distinctionem istam admittunt, sed perversa interpretatione depravant. Ac imprimis occurrunt Joan. Wicleffus et Joan. Calvinus , qui (ut supra ostendimus) peccata venialia dici volunt omnia peccata praedestinatorum, mortalia vero peccata omnia reproborum. Quam sen¬ tentiam non solum Catholici Doctores, sed etiam Lutherani ex Scripturarum exemplis firmissima ratione confutant. Nam profecto Adam praedestinatus erat, et nunc in coelo cum beatis spiritibus regnat. Nam inter hac- i'eticos numerant Tatianum, qui negabat Adamum salvum esset, Irenaeus lib. i. cap. 31, Tertullian. lib. de praescript. haeret., Epi- phanius haeres. 4G. et Augustinus in lib. de haeresibus, cap. 25. et tamen eumdem Ada- mum lethaliter peccasse, et vere a gratia Dei excidisse nemo unqnam negavit, cum Apostolus dicat : Per unum hominem pecca¬ tum in hunc mundum intravit, et per peccatum mors , Roman v. (1), et cum Deus tam aper¬ te comminatus esset : Quacumque die come¬ deris ex eo, morte morieris, Genes, ii. (2), quod de morte non solum corporis, sed etiam animae intelligendum esse docent sancti Patres, Ambrosius lib. de paradiso, c. 9, August. lib. xm. civ. cap. 12. et Gre¬ gor. lib. v. epist. 14. Adde etiam quod non solum lapsus est Adam in peccatum lethalis inobedientiae , sed etiam fidem amisit,- quam amitti non posse Calvinus existimat. Audi Tertullianum in secundo libro adversus Marcionem : « Quis dubitabit ipsum illud Adae delictum hacresim pronuntiare? n' Et infra: « Rudis admodum haereticus (Adam) fuit. » Audi sanctum Ambrosium in epist. 33. ad sororem Marcellinam : a Agnoscis Adam, esse te nu¬ dum, quia bona indumenta fidei prredidisti. » Et lib. vil. in Lucam, can. 47. dicit, Ada¬ mum exutum fuisse fidei vestimento, tum primum peccavit. Audi sanctum Augustinum lib. xiv. de civit. Dei, canon. 17 : « Hoc itaque cognoverunt, quod felicius ignora¬ rent, si Deo credentes, et obedientes non committerent, quod eos cogeret experiri, infidelitas et inobedidentia quid nocerent, » Et lib. i. in Julianum, cap. 2. idem probat testimonio sancti Olympi Episcopi Hispani. Audi S. Pr&spcrum in responsione ad tertium dubium Genuensium : « Credendo Adam diabolo, non credidit Deo. » Et infra : « Quomodo fides in Adam perdita, in quoquam filiorum ejus inveniretur, nisi ea idem spiri¬ tus, qui omnia in omnibus operatur , infun¬ deret? » Et infra : « Omnes igitur quod Adam perdidit, perdiderunt. Perdidit autem primitus fidem, quam omnes, quia primam potuimus amittere, primam habemus acci¬ pere. » Cum igitur Adam electus, ac prao- destinatus fidem semel habitam peccando perdiderit, et reus mortis aeternae constitutus fuerit, falsum omnino esse convincitur, quod Wicleffus, et Calvinus, et ante eos Jovinia- nus asseruit, peccata praedesti natorum non posse esse lethalia, praesertim si fidem ali¬ quando habuerint. Alterum exemplum est sancti propheta; David, quem praedestinatum fuisse, atque adeo salvum et sanctum esse nemo negare potest, cum Dominus dicat in Evangelio, Luca; xm : Cum videritis Abraham, Isaac, et Jacob, et omnes Prophetas in regno Dei (3). Certe enim si omnes Propheta; erunt in reg¬ no Dei, sine dubio non aberit David, qui per excellentiam Propheta; cognomen inve¬ nit. Eumdem fuisse fidelem, et justum, ante¬ quam in peccatum adulterii, et homicidii laboretur, aeque certum est. Nam Apostolus Paulus Actor xm. sic ait de eo : Suscitavit illis ( DeusJ David Regem , cui testimonium perhibens dixit : Inveni David filium Jesse vi¬ rum secundum cor meum (4). Et Psalmi ejus aperte indicant fuisse Davidem plenum fide, et Spiritu sancto. Porro eumdem lapsum esse in peccata mortalia, eaque gravissima , ac per hoc Spiritum sanctum excussisse, et gratia exci¬ disse facile probari potest. Nam in primis hoc apertissime docet ipse David in Psalm. l. ubi proprie (ut ex titulo constat) deflet adul- (1) Rom. V, 12. - (2) Gon. II, 17. —(3) Luc. XIII, 28. — (4) Act. XIII, 22 CAPUT VII. 223 tcrium suum , et homicidium occasione Bethsabca; commissum , ubi inter cfletera dicit : Tibi soli peccavi , et malum coram te feci , et : Cor mundum crea in me Deus , et Spiritum rectum innova in visceribus meis (1). Nec sane peteret cor mundum in se creari, et renovari spiritum rectum, nisi crederet per peccatum munditiem cordis, et rectitu¬ dinem spiritus se amisisse. Quod vero sub¬ jungitur : Et Spiritum sanctum tuum ne au¬ feras a me. Non significat, in eo peccante remansisse habitatorem Spiritum sanctum, qui in solis justis proprie inhabitat : sed sig¬ nificat (Augustino teste) spiritum coepisse iterum Davidi adesse, cum ei poenitentiam inspiravit, et ideo Davidem, qui donum Dei non ignorabat, precatum esse a Deo, ut spiritum illum sanctum, poenitentiae lacry- mas in se excitantem, non auferret. Quod autem David reconciliationem adhuc expe- ctaret et peteret, perspicuum est ex verbis sequentibus : Redde mihi laetitiam salutaris tui. Et rursum : Auditui meo dabis gaudium et laetitiam, et exultabunt ossa mea humiliata. Et : Cor contritum et humiliatum Deus non despicies (I). His accedunt testimonia Patrum. Nam S. Ambrosius in lib. de Apologia David, cap. 16, explicans illud : Libera me de san¬ guinibus, etc. : « Ad Uria? mortem, inquit, potest referri, quod mandatae necis ejus con¬ scius veniam tanti poscat admissi. » Et in¬ fra : « Quibus vinculis se enodari desiderans divinum sibi precatur auxilium, ut ab omni criminis perpetrati labe mundetur. » Et in¬ fra : « Non est mirum, quod t :m graviter doleat fundendi sanguinis innoxii sibi obre¬ psisse peccatum. Ideo liberari se a sanguini¬ bus, hoc est a peccatis mortalibus postula¬ vit. » Ilis verbis Ambrosius Davidis adulte¬ rium et homicidium, peccata mortalia fuisse docet, cum et crimina, et vincula, et tanta admissa, et expresse peccata mortalia nomi¬ net. S. Augustinus tract. in Psalm. lvi. ita Davidem loquentem inducit : « Miserere mei secundum magnam misericordiam tuam. Subveni gravi vulneri secundum magnam medicinam tuam. Grave est quod habeo, sed ad omnipotentem confugio. De meo tam lethali vulnere desperarem , nisi tantum medicum rcperirem. » Et hic vides peccatum Davidis grave, et lethale nominari , et ejus¬ modi, ut fere ad desperationem posset ad¬ ducere. S. Hieronymus in epist. ad Oceanum de obitu Fabiola; describit poenitentiam publi¬ cam Davidis, qualis in Ecclesia pro magnis sceleribus fieri solet. Ex quo satis indicat, grave admodum fuisse peccatum Davidis. S. Gregorius lib. xxn. Moralium, cap. 13. scribit, peccatorem similem esse Lazaro mortuo, qui Domini voce revocatur ad vi¬ tam : atque exemplum Davidis adducens ait : « Unde David Propheta ab illa tanti mole facinoris reviviscens ad vocem Domini, quasi foras exiit, dum per Natham correptus quod fecerat accusavit. » Ex his igitur ma¬ nifestum est, Davidem praedestinatum, fide¬ lem, et justum in peccatum mortale incidis¬ se, et rursus per poenitentiam ad gratiam Domini rediisse : ac proinde falsam atque etiam apertissime falsam Wicleffi, et Calvini esse sententiam. Tertium exemplum est Apostoli Petri , quem prajdestinatum fuisse, et nunc salvum, sanctum, et beatum esse nemo negat, cum B. Joannes in extremo Evangelio suo tam luculentum testimonium reddiderit beatae morti ipsius. Nam cum Dominus Petro di¬ xisset : Cum senueris alius cinget te, et ducet quo tu non vis , subjunxit Evangelista : Hoc autem dixit, significans qua morte clarifxcatu- rus esset Deum (2) Eumdem Petrum fidelem et justum fuisse antequam Dominum ter ab¬ negaret, testis est Christus ipse , qui et Matth. xvi. eum beatum appellavit, et Joan. xin. eidem dixit : Qui lotus est , non indiget, nisi ut pedes lavet. Et vos mundi estis, sed non omnes , etc. (3). Eumdem autem mortale peccatum, et qui¬ dem gravissimum admisisse, cum ad vocem ancillae Dominum negavit, nec solum nega¬ vit, sed etiam jurejurando, et anathematizan¬ do negationem confirmavit, testantur lacry- mae, et poenitentia ejus. Nam (ut scribit Mat- thaius cap. 26.) post tantum admissuni faci¬ nus amare flevit. Testantur etiam sancti Pa¬ tres idipsum passira, sed ut non laboremus in re perspicua, unus hoc loco sufficiet Au¬ gustinus, qui tract. 66. in Joan. non solum hoc docet, sed etiam contendit ita esse, nec posse, salva fide aliter dici. Inter alia sic Petrum alloquitur : « Timendo mortem car¬ nis tum, mortem dabis animai tuse. Quanta enim vita est confiteri Christum, tanta mors (i) Psal L, 6, 12. - (2) Joan. XXI, 18, 19. — (3) Joan. XIII, tO. 226 LIBER I. est negare Christum. » Et infra : « In anima Petri contigit, quocl offerebat in corpore, non tamen pro Domino, quod temere prae¬ sumebat, praecessit, sed aliter quam puta¬ bat ; namque ante mortem, et resurrectio¬ nem Domini, et mortuus est negando, et re¬ vixit plorando. Sed mortuus est, qui superbe praesumpsit; revixit autem, quia benigne ille respexit. » Ecce quoties Augustinus repetit, Petrum in anima mortuum esse, ac proin¬ de peccatum mortale commisisse, cum Chri¬ stum negavit. Et audet tamen Calvinus di¬ cere, fideles praedestinatos lethaliter pecca¬ re non posse. His omnibus accedat manifesta ratio ex adversariorum ducta principiis. Actiones il¬ las Adami, Davidis, Petri, ex genere suo peccata fuisse, nemo negare potest, nisi praevaricatio coelestis mandati specialis, adul¬ terium, homicidium, Christi abnegatio cum execratione, et perjurio alicui non videantur esse peccata ; ea vero peccata a scientibus, et volentibus commissa, atque adeo volun¬ taria fuisse, extra controversiam est. Quaero igitur, an ea peccata simul cum fide justifi¬ cante in hominibus illis Adamo, Davide, Pe¬ tro, consistere potuerint, an non potuerint. Nam si non potuerunt, excusserunt fidem justificantem, ac per hoc lethalia fuerunt, quod nos contendimus. Neque ipsi hoc nega¬ re possunt, cum ex communi adversariorum doctrina illa sint mortalia peccata, quae cum fide consistere nequeunt. Si vero dicat Calvinus peccata illa Adami, Davidis, Petri, cum fide consistere potuisse : sequitur, posse homines semel justificatos libere praevaricari Dei mandata, adulteria et homicidia perpetrare, Christum abnegare, addita etiam execratione, atque perjurio. Nam si haec in hominibus semel justificatis cum ipsa fide justificante manent, hoc ipso a Deo non imputantur, nec tam sunt venia¬ lia, et remittenda, quam reipsa condonata, atque dimissa, neque reum faciunt ullius poenae ac supplicii. Iloc vero dogma nemo non videt quam sit absurdum, et pernicio¬ sum. Huc igitur disputationis summa perdu¬ citur, ut vel concedere cogatur Calvinus posse homines fideles, et praedestinatos pec¬ care lethaliter, ac per hoc non esse peccata omnia praedestinatorum, post fidem semel adeptam, venialia : vel praedestinatis fideli¬ bus, id est, vere fidelibus licentiam tribuat adulteria, homicidia, perjuria, et alia id ge¬ nus scelera impune, ac libere perpetrandi. Videtur autem Calvinus hoc posterius membrum eligere. Nam tametsi in Antidot. Concil. Tridentini sess. 6. can. 27. scripse¬ rit, ubi fides regnat, nullum esse peccatum : tamen can. 28. addit, semen fidei, id est, fi¬ dem veram et vivam, sed sopitam manere cum gravissimis lapsibus : « Semen, inquit, aliquod fidei manere in homine licet silffoca- tum, etiam inter gravissimos lapsus non ne¬ go, id quantulumcumque est, particulam es¬ se fateor verae fidei ; addo etiam vivae, quan¬ do aliter non posset ex ea oriri fructus. Ve¬ rum quoniam non apparet ad tempus, nec se usitatis signis exerit, perinde habetur at¬ que emortua, quoad sensum nostrum. » Ita¬ que cum velit manere fidem veram et vivam in homine cum gravissimis lapsibus, licet ea non se prodat exterius : et certo sibi persua¬ serint adversarii, fidem justificare, et facere ut nulla peccata imputentur, sequitur ut cre¬ diderit Calvinus gravissimos lapsus fidelibus non imputari.