Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Loss of Grace · Book I: On Sin, Mortal and Venial
Chapter 10: The same is shown from the tradition of the Church and the Fathers
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).
That certain sins are by their nature venial not only the Scriptures which we have brought forward thus far show, but also the testimonies of the Church and of the Fathers. For the Council of Milevis, canons 6, 7, and 8, teaches that holy and just men have certain sins which, though they are not repugnant to holiness and justice, are yet truly sins, and need remission. But because the adversaries could answer that those sins of the Saints are venial from the mercy of God, not from their own nature, we shall bring forward the commentary of St. Augustine, who was the author of those canons, that he himself may expound his own words. For although those canons were published in the name of the whole Council, yet he who composed them was Augustine. And he, in the book On Nature and Grace, chapters 35, 36, and 37, brings forward the same Scriptures — Forgive us our debts, and, If we say that we have no sin, etc. — which he had brought forward in those Milevitan canons. Then in chapter 38 he explains of what sins those Scriptures are to be understood: “So too,” says he, “it needed not to be recorded if Abel, though he was deservedly called just, at some time laughed a little too immoderately, or jested in relaxation of mind, or saw something so as to desire it, or at some time plucked fruit too immoderately, or was somewhat surfeited with a little too much food, or, while he prayed, thought of something whereby his attention was called away to something else — and how often these and many like things crept in.” Thus he. Where he sufficiently shows that venial sins are not only the first and involuntary motions of concupiscence — which the adversaries teach are mortal sins by their nature, and venial by the mercy of God — but also certain evil and plainly voluntary actions, as immoderate laughter, too much food, an unnecessary jest; which actions, if they were mortal sins by their nature, would without doubt be imputed by God and would condemn the man, and thereby would in no way stand with justice. For only the involuntary (by the judgment of the adversaries) are not imputed, and stand with justice; but these sins, by the doctrine of St. Augustine and the Council of Milevis, are venial and stand with justice; therefore they are not mortal by their nature, but by their nature and kind, and in all ways, absolutely and simply, venial.
The same is confirmed (for the sake of Catholics) from the Council of Trent. For in session 14, chapter 5, we are taught that in sacramental confession all mortal sins which come to mind after a diligent sifting of conscience must of necessity be laid open; but venial sins are usefully laid open, not of necessity. From which it follows that venial sins can be not only in just men, but also in the impious; otherwise impious men would of necessity have to lay open absolutely all their sins in confession — which is against the doctrine of the Council and the sense of the universal Church. But sins venial from the mercy of God not imputing them are not in the impious, but in the pious and just alone, by the judgment of the adversaries; therefore the venial sins which the Council of Trent admits to be in the impious are venial not from the mercy of God not imputing them, but from their own nature. Finally let this come to these: that in the Bull of Pius V, Supreme Pontiff, renewed by Gregory XIII, in which many errors are condemned, one is: that no sins are venial by their nature.
Besides these testimonies there are not wanting also the sentences of the Greek and Latin Fathers. For we understand that the holy Fathers, when they speak of venial sins, mean to signify those venial sins which by their nature are such, from this — that they call them lightest, minute, daily. For those cannot rightly be called minute and light which by their nature constitute one guilty of eternal death, though from mercy they be condoned. Origen, homily 35 on Luke, speaks thus: “Each one, according to the quality and quantity of his sin, pays a different sentence of fine. If what thou sinnest is little, thou shalt be struck with the loss of a mite, as Luke wrote — or, as Matthew, of a farthing. Yet it is necessary to pay that very thing of which thou hast stood debtor; for thou shalt not go out thence until thou pay even each least thing.” Here Origen speaks of venials, not of mortals (lest perchance one say that by least sins he means the least among mortals); for at the end of the homily he writes that they who owe one farthing are detained for a fixed time in the prison (namely in purgatory), while they who owe a huge sum are tormented for everlasting time: “If he who owes little goes not out till he pay the last farthing, assuredly for him who is liable for so great a debt infinite ages will be counted out for the paying.” And so he calls venial sins least — and therefore least, because in quality and quantity they are least; for (as he himself says) punishments are decreed according to the quality and quantity of the sin. Now sins least in quality and quantity are least from their own nature and notion. Tertullian, in the book On the Soul, chapter 58, named the sins which admit a temporary purgation “small offenses,” as we cited above. St. John Chrysostom, homily 24 on Matthew, expounding that of chapter 7, Why seest thou the mote in thy brother's eye, etc., called venial sins, which are opposed to outrages, “lightest offenses” and “little faults.” St. Jerome, in the commentary on chapter 5 of the Evangelist Matthew, judged that the same venial sins should be named minute sins. And in the same place, explaining that, “Whosoever shall look on a woman to lust after her,” etc., he says there is a difference between pathos and propatheia: that pathos is desire with consent, propatheia a titillation without consent; and he adds that propatheia has the fault of a vice, yet is not held in crime. Where he openly teaches that the titillation is some sin, but light, and cannot be called a crime unless consent come — because, namely, in that titillation there is nothing but a sin of negligence in forestalling, or quickly rejecting, what should have been forestalled or rejected. The same, book 2 against Jovinian, who taught that sins are equal: “They will not give thee such thanks whom thou liftest from the lowly place to the lofty, as they will be angry whom, for a light and daily sin, thou hast thrust back into the exterior darkness.” Where St. Jerome most openly teaches that light and daily sins — such as are (as he himself says in the same place) idle words — do not by their nature deserve the punishment of gehenna. For if those sins deserved such punishment, no injury would be done a man if for such offenses he were thrust into the exterior darkness, nor could he justly complain or be angry thereat; nor could those be in any way named light for which one could be thrust into the exterior darkness.
St. Augustine, book On Nature and Grace, chapter 38: “Because,” says he, “sin often creeps in, in the lightest things, and sometimes on the unwary, they were both just, and were not without sin.” In this place we see that the venial sins which do not take away justice are such either because they consist in a most light matter, or because they creep upon the unwary. Hence the reason why some sin is venial is not that it is not imputed, though it could be imputed (as the adversaries teach), but that it consists in a most light matter, as in an idle word, in excessive laughter, in a superfluous jest, or that it creeps upon the unwary, as the wandering of the mind in time of prayer — as with Augustine the Catholics teach. The same author, On the Spirit and the Letter, chapter 36: “These things being settled, it will be sin, in a man living from faith, at some time to consent to some illicit delight — not only in those horrendous crimes and outrages to be perpetrated, but even in these lighter things: as that he lend his ear to some word which ought not to be heard, or his tongue to some which ought not to be said.” And in the Enchiridion, chapter 71: “For the daily, brief, and light sins, without which this life is not led, the daily prayer of the faithful makes satisfaction. For it is theirs to say, Our Father who art in heaven, who have already been regenerated to such a Father by water and the Holy Spirit. This prayer wholly blots out the least and daily sins.” And sermon 41 On the Saints: “By that transitory fire (of which the Apostle said, but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire) not capital but minute sins are purged.” And below: “By which sins, though we believe not that the soul is slain, yet they make it deformed, filling it as with certain pustules and, as it were, a horrid scab, so that they suffer it to come to the embraces of that heavenly bridegroom either scarcely, or with great confusion.” From these places we gather that Augustine held that venial sins are such by nature: both because he calls them brief, light, lightest, minute, least, daily; and because he compares them with pustules and scab, which not only do not kill, but even by their nature are not lethal diseases; and finally because he calls venial sins not only certain sudden motions of concupiscence — which alone the adversaries hold for venials, and say are not imputed by God — but also certain altogether voluntary sins, as superfluous jests, excessive laughter, and the like, which by their nature consist in most light matters; to which he adjoins also officious lies, in the Enchiridion, chapter 22, when he speaks thus: “A lie will not therefore be able at some time to be praised, because we sometimes lie for the safety of certain men. It is therefore a sin, but venial, which benevolence excuses.”
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT X. Idem ostenditur ex traditione Ecclesiae, et Patrum. Peccata quaedam ex natura sua venialia esse, non solum Scripturae, quas hactenus protulimus, ostendunt, sed etam testimonia Ecclesiae et Patrum. Nam Concilium Milevi- tanum can. G. 7. et 8. docet, sanctos et justos honines habere peccata quaedam , quae tametsi sanctitati et justitiae non repug¬ nent, tamen vere peccata sint, et remissio¬ ne indigeant, Sed quia possent adversarii respondere, peccata illa Sanctorum esse ve¬ nialia ex misericordia Dei, non ex natura sua, proferemus commentarium S. Augusti¬ ni, qui eorum canonum auctor fuit, ut ipse sua verba exponat. Tametsi enim canones illi nomine totius Concilii editi sunt, tamen qui eos composuit, Augustinus fuit. Is autem in lib. de natura et gratia cap. 33. 36. et 37. profert easdem Scripturas : Dimitte nobis debPa nostra, et : Si dixerinus, quia pecca¬ tum non habemus etc. quas protulerat in illis canonibus Milevitanis. Deinde cap. 38. explicat de quibus pecca¬ tis Scriptura) illa) intelligendse sint : « Ita, inquit, nec commemorandum fuit, si Abel, quamvis merito justus appellatus est, paulo immoderatius aliquando risit, vel animi re¬ missione jocatus est, vel vidit aliquid ad concupiscendum, vel aliquando immodera¬ tius poma decerpsit, vel plusculo cibo cru¬ dior fuit, vel cum oraret, cogitavit aliquid, unde ejus in aliud avocaretur intentio, et quoties illa ista, ac similia multa subrepse¬ rint. » Htec ille. Ubi satis ostendit, peccata venialia non esse solum primos, et involun¬ tarios motus concupiscentia), quos adversa¬ rii peccata mortalia ex natura sua, et venia¬ lia ex Dei misericordia esse docent ; sed etiam actiones quasdam malas, et plane vo¬ luntarias, ut risum immoderatum, cibum ni¬ mium, jocum non necessarium : qua) actio¬ nes si essent peccata mortalia ex natura sua, sine dubio imputarentur a Deo et hominem damnarent, ac per hoc cum justitia nulla ra¬ tione consisterent. Sola enim involuntaria (cx sententia adversariorum) non imputantur, et cum justitia consistunt, At hree peccata (1) Matth. XII, 36. — (2) Eph. V. 3. Tom. Y. 16 LlBfclt I. ex doctrina S. Augustini, ct Concilii Milevi- tani venialia sunt, et cum justitia consistunt. Igitur non sunt mortalia ex natura sua, sed cx natura, et ex genere, et modis omnibus, absolute, et simpliciter venialia. Confirmatur hoc idem (propter Catholicos) ex Tridentino Concilio. Nam sess. 14. cap. 5. docemur, in Confessione Sacramentali peccata mortalia omnia, quae menti occurrunt post diligentem conscientiae discussionem, esse necesssario aperienda : venialia vero utiliter aperiri, non necessario : ex quo se¬ quitur, ut peccata venialia non solum in ho¬ minibus justis, sed etiam in impiis esse pos¬ sint, alioqui homines impii omnia omnino peccata in confessione necessario aperire deberent, quod est contra doctrinam Conci¬ lii, et sensum Ecclesiae universae : At pecca¬ ta venialia ex misericordia Dei ea non im¬ putante, non sunt in impiis, sed in solis piis et justis, ex sententia adversariorum : Igitur peccata venialia, quae in impiis esse Conci¬ lium Tridentinum admittit, non sunt venia¬ lia ex misericordia Dei ea non imputante, sed ex natura sua. Denique his accedat quod in Bulla Pii V. Pont. Max. per Gregrorium XIII. renovata, in qua multi errores dam¬ nantur, unus est, nulla esse peccata venialia ex natura sua. Praeter haec testimonia non desunt etiam Patrum Graecorum et Latinorum sententiae. Intelligimus enim sanctos Patres, cum de peccatis venialibus verba faciunt, ea venia¬ lia peccata significare velle, quae natura sua talia sunt, ex eo quod levissima, minuta, quotidiana vocant. Neque enim minuta, et levia recte dici queunt, quae ex natura sua reum mortis aeternae constituunt, licet ex misericordia condonentur. Origenes homil. 35. in Lucam sic ait : « Unusquisque pro qualitate et quantitate peccati diversam mulctae sententiam expen¬ dit. Si parum est, quod peccas, ferieris dam¬ no minuti, ut Lucas scripsit, ut vero Mat¬ thaeus quadrantis. Verumtamen necesse est hoc ipsum, quod extitisti debitor, solvere. Non enim inde exies, nisi et minima quaeque persolveris. » Hic loquitur Origenes de ve¬ nialibus non de mortalibus (ne forte quis dicat, minima dici ab eo peccata minima in¬ ter mortalia) nam in fine homiliae scribit, eos qui debent unum quadrantem, certo tem¬ pore detineri in carcere (videlicet in purga¬ torio) qui debent ingentem summam, sempi¬ terno tempore cruciari : « Si, inquit, qui • # # parum debet, non egreditur nisi exolvat mi¬ nutum quadrantem : utique qui tanto debito fuerit obnoxius, infinita ei ad reddendum saj- cula numerabantur. » Itaque venialia pecca¬ ta vocat minima, et ideo minima, quia qualitate et quantitate sunt minima. Nam (ut ipse dicit) pro qualitate, et quantitate peccati supplicia decernuntur. Porro peccata minima qualitate et quanti¬ tate, ex natura et ratione sua minima sunt. Tertullian. in lib. de anima, cap. 47. pecca¬ ta, quae temporariam purgationem admit¬ tunt, modica delicta nominavit, ut supra ci¬ tavimus. S. Joannes Chrysostomus hom. 24. in Matth. exponens illud cap. vil : Quid vides festucam in oculo fratris ete, peccata venia¬ lia, que flagitiis opponuntur, delicta levissi¬ ma, et culpas parvulas appellavit. S. Hieronymus in commentar, cap. 5. Evangelistffi Matthaei, eadem venialia pecca¬ ta, peccata minuta nominanda censuit. Et ibidem explicans illud : « Qui viderit mulie¬ rem ad concupiscendum eam, etc. » dicit esse discrimen inter iraOo? et TvpocTraQeiav, quod iraOo? sit desiderium cum consensu, 7;poita0eia sit titillatio sine' consensu, et addit TtpouaOstav culpam habere vitii, non tamen teneri in crimine. Ubi aperte docet, titilla¬ tionem esse peccatum aliquod, sed leve, nec dici posse crimen, nisi accedat consensus, quia videlicet in illa titillatione non sit nisi peccatum negligentiae in praecavendo, vel cito rejiciendo, quod praecavendum, vel reji¬ ciendum erat. Idem lib. n. adversus Jovinia- num qui peccata paria docebat : « Non tibi, inquit, habebunt tantas gratias, quos de hu¬ mili in snblime levas, quantum irascentur, quos propter leve quotidianumque peccatum in exteriores tenebras retrusisti. » Ubi S. Hieronymus apertissime docet, levia, quoti- dianaque peccata, qualia sunt (ut ipse ibidem ait) verba otiosa, non mereri ex natura sua poenam gehennae. Nam si talem poenam ea peccata mererentur, nulla fieret homini inju¬ ria, si ob ejusmodi delicta in exteriores te¬ nebras truderetur, neque juste inde queri vel irasci posset. Sed nec levia ullo mudo no¬ minanda essent, ob quae in tenebras exterio¬ res detrudi aliquis posset. S. Augustinus lib. de natura et gratia cap- 38 : « Quia, inquit, saepe in levissimis, et ali¬ quando incautis obrepit peccatum, et justi fuerunt, ct sine peccato non fuerunt. » Hoc loco videmus, venialia peccata quae justi- CAPUT XI. 235 tiam non auferunt, vel ideo talia esse, quia in re levissima consistunt, vel quia obrepunt incautis. Proinde ratio cur peccatum ali¬ quod sit veniale, non est, quia non imputa¬ tur, licet imputari possit (ut adversarii do¬ cent) sed quia in re levissima consistit, ut in verbo otioso, in risu nimio, in joco superva¬ caneo, vel quia obrepit incautis, ut evagatio meDtis tempore orationis, ut cum Augustino Catholici docent. Idem auctor de spiritu et lit. cap. 36 : « His, inquit, constitutis, peccatum erit ho¬ minis ex fide viventis, aliquando alicui dele¬ ctationi illicitae consentire, non tantum in illis horrendis facinoribus, et flagitiis perpe¬ trandis ; verum etiam in istis levioribus, ut vel aurem alicui voci, que audienda non esset, vel linguam alicui, quae ‘dicenda non esset, accommodet. » Et in Enchirid. cap, 71 : «De quotidianis, inquit, brevibus, levi- busque peccatis, sine quibus haec vita non ducitur, quotidiana fidelium oratio satisfacit. Eorum enim est dicere, Pater noster qui es in coelis, qui jam Patri tali regenerati sunt ex aqua et Spiritu sancto, delet omnino haec oratio minima et quotidiana peccata. » Et sermon. 41. de Sanctis : « Illo, inquit, tran¬ sitorio igne (de quo dixit Apostolus) ipse au¬ tem salvus erit, sic tamen quasi per ignem, non capitalia, sed minuta peccata purgan¬ tur. » Et infra : « Quibus peccatis licet occi¬ di animam non credamus, ita tamen eam veluti quibusdam pustulis, et quasi horrenda scabie replentes deformem faciunt, ut eam ad amplexus illius sponsi coelestis, aut vix, aut cum grandi confusione venire permit¬ tant. Ex his locis colligimus, sensisse Augusti¬ num, peccata venialia ex natura esse talia. Tum quia vocat ea brevia, levia, levissima, minuta, minima, quotidiana. Tum quia com¬ parat ea cum pustulis, et scabie, quae non solum non occidunt, sed etiam ex natura sua non sunt morbi lethales. Tum denique, quia peccata venialia vocat non solum subitos quosdam concupiscentiae motus, quos solos adversarii pro venialibus habent, atque a Deo non imputari dicunt, sed etiam peccata quaedam omnino voluntaria, ut jocos super¬ vacaneos, risum nimium, et similia, quae ex natura sua in rebus levissimis consistunt, quibus adjungit etiam mendacia officiosa in Enchiridio cap. 22. cum sic loquitur : « Non ideo mendacium poterit aliquando laudari, quia nonnumquam pro salute quorumdam mentimur. Peccatum ergo est, sed veniale, quod benevolentia excusat. »