Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Loss of Grace · Book IV: On Original Sin
Chapter 1: The matter of the following disputation is set forth, and those who have written on it are briefly indicated
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. V, De Amissione Gratiae et Statu Peccati, Book IV. 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).
Of the sin of origin — which from the sin of the first man, of which we discoursed in the preceding book, has been derived into the universal human race — the order of the disputation now demands that we discourse.
And there are three principal questions concerning the sin of origin: the first, whether there is any sin of origin; the second, what that sin is; the third, what is its proper punishment. For to these questions all the others can be brought back, such as these: how this sin is transmitted; from whom it is transmitted; to whom it is transmitted; whether one only, or other sins also, are transmitted.
Now this disputation about the sin of origin is one of the gravest controversies of our faith. For, as St. Augustine teaches in the book On Original Sin, chapter 24, in the cause of two men — by the one of whom we were sold under sin, by the other we are redeemed from sins — the Christian faith properly consists. And therefore, in book 1 against Julian, chapter 2, the same Augustine speaks thus of this controversy: “There are other things in which sometimes even the most learned and the best defenders of the Catholic rule, the fabric of the faith remaining safe, do not agree, and one speaks better and more truly than another about one matter. But this whereof we now treat pertains to the very foundations of the faith. Whoever in the Christian faith wishes to shake what is written — By a man came death, and by a man the resurrection of the dead; and, As in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive — is laboring to take away the whole of what we believe in Christ.”
Many authors have written of the sin of origin, both ancient and more recent. First of all, St. Augustine (for in his time this question arose, as he himself testifies, book 3 On the Merits and Remission of Sins, chapters 5, 6, and 7) disputed the controversy about the sin of origin most copiously: in the single book On Original Sin, against Pelagius; in the two books to Valerius, On Marriage and Concupiscence; in the three to Marcellinus, On the Merits and Remission of Sins; in the four to Boniface, Against the Two Epistles of the Pelagians; in the six to Claudius, Against Julian; and in his other books and epistles most frequently.
After Augustine there wrote of the same matter professedly: St. Prosper, on the chapters of the Genoese, response 3; St. Fulgentius, in the book On the Grace of Christ, chapters 4 and 13 and following; Hugh of St. Victor, book 1 On the Sacraments, part 7, from chapter 24; Anselm, in the book On the Virginal Conception and Original Sin; Peter Lombard, book 2 of the Sentences, distinctions 30 and 31; and on the same distinction all the Scholastic theologians. Likewise Albert, part 2, tractate 47; Alexander of Hales, part 2, question 122; St. Thomas, in 1-2, question 81, and book 4 against the Gentiles, from chapter 50; Henry, quodlibet 1, questions 22 and 23; Giles, quodlibet 6, question 19; William of Paris, in the tractate On Vices and Sins.
And in this our age very many have labored on the same argument: as Albert Pighius, in the first controversy, which is on the sin of origin; Ambrose Catharinus, in the book On Original Sin; Dominic Soto, in book 1 On Nature and Grace, chapter 7; Alphonsus de Castro, in book 12 Against All Heresies; Andrew Vega, book 2 on the Council of Trent; Diego Payva, book 3 of the Orthodox Explications, and book 5 of the Defense of the Council of Trent; John Driedo, book 1 On Grace and Free Choice, tractate 3; Ruard Tapper, in the explication of article 2; Cunerus Petri, in the book On Original Sin; Theodore Peltanus, in the disceptation On the Sin of Origin; Jodocus Tiletanus, in the Apology for the Council of Trent; William Lindanus, book 4 of the Panoply, chapter 10; Andrew Fabricius, in the Harmony of the Augsburg Confession, article 2, where he sets down various tractates of distinguished theologians on this matter; Thomas Stapleton, books 1 and 2 On Justification.
Of the adversaries, Huldrych Zwingli wrote of the sin of origin in the book On Baptism, tractate 3, and again more copiously in the book which is entitled Declaration on the Sin of Origin, to Urbanus Rhegius; Martin Luther, in the assertion of articles 2 and 3; Philip Melanchthon, in the Commonplaces, under the title On the Sin of Origin; John Calvin, book 2 of the Institutes, chapter 1, and book 4, chapter 15, and in the Antidote to the Council of Trent; Martin Bucer and Peter Martyr, in the commentaries on chapter 5 to the Romans; Martin Chemnitz, in the Examination of the Council of Trent; Henry Bullinger, sermon 10 of Decade 3. Matthias Illyricus wrote much of original sin: first in the Centuries, century 1, book 2, chapter 4; then in the book On the Essence of the Image of God and of the Devil; in the book On the Occasion of Avoiding Error; in the book On the Eminent Utility of This Doctrine; in the book Know Thyself; finally, in the refutation of certain persons holding the contrary. And many of the adversaries wrote against Illyricus: as John Wigand, Martin Chemnitz, Tilemann Heshusius, Joachim Mörlin, and others.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT PRIMUM. Proponitur materia disputationis sequentis, et qui de ea scripserint breviter indicantur. De peccato originis; quod a peccato primi hominis, de quo in superiore lib. disserui¬ mus, in universum genus humanum deriva¬ tum est, disputationis ordo nunc postulat ut disseramus. Ac tres sunt de peccato originis praicipmc quccstioncs : prima, sit ne aliquod peccatum originis; secunda, quid sit illud peccatum; tertia, qua) sit ejus propria poena. Ad has enim quaistiones revocari possunt aliae om¬ nes, ut illae : Quomodo peccatum hoc tradu¬ catur, a quo traducatur, ad quos traducatur, unum ne tantum, an alia etiam peccata tra¬ ducantur. • Est autem haic de peccato originis dispu¬ tatio, una ex gravissimis fidei nostrae contro¬ versiis. Nam ut S. Augustinus docet in libro de peccato originali cap. 24. in causa duo¬ rum hominum, quorum per unum venumdati sumus sub peccato, per alterum redimimur a peccatis, proprie fides Christiana consistit. Et idcirco in lib. i. adversus Julianum c. 2. idem Augustinus de controversia hac ita lo¬ quitur : « Alia sunt in quibus inter se ali¬ quando etiam doctissimi, atque optimi re¬ gula) Catholicae defensores, salva fidei com¬ page, non consonant, et alius alio de una re melius dicit et verius. IIoc autem unde nunc agimus, ad ipsa fidei pertinet fundamenta. Quisquis in Christiana fide vult labefactare quod scriptum est, Per hominem mors, et per hominem resurrectio mortuorum, et sic¬ ut in Adam omnes moriuntur, ita in Christo omnes vivificabuntur, totum quod in Chri¬ stum credimus auferre molitur. » Scripserunt de peccato originis auctores multi, tum veteres tum recentiores. Primus omnium sanctus Augustinus (ejus enim tem¬ pore quaistio ha)c orta est, ut ipse testatur lib. m. de peccatorum meritis et remissione cap. 5. G. et 7.) controversiam de peccato originis copiosissime disputavit in libro unico de peccato originali contra Pelagium; in duo¬ bus ad Valerium de nuptiis, et concupiscen¬ tia; in tribus ad Marcellinum de peccatorum meritis et remissione; in quatuor ad Bonifa- cium contra duas epistolas Pelagianorum; in sex ad Claudium adversus Julianum; et iti aliis libris, et epistolis suis frequentissime. Post Augustinum scripserunt de re eadem ex professo, S. Prosper ad capitula Genucn- sium, responsione 3. S. Fulgentius lib. de gratia Christi, cap. 4. et 43. et seq. Ilugo de S. Victore lib. i. de Sacramentis part. 7. a cap. 2 i. Ansclmus in lib. de conceptu virgi¬ nali et peccato originali, Petrus Lombardus lib. 2. sent. dist. 30. et 31. et in eamdem dis¬ tinctionem Theologi Scholastici omnes. Item Albertus 2. part. tract. 47. Alexander CAPUT II. 329 Alcnsis 2. part. quajst. 122. S. Thomas in •1. 2. qua)st. 81. ct lib. iv. contra Gentes a cap. 5. Henricus quodlib. 1. quaest. 22. et 23. vEgidius quodlib. 6. quaest. 19. Gulicl- mus Parisiensis in tractatu de vitiis et pec¬ catis. Et nostro hoc saeculo plurimi circa idem argumentum laborarunt. Ut AlbertusPighius in controversia prima, quae est de peccato originis. Ambrosius Catharinus in lib. de pec¬ cato originali. Dominicus a Soto in lib. i. de natura et gratia cap. 7. Alphonsus a Castro in lib. xii. adversus omnes haereses. Andreas Yega lib. ii. in Concilium Tridentinum. Dic- gus Payva lib. 3. orthodoxarum explicatio¬ num, et lib. v. defensionis Concilii Triden- tini. Joanncs Driedo lib. i. de gratia ct libero arbitrio, tract. 3. Ruardus Tapperus in ex¬ plicatione artic. 2. Cunerus Petri in lib. de peccato originali. Theodorus Pcltanus in dis¬ ceptatione de peccato originis. Jodocus Tile- tanus in Apologia pro Concilio Tridentino. Wilhelmus Lindanuslib. iv. Panoplia) c. 10. Andreas Fabricinus in harmonia Confessionis Augustanae artic. 2. ubi ponit varios tracta¬ tus insignium Theologorum de hac re. Tho¬ mas Stapletonus lib. i. et ii. de justificatione. Ex adversariis Huldricus Zwinglius scripsit de peccato originis in lib. de Baptismo tract. 3. et rursus copiosius in lib. qui inscri¬ bitur : Declaratio de peccato originis ad Ur¬ banum lthegium. Murtinus Lutherus in as- sert. 2. et 3. articuli. Philippus Melanchthon in locis tit. de peccato originis. Joannes Cal¬ vinus lib. ii. Instit. cap. 1. et lib. iv cap. 15. et in Antidoto Concilii Tridentini Martinus Bucerus, et Petrus Martyr'in comment. c. 5. ad lloman. Martinus Keranitius in Examine Concilii Tridentini. Henricus Bullingerus serm. 10. Decad. 3. Matthias Illyricus multa scripsit de peccato originali. Primum in Cen¬ turiis, centuria 1. lib. ii. cap. 4. Deinde in lib. de essentia imaginis Dei, ct diaboli; in libro dc occasione vitandi erroris in libro de eximia utilitate hujus doctrinae ; in libro Nosce te ipsum. Denique in refutatione quo¬ rumdam contrarium sentientium. Scripserunt autem contra. Illyricum multi ex adversariis ; ut Joan. Wigandus, Martinus Kemnitius, Tilmannus Heshusius, JoachimusMerlinus et alii.