Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Loss of Grace · Book VI: The Punishments of Original Sin
Chapter 3: Response is made to the objections against the doctrine of the preceding chapter
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. V, De Amissione Gratiae et Statu Peccati, Book VI. 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).
But it will be worth while to respond to some objections of Ambrose Catharinus, which he thought should be opposed to the doctrine of the ancient Fathers which we defended in the preceding chapter. I shall omit the arguments by which he strives to prove that little ones are not to be punished with the fire of gehenna (for that we too shall prove in the following chapter), and shall adduce only those by which he thinks he has made out that little ones will not always be in the damnation of death, nor always have their seat in the subterranean places, and finally that they will lead a happy and blessed life outside the kingdom of heaven.
His first objection, then, is this: “That the eternal damnation is not according to every punishment was done through Jesus Christ our Lord, who came to bear away that sin. For as it was said by Paul: as by the offence of one, unto all men to condemnation; so also it was said by the same: so also by the justice of one, unto all men to justification of life. Not that I would say that these boys, unless life be applied to them through Jesus Christ in the Sacrament, are justified unto eternal life — far be the heresy; but they will not be subjected to the perpetual condemnation of death; for even for them, in the last place, the enemy death will be destroyed, nor will they be perpetually under the power of the devil; for even for them the devil will be cast out on the last day, so that he have no right in them further. That damnation, then, on account of that sin, will not be perpetual.” I answer: this argumentation of Catharinus, first, is repugnant to the express testimonies of the Fathers which we cited in the preceding chapter. Next, it follows from it that, if the damnation of the little ones is not eternal, by the same reasoning the damnation of adults seems not eternal. For what he says — that Christ came to take away the sin of origin, and that on account of the justice of Christ all are justified, and that on the last day the enemy death will perish, and the devil be cast out — holds equally in adults as in little ones. For Christ came to take away all sins: For he gave himself a redemption for all, 1 Timothy 2; and he is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world, 1 John 2. On account of his justice all — not only little ones, but also adults — will be justified; for the judgment indeed was by one offence unto condemnation, but grace is of many offences unto justification, says the Apostle, Romans 5. And the enemy death will be destroyed for absolutely all, not only little ones but also adults; for all will rise, even the gravest sinners. Finally, the devil too will be cast out; but Scripture nowhere indicates that he will thereafter have power over adults, but not over little ones. And so, if that conclusion — that the damnation will not be perpetual — is true of the damnation of the little ones, it will also be true of the damnation of adults. And if the damnation of sinners is not eternal, doubt can also arise concerning the beatitude promised to the Saints, whether perchance it be not eternal, as St. Augustine gathers, book 21 of the City of God, chapter 24 [al. 23]. But these things being omitted, let us answer briefly to the argument. What Catharinus says — that Christ came to take away the sin of origin — is true as to efficacy; because, as we cited from John, he is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world; yet from many this sin is not taken away, because the price of redemption is not applied to them. For the instrument of application for little ones is none other than Baptism; hence they who depart without Baptism are without part in the redemption. What he adds — that it is written, By the justice of one, unto all men to justification of life — is also most true; but it is understood, by the common sense and consent of Catholics, not of all simply, but of all who are born again of Christ through Baptism. For as all who are born of Adam are condemned, so all who are born again in Christ are justified; wherefore this testimony pertains nothing to unbaptized little ones. But “on the last day, even for the little ones, the enemy death will be destroyed.” If this place be understood simply of the resurrection: death will indeed be destroyed for all the damned, because all will rise; but they will not for that reason cease to be in eternal death; for they will rise not to the resurrection of life, but to the resurrection of judgment, as the Lord says, John 5 — that is, they will rise that they may live forever wretched in damnation, and that their death may never die. But if, as seems more probable, those words — the enemy death will be destroyed — be understood of the resurrection to true life, this promise pertains nothing to the little ones. For the resurrection to true life will be of the faithful only, and of the Saints, as St. Augustine affirms in epistle 146 to Consentius; who also, in epistle 28 to Jerome, sets the little ones in the number of those who will rise not to the resurrection of life, but to the resurrection of judgment — that is, of damnation. Finally, what Catharinus brings about the casting out of the devil proves nothing at all; for, as we showed above by many testimonies, the devil is not cast out except through Baptism — the sign of which thing is that in the universal Church, from the most ancient tradition, the little ones to be baptized are exorcised and exsufflated.
The second objection of Catharinus fights for the third place to be assigned to the infants, from chapter 12 of Daniel, where we read thus: And many of those that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake: some unto life everlasting, and others unto reproach, to see it always. “Attend,” says Catharinus: “he does not say, all who sleep, but many of those who sleep — that he may clearly hint that there remain some of the sleepers who will awake neither unto eternal life nor unto eternal reproach. And who can these be, but these boys? Otherwise let those who contradict give us who these are. Certainly this place concludes irrefragably against them.” I answer: St. Augustine, book 20 of the City of God, chapter 23, and Theodoret, in the commentary on this place, warn us that that word “many” is set in this place for the word “all” — because in very truth they will be many who will rise, when all will rise. Like is that of Romans 5: By the disobedience of one man, many were made sinners — whom, having called many, he also calls all, when he says: In whom all have sinned; and: By the offence of one, unto all men to condemnation. Like also is what is had in Genesis 17: I have made thee a father of many nations — of which nations again it is said, chapters 18 and 22: In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed. Add that St. Augustine, in the place noted, St. Ambrose on Psalm 1, and St. Jerome on chapter 26 of Isaias say that that place of Daniel signifies altogether the same as what the Lord long after expressed, John 5, when he says: All that are in the graves shall hear the voice of the Son of God. And they that have done good things, shall come forth unto the resurrection of life; but they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of judgment. Where we see that it was declared by the Lord himself that by the many sleeping in the dust of the earth are to be understood all who are in the graves — that is, all the dead. This place, then, does not conclude irrefragably against those who deny that little ones will have, after the judgment, a certain third seat outside heaven and gehenna.
The third objection: “If that were true,” says Catharinus, “which Augustine wrote to Renatus — namely, that to assign to these boys a middle place between the punishment of gehenna and the kingdom of heaven is the Pelagian heresy — the consequence is that the whole school defends the Pelagian heresy. But why should we not rather confess that Augustine suffered something human, and went too far in the dogma?” I answer: St. Augustine, in the book to Renatus, which is the first On the Origin of the Soul, chapter 9, does not say that it is the Pelagian heresy to assign to little ones a middle place between the punishment of gehenna and the kingdom of heaven, but between the damnation and the kingdom of heaven. And that little ones are truly damned, and thereby have no middle place between damnation and the kingdom of heaven, not only does the Apostle say, Romans 5, and the whole school defend against the Pelagians, but Catharinus himself also confirms it in that very booklet of his. For thus he speaks in the response to the first argument: “I confess that no one according to the faith can deny that all sinned in Adam, and that therefore all boys contract that vice, and carry with them damnation.” But suppose Augustine had written, in the book to Renatus, that a middle place between the punishment of gehenna and the kingdom of heaven cannot be assigned to little ones except by the opinion of the Pelagians — which he truly wrote in sermon 14 on the words of the Apostle, and elsewhere: not for that reason will it be consequent that the whole school defends the Pelagian heresy. For although the Scholastic theologians almost agree in this, that little ones dying without Baptism do not suffer the sensible punishment of corporal fire, yet they openly teach, as we cited above, that they are in the lower world, and perpetually pay the punishment of loss; and thereby they do not assign them a middle place between the punishment of gehenna and the kingdom of heaven, but confirm that in gehenna itself they are to be punished with a milder punishment than the rest — from which opinion not even Augustine himself much recoils. Augustine, then, is not to be judged to have suffered something human, or to have gone too far in this dogma; but they plainly suffer something human, and go too far, who place the little ones on the upper part of the earth, as in an earthly paradise, and call them blessed and happy.
The fourth objection: “Because it was not fitting,” says Catharinus, “that anything be defrauded of its end — that is, of that which belongs to it according to nature — therefore there awaits the little ones that felicity which it is worthy should belong to man as man. Therefore to these boys, who will have human nature without crime, that felicity will be given which suits human nature and in a certain manner is owed to it by right itself. They will know, then, so far as natural knowledge can extend itself, the Lord God and the separated substances, far above all the Philosophers; for they will have no impediment from the body, neither within nor without; and, living forever, they will advance as it were without measure.” I answer: there are many things in this reasoning which can deservedly be denied and reprehended. First, it is false that it is not fitting that anything be defrauded of its end; nay rather, it is fitting that the supreme provider of all things direct indeed all things to their end, but yet permit some to fall away from that end — see St. Thomas, in [part] 1, question 22, article 2, and question 23, article 3. Next, it is false that little ones dying without Baptism have human nature without crime — unless by crime thou wilt have actual sin understood. But whatever be of the name, it is certain that little ones have a nature depraved by sin, and are children of wrath, and thereby that felicity is owed them by no right. Finally, it is false that it is natural felicity to live forever with a body utterly immortal, to advance without measure, to have no impediment from the body, to understand God and the separated substances above all the Philosophers — and that without labor, without teacher, without books and the other instruments of learning. For nothing of these does human nature of itself require; nay rather, it is natural to man to have a mortal body, to need food and drink, to depend on the corporal senses in acquiring sciences, and not without great labor to arrive at an understanding — however scanty and slender — of incorporeal things. Wherefore the little ones of whom we speak will rise to immortal life not because their nature so demands, or because it will be very useful to them, but that the justice of God may be discerned in their perpetual damnation. And therefore they will have a body immortal indeed, but not impassible, not spiritual, not glorious; a mind too they will have — not indeed defiled with actual sin, but habitually turned away from God, and adorned with no sciences or virtues.
The fifth objection: “Since they will not be, properly, exiles from the kingdom of God,” says Catharinus, “but more like the relegated, it seems probable to me that they will not lack Angelic revelations and visitations — even of those who will be in heaven — who will so refresh and console them that we may understand that, besides the vision of the divine majesty, nothing is wanting to them.” I answer: between an exile and a relegated man this difference is established in law (Digest, On Punishments): that exiles lose the right of citizenship, the relegated retain it. Wherefore, if unbaptized little ones are to be called not exiles from the kingdom of God and the holy city, the heavenly Jerusalem, but relegated, this will follow: that such little ones ought to be held citizens of the Saints, members of the household of God, sons of the kingdom, and members of the body of Christ. For since the Church which is in heaven is called now the holy city, now the house of God, now the kingdom of heaven, now also the body of Christ — they who are citizens of the Saints are likewise named members of the household of God, sons of the kingdom, and members of Christ. But what Catholic would bear that men without faith and Baptism be called members of Christ? and that children of wrath be sons of the kingdom? and that they who are not written in the book of life be, even after this life, citizens of the Saints and members of the household of God? Not, then, to the relegated, but plainly to the deported, are little ones dying without Baptism like; and, set in the subterranean places, very far from the holy city, they enjoy the visitation neither of Angels nor of blessed men. Here plainly has place what St. Augustine writes in book 1 On the Merits and Remission of Sins, chapter 23, and which has been carried into the decree, On Consecration, distinction 4, canon Nulla: “Let no eternal salvation be promised to infants by our judgment, apart from the Baptism of Christ — which the divine Scripture, to be preferred to all human wits, does not promise.”
The sixth objection: “I have judged most probable,” says he, “what certain men say: that their habitation will be upon this earth, because it is the proper place of men, where they will contemplate the works of God. And to this perhaps he looked who said: The heaven of heaven is the Lord's: but the earth he has given to the children of men. And perhaps this is also what the Apostle said: all things restored through Jesus, that are in heaven and that are on earth — that is, those which will have a heavenly habitation, and those an earthly.” I answer: concerning things which hang on the divine will, nothing is to be asserted, unless God himself in the holy Scriptures has revealed some such thing. But the Scriptures, as St. Augustine, cited by us above, has rather often observed, nowhere hand down that after the day of judgment there will be seats of men except two: one in heaven with the Angels, the other in the lower world with the demons — which are also the two cities, Jerusalem and Babylon, of which the same Augustine writes so much in the books On the City of God. Wherefore the upper face of the earth is the proper place of men while they are mortal, and need air for respiration and the fruits of the earth for nourishment; and for this time the Psalm speaks: The heaven of heaven is the Lord's: but the earth he has given to the children of men; but to the immortal, according to the proportion of their deserts, heaven rather, or gehenna, will be fitting. And as to what the Apostle writes, Ephesians 1, that Christ restored the things that are in heaven and the things that are on earth — it signifies that through Christ the ruins of the Angels were repaired in heaven, and on earth the human race was redeemed from captivity. St. Augustine, in the Enchiridion, chapter 62: “In him are restored the things that are in heaven, when that which fell thence in the Angels is given back from among men; and the things that are on earth are restored, when the men themselves who have been predestinated to eternal life are freed from the oldness of corruption.” Another is the exposition of St. Jerome on this place, who for “restore” reads “recapitulate,” and will have the sense to be that in the cross of Christ all the mysteries foretold or figured at diverse times were called back, as it were, to one sum. St. John Chrysostom brings another exposition, and one indeed very consonant with the words of the Apostle: for the Greek word he expounds “to bring back to one head” — so that the sentence of this place is that it was brought about through the mystery of the incarnation that the heavenly and the earthly — that is, Angels and men — began to have one head, that is, Christ; whereas before, on account of the sins of men, the heavenly had been disjoined and separated from the earthly. Which the same Apostle writes in other words to the Colossians, chapter 1, when he says: making peace through the blood of his cross, both as to the things that are on earth, and the things that are in heaven.
The seventh objection: “There is another reason,” says Catharinus, “not on this account to be rejected, which certain learned men have brought in: since this earth is to remain forever, both more purged and more beautiful, as it is written: And I saw a new heaven and a new earth; and as heaven is not taken barely for heaven, without an inhabitant, so neither is the earth. And truly it seems very incongruous that such and so great a place should be perpetually empty, without an inhabitant; and likewise that earthly men should lack their own proper habitation, which is this earth; for that such should remain under the earth seems less fitting to their condition.” I answer: the earth will indeed remain forever, and more purged, but covered on every side with waters (as we said above), and therefore will not be fit for the habitation of men. Further, the new heaven is not left altogether without an inhabitant — unless one would have either demons or birds dwell in this heaven after the judgment; for the discourse is not of the starry heaven, but of the airy. For this heaven will be renewed and purged, when, as St. Peter speaks in the second epistle, last chapter, the heavens, being on fire, shall be dissolved. And if it were little fitting that the earth should remain perpetually empty of men, by the same reasoning it would be little fitting that the water should perpetually lack fishes, and the air birds. Finally, to the condition of damned men the place under the earth is excellently suited — that is, the prison, or workhouse, of the lower world.
The eighth objection: “But if now the souls are held in limbo, as of old the holy Fathers were detained — which place is deservedly believed to be under the earth — this is given to that original sin meanwhile, until the day of the great resurrection. For when the whole body of Christ shall have risen — namely, in his Saints — then it will be equitable that they too obtain their perfection.” I answer: if the souls of little ones dying without Baptism are detained in the subterranean limbo in punishment of original sin, and that sin will never be remitted, as all Catholics constantly believe, certainly it follows that the souls of those little ones will never go forth from that subterranean limbo. Further, when the whole body of Christ shall have risen, all the damned too will rise, both small and great; but they will not therefore rise that the souls may be where the bodies had been, but contrariwise, that the bodies may be where the souls had been: their bodies will follow their souls, whether into heaven or into the lower world.
The last objection — though not set in the last place — is taken from Augustine, who in book 3 On Free Choice, chapter 23, says thus: “Who knows what good compensation God, in the secret of his judgments, reserves for the little ones themselves — by whose torments the hardness of adults is beaten down, or faith is exercised, or mercy is proved? Who, I say, knows?” I answer: the same St. Augustine, in epistle 28 to Jerome, explains these his words, and says that he brought them forward for baptized infants, but not for those who depart without the remission of original sin.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT III. llespondetur ad objectiones contra doctrinam, capitis superioris. Sed opera* pretium erit respondere ad objectiones aliquas Ambrosii Gatharini, quas, ille opponendas putavit doctrina) veterum Patrum, quam nos cap. superiore defendi¬ mus. Omiftam argumenta, quibus ille pro¬ bare nititur, parvulos non puniendos igne gehenna; (id enim etiam nos probabimus in sequenti capite) et ea solum adducam, qui¬ bus effecisse se putat, parvulos non semper futuros in damnatione mortis, nec semper habituros sedem in locis subterraneis, et de¬ nique felicem, ac beatam vitam acturos ex¬ tra .regnum c telorum. Prima igitur ejus objectio talis est : « Quod, inquit, seterna damnatio non sit secundum omnem poenam, factum est per Jesum Chri¬ stum Dominum nostrum, qui venit pecca¬ tum illud sufferre, sicut enim dictum est a Paulo, sicut per unius delictum in omnes homines in condemnationem ; sic et ab eo¬ dem dictum est, ita et per unius justitiam in omnes homines in justificationem vita». Non quod velim dicere, quod ii pueri, nisi appli¬ cetur eis vita per Jesum Christum in Sacra¬ mento, justificentur ud vitam te ternam. Ab¬ sit ha;resis, sed non perpetua: subdentur condemnationi mortis; quia ct pro illis ulti¬ mo loco inimica destruetur mors, neque sub (:awtt m. 4G1 diaboli perpetuo potestate erunt. Quia et pro illis ejectus erit diabolus foras in die novissi¬ mo, ut nihil juris habeat ulterius in illos. Il¬ la ergo damnatio ob illud peccatum non erit perpetua. » Hespondeo : ha?c argumentatio Catharini, primum repugnat expressis testimoniis Pa¬ trum, quae in eap. superiore citavimus. De¬ inde sequitur ex ea, ut si damnatio parvulo¬ rum non sit aeterna, eadem ratione damna¬ tio majorum non videatur aeterna. Nam quod ipse dicit, Christum venisse, ut tolleret pec¬ catum originis, et propter Christi justitiam omnes justificari, et in novissimo die inimi¬ cam mortem perituram, et diabolum foras ejiciendum, reque valet in majoribus ac par¬ vulis. Christus enim venit omnia peccata tollere : Dedit enim semetipsum redemptionem pro omnibus. 1 Timot. 2 (1). Et ipse est pro¬ pitiatio pro peccatis totius minui i. i. Joan. 2 (2). Propter ejus justitiam omnes non solum par¬ vuli, sed etiam adulti justificabuntur. Nam judicium quidem ex uno, delicto videlicet,, in condemnationem, gratia autem ex multis delictis in justificationem, inquit Apostolus ad Rom. o. et inimica destruetur mors, pro omnibus omnino non solum parvulis, sed etiam majoribus ; omnes enim resurgent, e- tiam gravissimi peccatores. Denique et dia¬ bolus ejicietur foras, sed Scriptura nusquam indicat, eum deinceps habiturum potesta¬ tem in majores, non autem in parvulos. Itaque si conclusio illa, damnationem vi¬ delicet non fore perpetuam, vera est de par¬ vulorum damnatione, vera etiam erit de damnatione majorum. Quod si damnatio peccatorum non sit aeterna, dubitari etiam poterit de beatitudine Sanctis promissa, ne forte non sit aeterna, ut S. Augustinus colli¬ git lib xxi. de civit. Dei cap. 24. Sed his omissis respondeamus breviter ad argumen¬ tum. Quod igitur Catharinus dicit, Christum venisse, ut peccatum originis tolleret, verum est quoad efficaciam, quia ut ex Joanne ci¬ tavimus, ipse est propitiatio pro peccatis to¬ tius mundi ; a multis tamen non tollitur hoc peccatum, quia non applicatur cis pretium redemptionis. Instrumentum enim applica¬ tionis pro parvulis nullum est, praiter Ba¬ ptismum ; proinde sine Baptismo deceden¬ tes, expertes sunt redemptionis. Quod addit, scriptum esse, « Per unius justitiam in omnes homines in justificatio¬ nem vita? », verissimum quoque est : sed intclligitur ex communi Catholicorum sensu atque consensu, non in omnes simpliciter, sed in omnes, qui ex Christo per Baptismum renascuntur. Sicut enim omnes, qui nascun¬ tur ex Adamo, damnantur ; ita omnes qui renascuntur in Christo, justificantur; quare ad parvulos non baptizatos nihil hoc testi¬ monium pertinet. At in novissimo etiam pro parvulis inimi¬ ca destruetur mors. Si hic locus de resurre- ctione simpliciter intclligalur : destruetur quidem mors pro omnibus damnatis, quia omnes resurgent, sed non propterca desi¬ nent esse in morte alterna : nam resurgent non ad resurrectionem vitee, sed ad resur¬ rectionem judicii, ut Dominus dicit Joan. v. hoc est, resurgent, ut miseri semper in dam¬ natione vivant, et ut mors eorum nunquam moriatur. Sin autem, quod probabilius videtur, verba illa, « Inimica destruetur mors, » in- tclligantur de resurrectione ad veram vitam, nihil luec promissio ad parvulos pertinet. Resurrectio enim ad veram vitam, fidelium tantum erit atque Sanctorum, ut S. Augu¬ stinus affirmat in epist. i 16. ad Gosentium, qui etiam in cpistol. 28. adHieron. parvulos in eorum numero ponit, qui resurgent non ad resurrectionem vitee, sed ad resurrectio¬ nem judicii, id est, damnationis. Denique quod affert Catharinus de eje¬ ctione diaboli, nihil omnino probat ; nam ut supra ostendimus multis testimoniis, diabo¬ lus non ejicitur foras, nisi per Baptismum, cujus rei signum est, quod In univorsa Ec¬ clesia ex antiquissima traditione parvuli ba¬ ptizandi exorcizantur et exsufflantur. Altera objectio Catharini pugnat pro ter- ' tio loco infantibus assignando, ex cap. 12. Daniel, ubi sec legimus : Et multi de his , qui dormiunt in terree pulvere , evigilabunt, alii in vitam ;c ternam, alii in opprobrium, ut videant semper (3). Attendite, inquit Cathari¬ nus, «non dicit, omnes qui dormiunt, sedmul- ti dehis qui dormiunt, ut clare innuat, super- esse aliquos dormientium, qui nec in vitam alternam, nec in opprobrium te ternum vigi¬ laturi sunt. Hi autem quinam esse possunt, nisi pueri isti ? Alioqui dent nobis contradi¬ centes, quinam hi sint. Certe hic locus irre- fragabilitcr contra eos concludit. » (1) Timoth. II, «. - (2) I Joan. II, 2. —(3) Dan. XII. 462 LIBER VI. Respondeo, S. Augustinus lib. xx. de civ. Dei c. 23. et Theodoret. in comment. hujus loci, nos admonent, vocem illam, « multi, » positam esse hoc loco pro voce, « omnes, » quia re vera multi erunt, qui resurgent, cum omnes resurgent. Simile est illud ad Roman. V. Per inobedientiam unius hominis peccato¬ res constituti sunt multi (1). Quos multos vo¬ cavit, etiam omnes vocat, cum ait : In quo omnes peccaverunt. Et : Per unius delictum in omnes homines in condemnationem (2). Simile est etiam quod habetur Gen. xvn. Patrem multarum (/entium constitui te (3). De quibus gentibus rursus dicitur cap. xvm. et xxn. In semine tuo benedicentur omnes gentes ter¬ ree . Adde quod S. Augustinus loco notato, S. Ambrosius in i. Psal. et S. Hieronymus in cap. 2G,Isai. dicunt, locum istum Dan. idem omnino significare, quod multo post Domi¬ nus expressit Joan. v. cum ait: Omnes, qui in monumentis sunt audient cocem filii Dei, et procedent, qui bona fecerunt, in resurrectionem vitx qui vero mala egerunt, in resurrectionem judicii ( 4). Ubi vide mus, a Domino ipso decla¬ ratum esse, per multos dormientes in terra3 pulvere intelligendos esse omnes, qui in mo¬ numentis sunt, id est, omnes mortuos. Non igitur irrefragabiliter hic locus contra eos concludit, qui negant parvulos extra coelum, et gehennam, sedem quamdam tertiam post judicium habituros. Tertia objectio : « Si verum fuerit, inquit Catharinus, quod Augustinus ad Renatum scripsit, videlicet his pueris medium assig¬ nare locum inter gehennae supplicium, et coelorum regnum, haeresim esse Pelagia- nam ; consequens est, ut omnis schola ha}- resim Pclagianam defendat. At cur non po¬ tius fateamur, quod Augustinus humani ali¬ quid passus est, et excessit in dogmate ? » Respondeo : S. Augustinus in lib. ad Re¬ natum, qui est primus de origine animae, cap. 9. non dicit, esse Pelagianam haeresim, assignare parvulis medium locum inter Ge¬ hennae supplicium et coelorum regnum, sed inter damnationem regnumque coelorum. Parvulos autem vere esse damnatos, ac per hoc non habere medium locum inter dam¬ nationem, regnumque coelorum, non solum Apostolus dicit ad Rom. v. et omnis schola contra Pelagianos defendit, sed ipse etiam Catharinus in illo ipso suo libello confirmat. Sic enim loquitur in responsione ad primum argumentum : « Fateor, inquit, quod nemo secundum fidem negare potest, omnes in Adam peccasse, et ideo pueros omnes illud vitium contrahere, ac secum ferre damna¬ tionem. » Sed esto scripsisset Augustinus in libro ad Renatum, non posse assignari parvulis me¬ dium locum, nisi ex sententia Pelagianorum, inter gehenna} supplicium, et coelorum reg¬ num; quod vere scripsit in serm. 14. de verbis Apostoli, et alibi : non propterea con¬ sequens erit, ut omnis schola haeresim Pe¬ lagianam defendat. Nam tametsi Theologi Scholastici in eo fere conveniant, ut parvuli sine Baptismo decedentes non patiantur poe¬ nam sensibilem ignis corporalis ; tamen a- perte docent, ut nos supra citavimus, eos in inferno esse, et poenam damni perpetuo lue¬ re ; ac per hoc non assignant illis medium locum inter gehennae supplicium, et coelo¬ rum regnum. Sed in ipsa gehenna mitiore poena quam caeteros puniendos esse confir¬ mant. A qua sententia ne ipse quidem Au¬ gustinus multum abhorret. Non igitur Au¬ gustinus aliquid humani passus esse, aut excessisse in hoc dogmate censendus est; sed illi plane humanum aliquid patiuntur, et excedunt, qui parvulos in superiore parte terra, quasi in terrestri paradiso collocant, eosque beatos ac felices dicunt. Quarta objectio : « Quia non erat conve¬ niens, inquit Catharinus, ut quidquam frau¬ daretur suo fine, id est, illo qui ei secundum naturam competit : idcirco parvulos ea ma¬ nebit felicitas, quam homini dignum est competere, ut homo est. Ergo istis pueris, qui humanam naturam sine crimine habe¬ bunt, illa, qum humante natura convenit, et quodammodo ipso jure debetur felicitas, dabitur. Noscentergo quatenus naturalis cog¬ nitio se extendere poterit, Dominum Deum et substantias separatas longe super omnes Philosophos. Non enim ullum habebunt im¬ pedimentum ex corpore, neque interius, neque exterius, et in teternum viventes pro¬ ficient quasi in immensum. » Respondeo : Multa sunt in hac ratiocina¬ tione, quae merito negari et reprehendi pos¬ sunt. Primum, falsum est, non esse conve¬ niens , ut quidquam fraudetur suo fine' Quin potius conveniens est, ut summus pro¬ visor omnium rerum, dirigat quidem omnia (1) Rom. V, 19. - (2) Gen. XVII, 5. — (3) ibid. XXII, 18. - (4) Joan. V, 28. CAPUT III. 463 ' ad suum finem, sed tamen aliqua ab eo fine excidere permittat ; vide sanctum Thom. in . quaest . 22. art. 2 . et quaest. 23 . art. 3. Deinde falsum est, parvulos sine Bapti¬ smo decedentes, naturam humanam habere sine crimine, nisi per crimen actuale pec¬ catum intelligi velis. Sed quidquid sit de no¬ mine, certum est, parvulos naturam habere peccato depravatam, et esse filios ira;, ac per hoc nullo jure deberi eis felicitatem. Denique falsum est, naturalem esse felici¬ tatem, vivere in aeternum, cum corpore pe¬ nitus immortali, proficere in immensum, nullum impedimentum ex corpore habere, intelligere Deum et substantias separatas supra omnes Philosophos, idque sine labore, sine doctore, sine libris, aliisque discendi instrumentis. Nihil enim horum natura hu¬ mana perse requirit, quin potius naturale est homini corpus habere mortale, cibo ac potu indigere, pendere a sensibus, corporalibus in scientiis acquirendis non sine magno labore ad inlelligentiam, quamvis exiguam, ac tenuem rerum incorporalium pervenire. Quare non resurgent parvuli, de quibus loquimur, ad vitam immortalem, quod ita postulat eorum natura, vel quod ipsis id val¬ de utile sit futurum, sed ut justitia Dei in eo¬ rum perpetua damnatione cernatur. Et ideo corpus habebunt, immortale quidem, sed non impassibile, non spirituale, non glorio¬ sum : mentem quoque habebunt, non qui¬ dem actuali peccato inquinatam, sed habi- tualiter a Deo aversam, nullisque scientiis, aut virtutibus ornatam. Quinta objectio : « Cum non sint futuri, in¬ quit Catharinus, proprie exules a regno Dei, sed relegatis magis similes, probabile mihi videtur, quod non carebunt Angelicis reve¬ lationibus et visitationibus etiam eorum, qui erunt in coelis, qui sic recreabunt eos, et so¬ labuntur, ut praeter divinae visionem maje- ' statis, nihil eis deesse intelligamus. » Respondeo : Inter exulem, et relegatum ea differentia constituitur I. 2. ff. de poenis, ut exules jus civitatis amittant, relegati retineant. Quare si parvuli non baptizati, non exules a regno Dei, et civitate sancta Hierusalem coelesti, sed relegati dicendi sint, id seque¬ tur, ut ejusmodi parvuli, cives Sanctorum, domestici Dei, filii regni, et membra corpo¬ ris Christi haberi debeant ; nam cum Eccle¬ sia, qua; est in coelis, nunc civitas sancta. nunc domus Dei, nunc coelorum regnum, nunc etiam corpus Christi esse dicantur, qui cives Sanctorum sunt, iidem domestici Dei, filii regni, et membra Christi nominan¬ tur. At quis ferat Catholicus, ut homines sine fide et Baptismo dicantur membra Christi ? et filii ira; sint filii regni ? et qui scripti non sunt in libro vitee, sint etiam post hanc vi¬ tam cives Sanctorum, et domestici Dei ? Non igitur relegatis, sed plane deportatis similes sunt parvuli sine Baptismo deceden¬ tes, et in locis subterraneislongissime a san¬ cta civitate constituti, neque Angelorum, ne¬ que hominum beatorum visitatione fruuntur. Ilie plane locum habet, quod scribit S. Au¬ gustinus in lib. i. de peccatorum meritis et remissione, cap. 23. et relatum est in decre¬ tum de consecratione, distin. 4. can. Nul¬ la. <( Nulla ex nostro arbitrio praeter Bapti¬ smum Christi, salus aeterna promittatur in¬ fantibus, quam non promittit Scriptura divina humanis omnibus ingeniis praeferenda. » Sexta objectio : « Probabilissimum, inquit, judicavi, quod quidam dicunt, habitationem eorum fore super hanc terram, quia locus tst proprius hominum, ubi contemplabuntur opera Dei. » Et huc aspexit forsan, qui dixit : Coelum coeli Domino , terram autem dedit filiis hominum. Et fortasse hoc est etiam quod dixit Apostolus : « Instaurata per Jesum om¬ nia quae in coelis et qua; in terra, id est, quae coelestem habitationem habebunt, et quae terrenam. » Respondeo : non est de rebus, quae pen¬ dent a divina voluntate, aliquid asserendum, nisi Deus ipse in Scripturis sanctis tale ali¬ quid revelaverit. Scripturae autem, ut san¬ ctus Augustinus, a nobis supra citatus, saepius observavit, nusquam tradunt, post diem ju¬ dicii futuras hominum sedes, nisi duas, unam in coelo cum Angelis, alteram in inferno cum daemonibus, quae sunt etiam duae civitates,' Hierusalem et Babylon, et de quibus tam multa scribit idem Augustinus in libris de ci- vitateDei. Quare superior terrae facies pro- priusest hominumlocus, dummortales sunt, et egent aere ad respirationem, et fructibus terrae ad alimentum, et pro hoc tempore lo- § quitur Psalm. Coelum coeli Domino, terram autem dedit filiis hominum (1) ; immortalibus autem pro ratione meritorum coelum potius, aut gehenna conveniet. Quod autem Apostolus ad Ephes. cap. ii (1) Psalm. CXIII, 16. 1JBKIJ VI. Wl scribit, Christum instaurasse qua) in coelis, et qua) in terra sunt, significat per Christum reparatas in crelo Angelorum ruinas, et in terra genus humanum de captivitate red¬ emptum. S. Augustinus in Enchirid. cap. 62. « In ipso, inquit, instaurantur qua) in ccelis sunt, cum id, quod inde in Angelis lapsum est, ex hominibus redditur ; instau¬ rantur autem quae in terris sunt, cum ipsi homines, qui praedestinati sunt ad aeternam vitam, a corruptionis vetustate liberantur. » Alia est expositio sancti Hieronymi in hunc locum, qui pro « instaurare, » legit, « recapi- tularc, » et sensum esse vult, in Christi cru¬ ce omnia mysteria diversis temporibus prae¬ dicta, vel figurata, ad unam veluti summam esse revocata. S. Joannes Chrysostomus aliam adfert expositionem, et quidem valde, consentaneam verbis Apostoli : verbum e- nim Gra)cum dvazssaXauoffaaO&i, exponit, re¬ ducere ad unum caput, ut sententia hujus loci sit, factum esse per mysterium incar¬ nationis, ut coelestia, et terrena, id est An¬ geli et homines, unum caput, id est, Chri¬ stum, habere inciperent, cum antea propter hominum peccata sejuncta, et separata es¬ sent a terrenis coelestia. Quod aliis verbis i- dem Apostolus ad Colossens. cap. i. scribit, cum ait : Pacificam per sanguinem crucis ejus, sive quae in teiris, sive quae in ccelis sunt (1). Septima objectio : « Est alia ratio, inquit Catharinus, per hoc non rejicienda, quam docti quidam induxere : Quoniam cum terra hsec mansura sit in reternum, et' purgatior, et pulchrior, sicut scriptum est : Et vidi coe¬ lum novum, et terram novam ; sicut autem ccclum non nude pro coelo sumitur, absque habitatore, ita nec terra. Et vere valde in- congruum videtur, locum talem et tantum fore perpetuo vacuum sine habitatore ; et similiter terrenos homines carere habitatio¬ ne sua propria, qua) est terra haec, nam sub terra manere tales, minus conveniens eorum conditioni videtur. » Respondeo : terra quidem manebit in a)- ternum, et purgatior, sed aquis (ut supra diximus) undique cooperta, et ideo non erit ^conveniens habitationi hominum. Porro cce- lum novum omnino sine habitatore intolli¬ tur, nisi quis velit, post judicium aut dro¬ mones, aut aves in coelo hoc degere. Neque enim de coelo syderco, sed aereo sermo est. Hoc enim coelum innovabitur, et purgabitur, cum, ut loquitur S. Petrus in epist. 2. cap. ult. Cceli ardentes solventur (2). Quod si pa¬ rum conveniens esset, terram perpetuo va¬ cuam hominibus permanere, eadem ratione parum esset conveniens, aquam piscibus, et aerem avibus perpetuo carituram. Denique conditioni hominum damnatorum optime convepit locus sub terra, id est, carccr, sive ergastulum inferorum. Octava objectio : « Quod si nunc anima) te¬ nentur in limbo, sicut olim sancti Patres de¬ tenti sunt, qui locus sub terra esse merito creditur, hoc illi originali peccato datur in- terim usque ad diem magnae resurrectionis. Quar.do enim totum Christi corpus resurre¬ xerit, scilicet in Sanctis suis, tunc coquum erit et ipsos potiri perfectione sua. » Respondeo : Si anima) parvulorum sine Baptismo decedentium, in poenam originalis peccati detinentur in limbo subterraneo ; et peccatum illud nunquam dimittetur, ut Ca¬ tholici omnes constanter credunt, certe se¬ quitur, animas eorum parvulorum cx limbo illo subterraneo nunquam egressuras. Por¬ ro cum totum Christi corpus resurrexerit, re¬ surgent etiam et damnati omnes, tum pusil¬ li, tum magni. Sed non ideo resurgent, ut ibi sint anima), ubi fuerant corpora, sed con¬ tra ut ibi sint corpora, ubi fuerant anima). Sequentur corpora sua animas, sive in cte- lum, sive in infernum. Objectio ultima, quamvis non ultimo loco posita, sumitur ex Augustino, qui in lib. m. de libero arbitrio, cap. 23. sic ait : « Quis novit quid parvulis, quorum cruciatibus du¬ ritia majorum contunditur, aut exercetur fi¬ des, aut misericordia probatur, quis, inquam, novit, quid ipsis parvulis iu secreto judicio¬ rum suorum bona) compensationis reservet Deus ? Respondeo : Idem S. Augustinus in epist. 28. ad Hieronymum explicat heee sua verba, ac dicit, ea se protulisse pro infantibus ba¬ ptizatis, non autem pro iis, qui sine peccati originalis remissione decedunt. (1) Colos?.. I, 20. — (2) Pet, III, 12. CAPUT IV. 105