Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Loss of Grace · Book VI: The Punishments of Original Sin
Chapter 6: The third opinion is refuted, and it is asserted to be probable that unbaptized little ones will suffer an interior sorrow of mind, though a most mild one
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).
It remains, at the last, that we sift the third and fourth opinions: of which the former exempted little ones from all sorrow, both internal and external; the latter left them the internal, and freed them utterly from the external. And the former indeed is probable, on account of the authority of St. Thomas, St. Bonaventure, and many other illustrious theologians; but the latter seems to us more probable, on account of the authority of the holy Fathers — Augustine, Fulgentius, Gregory, and others — whom some even of the Scholastic theologians have followed.
We say, then, that little ones dying without Baptism will have a sorrow of mind, in that they will understand that they are deprived of beatitude, strangers to the fellowship of their pious brothers and parents, thrust down into the prison of the lower world, and to lead their life in perpetual darkness. But that this sorrow in them will be most light and most mild, for many causes. Both because they had only a most remote disposition toward beatitude. And because they will understand that not by their own negligence did they lose so great a good — whence also they will lack the worm of conscience. And because they never tasted delights, either heavenly or earthly; for we easily go without those goods to which we have never grown accustomed. And finally, because they will see that there are very many in the same prison of gehenna far more unhappy than themselves, to whose lot they too could have pertained, had it befallen them to live longer. Wherefore St. Augustine in many places affirms that little ones dying without Baptism will be in the mildest damnation of all. See book 1 On the Merits and Remission of Sins, chapter 16; in the Enchiridion, chapter 93; and book 5 against Julian, chapter 8 [al. 11]. But let us bring forward the testimonies of the Fathers, to prove that the little ones will not be free of all sorrow of mind.
The first testimony is of St. Augustine, book 1 On the Origin of the Soul, chapter 9: “To unbaptized little ones let no one promise, between the damnation and the kingdom of heaven, a middle place, as it were, of rest or felicity of any kind, wheresoever it please,” etc. St. Augustine in this place denies that little ones have any place of rest or of felicity of any kind. But if they were touched by no sorrow at all, no sadness, neither internal nor external, neither of body nor of mind, certainly they would enjoy a great and perfect rest. The second testimony, of the same Augustine, in epistle 106 to Paulinus: “Surely they will confess that unbaptized little ones, however more tolerably than all who also commit their own sins, are yet punished with eternal death.” But that word, “more tolerably,” manifestly requires that the little ones have something penal to tolerate; and no one is said to tolerate except one who feels pain and labors in bearing. The third testimony, of the same, book 6 against Julian, chapter 4 [al. 14], past the middle, where he proves that it is an evil for little ones not to enter into the kingdom of God, and that they grieve over this matter: “If this,” says he, “will not be an evil to them, then so many innocent images of God did not love the kingdom of God. But if they will love it — and will love it as much as innocents ought to love the kingdom of him by whom they are created to his own image — will they suffer nothing of evil from this separation?” The same Augustine adds also, book 5 against Julian, chapter 8 [al. 11], that it will be a punishment to little ones that they will be separated from the fellowship of their pious parents. But certainly to be separated from a thing which is loved necessarily brings sorrow. The fourth testimony of the same Augustine is in epistle 28 to Jerome, in sermon 14 on the words of the Apostle, and elsewhere, where he teaches that little ones will suffer in the lower world punishment, or torment — which names can scarcely be understood without some sorrow. The fifth testimony is of St. Fulgentius, in the book On the Faith, to Peter, chapter 27 [al. 3], who says that little ones dying without Baptism sustain the interminable torments of gehenna; but torment without sorrow is not wont to be. The sixth is of St. Gregory, book 9 of the Morals, chapter 16 [al. 21], where he more than once repeats that little ones receive the perpetual torments of gehenna; and who would concede that a torment is without sorrow? The seventh is of Cyprian — or whoever was the author — in the sermon on the reason of circumcision, where, speaking of the punishment of original sin after death: “There remained,” says he, “after the death of the flesh, the toil of the soul and the affliction of the spirit.” What clearer?
To these testimonies comes this: that no one hitherto of those who think the contrary has been able to render a congruent reason why the infants should not be saddened while they think that they are deprived of the heavenly felicity, and thrust down into the prison of the lower world. Some of the old Scholastics said that those little ones will perceive no sorrow from the loss of beatitude for this reason: that they will be altogether ignorant that they have lost it, since that can be known only through faith, and they never had faith. This reason St. Thomas approves in question 5 On Evil, article 3; but the same he reprehends on 2 Sentences, distinction 33, question 2, article 2 [al. 3]. Durandus indeed defends it, writing on the same distinction of the same book. But to St. Thomas (as I said) and St. Bonaventure, writing on 2 Sentences, and to other learned men, it rightly did not please. For if that reason effected anything, it would follow that adult barbarians, who added many and most grave sins to that one original, would have no sorrow over the lost beatitude, seeing that in this life they never heard anything of that beatitude, or of Christ. They will know, then, that there is a certain beatitude, and that they have lost it, because they will know their own nature, and will not be ignorant that in it a natural desire of attaining the highest good was implanted by the author of nature. For, as St. Augustine speaks, book 1 of the Confessions, chapter 1: Thou hast made us toward thyself, and our heart is unquiet until it rest in thee. And so of this sadness of the unquiet heart those men will not be able to be free. Next, will they not, on the day of judgment, openly behold many of their own race — and perhaps parents and brothers — ascending into heaven with immense glory? Will not, in the same judgment — that God may be approved just by all — the reason be manifest both of the reward and of the punishment of all men? “For then the hidden things of darkness will be brought to light, and the counsels of hearts will be made manifest,” as the Apostle writes, 1 Corinthians 4. See St. Thomas, on 4 Sentences, distinction 43, question 1, article 3, little question 2, where he teaches that in the judgment there will be known to all both their own sentence and that of others, and also the reason and cause of that sentence. And what Durandus answers — that the little ones do not properly pertain to the judgment, but only the adults, who commit actual sins — is repugnant to the Apostle, who in Romans 5 says: By the offence of one, unto all men to condemnation — for he is not condemned who is not judged; repugnant to the creed of Athanasius, in which it is said that all men will rise and render an account to the judge; repugnant to Augustine, who in sermon 14 on the words of the Apostle says that little ones will rise to the judgment, and be judged. This reason, then, being exploded, St. Bonaventure devised another. For he writes that those men will consider at once the beatitude which they lost, and the punishments of the other damned, which they escaped; and though the former consideration can bring sorrow, the latter joy, yet the one is so to be tempered by the other that the consideration of the lost beatitude will hinder the joy over the escape from the punishments, and the consideration of the escape from the punishments will hinder the sorrow over the privation of beatitude; and so it will come to pass that they will neither ever be saddened nor rejoice. But this reason too seems not to have fully satisfied. For if the matter stood so, those men would seem reduced to the nature of things without sensation. And indeed it would more probably be said that they will consider, not at once, but by turns, now the lost beatitude, now the deliverance from graver evils; and by the same reasoning will be now sad, now glad — or certainly that the consideration of the punishments they escaped will not utterly take away, but in part mitigate, the sadness which the consideration of the lost felicity brings with it. St. Thomas adduces another reason: namely, that those men are to be affected with no sadness because they will well understand that they never had any proportion to that beatitude, since they had neither grace nor the use of free choice; for they who use right judgment are not saddened if they lack that good for which they are found in no way fit. But neither in this reason does the human mind utterly acquiesce. For although the little ones dying without Baptism never had in themselves a proportion to beatitude, yet they had it in the first parent; and they will know, as we have shown, that by the fault of the first parent they lost so great a good. Richard, writing on the same distinction 33 of book 2 of the Sentences, when he saw that the aforesaid reasons did not fully satisfy, added a fourth, and says that the little ones know that they have fallen from beatitude, and yet are not saddened thence, comes about by a singular providence of God, who removes sorrow from their minds. But this reason seems to be nothing better than the rest. For since God does not hinder little ones in this life from suffering the pains which follow from the loss of original justice, why should he hinder the sorrow which after death will naturally follow the knowledge of the lost beatitude? For if there were any cause of hindering this sorrow, it would without doubt be this: that the little ones do not deserve such sorrow, since they committed nothing of evil by their own will; but by the same reasoning God ought to hinder the so many evils which the little ones now suffer.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT VI. Refellitur tertia opinio , et asseritur , probabile esse, parvulos non baptizatos passuros inte¬ riorem animi dolorem , quamvis mitissi¬ mum. Restat ad extremum, ut excutiamus opi¬ nionem tertiam et quartam, quarum prior parvulos eximebat ab omni dolore tum in¬ terno tum externo; posterior internum eis relinquebat, ab externo penitus liberabat, et quidem prior probabilis est propter aucto¬ ritatem S. Thom. S. Bonaventurae, et alio¬ rum multorum illustrium Theologorum. Sed posterior probabilior nobis videtur propter auctoritatem sanctorum Patrum, Augustini Fulgentii, Gregorii, et aliorum, quos non¬ nulli etiam Scholasticorum Theologorum se¬ cuti sunt. Dicimus igitur parvulos sine Baptismo de- cedeptes dolorem animi habituros, quod in- lelligent se beatitudine privatos, a consortio piorum fratrum et parentum alienos, in car¬ cerem inferni detrusos, et in tenebris perpe¬ tuis vitam acturos. Caeterum hunc dolorem in eis levissimum, mitissimumque mullis de causis futurum. Tum quod dispositionem ad beatitudinem non nisi remotissimam habuerint. Tum, quod intelligent non propria negligentia se tan¬ tum bonum amisisse, unde etiam verme con¬ scientia: carebunt. Tum, quod delicias, ne¬ que coelestes, neque terrenas unquam gusta- vexint. Facile enim iis bonis caremus, qui¬ bus nunquam assuevimus. Tum denique, quod videbunt plurimos esse in eodem ge¬ hennae caicere se multo infelieiores, ad quo¬ rum sortem ipsi quoque peitinere potuissent, si diutius sibi vivere contigisset ; quare S. Augustinus multis in locis affirmat, parvulos sine Baptismo decedentes in damnatione omnium mitissima futuros. Vide lib. i. de pec. mer. et remiss. cap. 16. in Enchir. cap. 93. et lib. v. in Julian. cap. 8. Sed ad- fei-amus testimonia Patrum, ad probandum parvulos non vacat ui-os omni dolore animi. Primum testimonium est sancti Augustini lib. i. de orig. animae, cap. 9. « Parvulis non baptizatis nemo pi’omittat quietis aut felicitatis cujuslibet, atque ubilibet, inter damnationem regnumque coelorum, quasi medium locum, etc. » Negat hoc loco san¬ ctus Augustinus, parvulos habei’0 locum ul¬ lum quietis, aut felicitatis cujuslibet. At si nullo omnino dolore, nulla tristitia tange¬ rentur nec interna, nec externa, neque cor¬ poris, neque animi, certe magna et perfecta quiete frucrentur. Secundum testimonium ejusdem Augustini in epist. 106. ad Paulinum : « Nempe fate¬ buntur parvulos non baptizatos, quamlibet tolerabilius omnibus, qui etiam propina pec¬ cata committunt, tamen seterna morte mul- ctari. » At vox illa, « tolerabilius » , manife¬ ste requirit ut parvuli aliquid habeant poe¬ nale tolei-andum ; non dicitur autem tolera¬ re, nisi qui sentit dolorem et laboi'al in per- fei'endo. Tertium testimonium ejusdem, lib. vi. in Julian. cap. 4. ultra medium, ubi probat parvulis esse malum, non intrare in regnum Dei, et ipsos de hac re dolere : « Si hoc, inquit, eis non erit malum, non ergo ama¬ bant regnum Dei tot innocentes imagines Dei. Si autem amabunt, et tantum amabunt, quantum innocentes amai‘e debent regnum ejus, a quo ad ipsius imaginem creantur, ni¬ hil ne mali de hac sepai’atione patientur? » addit etiam idem Augustinus lib. v. in Ju¬ lian. cap. 8. parvulis poenam esse futuram, quod separabuntur a consortio pioi'um pa¬ rentum. At cci-te separai-i a re, qua; diligi¬ tur, necessaiio dolorem affert. Quai-tum testimonium ejusdem Augustini est in epist. 28. ad Hieronymum, in serra. 14. de verb. Apost. et alibi, ubi docet, parvulos in inferno poenam, vel supplicium esse pas¬ suros ; qua; nomina vixintelligi possunt sine aliquo dolore. Quintum testimonium est S. Fulgentii in CAPUT VI. 471 lib. de fide ad Petrum, cap. 3. qui dicit, parvulos sine Baptismo decedentes, intermi¬ nabilia gehenna; sustinere supplicia, at sup¬ plicium sine dolore esse non solet. Sextum estS. Gregorii lib. ix. moral. cap. 16. ubi non semel repetit parvulos perpetua gehenna; tormenta percipere; quis autem tormentum sine dolore esse concedat? Septimum est Cypriani, sive quicumque fuit auctor, in serm. de ratione circumcisio¬ nis, ubi loquens de poena peccati originalis post mortem : « Supererat, inquit, post mor¬ tem carnis, anima; labor et afflictio Spiritus », quid clarius ? Ad haec testimonia accedit, quod nullus hactenus eorum, qui contra sentiunt, con¬ gruentem rationem reddere potuit, cur in- tantes non tristentur dum cogitant, se coele¬ sti felicitate privatos, et in carcerem inferni esse detrusos. Aliqui veterum Scholasti c- rutn dixerunt, parvulos illos propterea dolo¬ rem nullum percepturos ex amissione beati- tudinis, quod ignorabunt omnino eam se amisisse, cum id nisi per fidem cognosci non possit, et ipsi fidem nunquam habuerint ; hanc rationem approbat S. Thom. in qua;st. o. de malo, art. 3. Sedeamdem reprehendit in 2. Scnt. dist. 33. qumst. 2. art. 3. Defen¬ dit quidem eam Durandus in eamdem distin. ctionem ejusdem libri scribens. Ceterum, S. Thomse (ut dixi) et S. Bona- vent. in 2. Senten. scribentibus, aliisque vi¬ ris doctis jure non placuit : nam si ea ratio aliquid efficeret, sequeretur, barbaros adul¬ tos, qui multa et gravissima peccata ad unum illud originale addiderunt, non habi¬ turos dolorem de amissa beatitudine ; quan¬ doquidem in hac vita de ea beatitudine, vel de Christo nihil unquam audierunt. Cogno¬ scent igitur esse aliquam beatitudinem, et eam se amisisse, quia cognoscent naturam suam, et in ea naturale desiderium summi boni adipiscendi ab auctore naturte insertum esse non ignorabunt : nam, ut loquitur san¬ ctus Augustinus lib. i. Confess. cap. i. fecit nos Deus ad se, et inquietum est cor nostrum, donec requiescat in ipso. Itaque hac inquieti cordis tristitia homines illi vacaro non pote¬ runt. Deinde nonne in die judicii palam aspi¬ cient multos sui generis, et fortasse parentes et fratres in ccelum cum ingenti gloria ascen¬ dere? nonne in eodem judicio, ut justus Deus ab omnibus comprobetur, ratio mani¬ festa erit, tum proemii, tum supplicii om¬ nium hominum ? « Tunc enim illuminabun¬ tur abscondita tenebrarum, et manifesta erunt consilia cordium, » ut Apostolus scri¬ bit I. ad Corinth. iv. vide S. Thom. in 4. Scnt. distinet. 43. quaest. 1. art. 3. quiesti- uncula 2. ubi docet, in judicio omnibus no¬ tam esse futuram, tum sententiam suam, et alimim, tum etiam rationem et causam ejus sententia;. Quod autem Durandus respondet ad judi¬ cium proprie non pertinere parvulos, sed solum adultos, qui actualia peccata commit¬ tunt, repugnat Apostolo, qui ad Itom. v. di¬ cit : Unius delicto in omnes homines in con¬ demnationem. Neque enim condemnatur, qui non judicatur. Repugnat symbolo Athanasii, in quo dicitur, omnes homines resurrectu¬ ros, et reddituros judici rationem. Repugnat Augustino, qui serm. 14. de verbis Apostoli dicit, parvulos resurrecturos ad judicium, et judicandos. Hac igitur ratione explosa, S. Bonavent. aliam excogitavit, scribit enim homines illos simul consideraturos beatitudinem, quam amiserunt; et poenas aliorum damnatorum, quas evaserunt ; et quanquam prior consi¬ deratio dolorem, posterior gaudium adferre possit, tamen ita unam temperandam per aliam, ut consideratio amissa; beatitudinis, impeditura sit gaudium de evasione poena¬ rum, et consideratio evasionis poenarum, im¬ peditura sit dolorem de privatione beatitu¬ dinis, atque ita futurum, ut illi neque tris¬ tentur unquam, neque laetentur. Sed haec etiam i’atio non plene satisfecis¬ se videtur, nam si res ita se haberet, vide¬ rentur homines illi redacti ad naturam re¬ rum non sententiam. Et sane, probabilius diceretur, eos non simul, sed pervices consi¬ deraturos, nunc amissam beatitudinem, nunc liberationem a gravioribus malis, atque eadem ratione, nunc tristes, nunc laetos fu¬ turos, aut certe considerationem poenarum quas evaserunt, non penitus sublaturam, sed ex parte mitigatuiam tristitiam, quam secum consideratio amissa; felicitatis adferre. S. Thomas aliam rationem adducit, nimi¬ rum homines illos, ideo nulla tristitia esse afficiendos, quod probe intellecturi sint, nul¬ lam se proportionem ad eam beatitudinem unquam habuisse, cum nec habuerint gra¬ tiam, nec usum liberi arbitrii. Non enim tri¬ stantur qui recto judicio utuntur, si eo bono carcant^ ad quod nulla ratione inveniuntur idonei. LIBER vr. i ii Verum neque ia lmc ratione mens huma¬ na penitus acquiescit. Nam tametsi nunquam in se parvuli decedentes sine Baptismo pro- portionem habuerint ad bcatiludinem, ta¬ men habuerunt in primo parente, et cognos¬ cent, ut ostendimus, se primi parentis culpa tantum bonum perdidisse. Itichardus in eamdem distinctionem 33. lib. ii. Sententiarum scribens, cum videret pnedictas rationes non plene satisfacere, ad¬ didit quartam atque ait, quod parvuli cogno¬ scant se beatitudinc excidisse, et tamen non inde tristentur, fieri singulari Dei provi¬ dentia, qui dolorem ab eorum animis remo¬ vet. Sed hiec ratio nihilo videtur esse melior cteteris, nam cum Deus non impediat, quo minus parvuli in hac vita patiantur dolores, qui sequuntur ex amissione justitias origina¬ lis, cur impediret dolorem, qui post mortem naturaliter consequelur cognitionem amissas bealitudinis? Si enim ulla causa esset impe¬ diendi hunc dolorem, illa sine dubio esset, quia non merentur parvuli ejusmodi dolorem, cum nihil mali, propria voluntate commise¬ rint, at eadem ratione impedire deberet Deus tot mala, qua: nunc parvuli patiuntur.