Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Sacrament of Baptism
Chapter 1: On the Name, the Definition and the Parts of Baptism; and On Its Matter
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. III, De Sacramento Baptismi, the second general controversy on the sacraments. 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).
The Argument and Division of the Disputation on Baptism. What is usually disputed about Baptism can be brought back to nine heads. The first is about the name and definition. The second, about the matter. The third, about the form. The fourth, about the necessity. The fifth, about the minister. The sixth, about those who receive it. The seventh, about the effects. The eighth, about the comparison of the Baptism of Christ and of John; for the chief comparison turns on the effects. The ninth, about the rite and ceremonies. In explaining all these controversies we shall look chiefly to two ends. One, to defend the canons of the Council of Trent on Baptism, which are had in the seventh session, against Calvin's Antidote and Chemnitz's Examination. The other, to understand well the opinions and arguments of the chief heretics of this time, and, God helping, to refute them effectively.
Chapter 1. On the Name, the Definition and the Parts of Baptism
About the name of Baptism there is no dissension; for all use this word, because it is had everywhere in the Scriptures. And baptisma properly signifies immersion. For ordinarily Baptism is made by immersion, and that to represent the burial of Christ, according to that of Colossians 2: “Buried with him in baptism.” But it has many other names among the Fathers, on which see especially Clement, book 1 of the Paedagogus, chapter 6; Nazianzen, the oration on Baptism; and Chrysostom, the homily to the baptized; who call Baptism illumination, grace, gift, seal, mystery, cleansing, and some others. But the chief and most common name is photismos, that is, illumination: for this, besides the three Fathers cited, all the other later Greeks use, and before them Dionysius the Areopagite, On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, chapter 2; nay, the Apostle himself, Hebrews 6, when he says, “It is impossible for those who were once illuminated,” and so on; and chapter 10: “Call to mind the former days, wherein, being illuminated, you endured a great fight of afflictions.” Whence Cyril of Jerusalem too calls his catecheses on Baptism the catecheses of the illuminated. And Baptism is called illumination because in it the habit of faith is poured in.
As regards the definition, St. Thomas, part 3, question 66, article 1, brings some definitions. But from the Scriptures the Roman Catechism defines it most fitly thus: “Baptism is the sacrament of regeneration by water in the word of life.” Which definition is taken partly from John 3, partly from Paul to the Ephesians 5. And first there is put “sacrament,” which is the genus. Then is added “of regeneration,” which is the difference narrowing the genus and distinguishing it from the sacraments of the old law. Third is added “by water,” which is another difference, narrowing it still more and distinguishing it from the other sacraments of the new law. For although the rest are not properly said to regenerate, yet they justify the ungodly, and especially Penance; and the justification of the ungodly, especially of a heretic or an apostate, differs little or nothing from regeneration. Whence Galatians 4 Paul says: “My little children, of whom I am in labour again.” But when “by water” is added, the difference is now clear. For the reconciliation of penitents is not regeneration by water, but a certain re-forming, and as it were a calling back from the dead.
Where this too is to be observed, that the sacrament of Baptism is not the water itself, which is a permanent thing, but the washing, which is a passing thing. And so Baptism is the sacrament of regeneration by water, that is, an external sign sanctifying through the sprinkling of water. Lastly is added “in the word of life,” that the form of the sacrament too may be expressed, which is the chief part of its essence.
Philip, in the Commonplaces of the year 1558, under the title on sacrifice, defines Baptism thus: “Baptism is a sign by which God deals with us and receives us into favor.” But this definition fits every sacrament, nay even the word itself, which yet is not a sacrament.
Calvin, book 4 of the Institutes, chapter 15, section 1, defines it thus: “Baptism is the sign of initiation by which we are received into the fellowship of the Church, that, grafted into Christ, we may be reckoned among the children of God.” Which definition has many faults. For neither is it essential, since it does not touch any part of the essence of Baptism; nor does it explain the effect, or principal end, of this sacrament. For the principal end, according to the Catholics, nay according to the Scriptures, is to justify and regenerate; according to Calvin (as he himself adds in the same place) it is to feed faith after the manner of a sealed diploma; which end certainly is not explained in that definition, but only a certain secondary end, which is to bear witness to the faithfulness which we owe to God and the Church, and so to be acknowledged and numbered among the children of God.
Add that this definition fits circumcision too. For circumcision was the sign of initiation by which the Jews were received into the fellowship of the Church and grafted into Christ. For although the assembly of the Jews is called the synagogue when it is distinguished from the Church, yet absolutely it was a Church, and the Church of the true God, before it denied Christ. Christ himself too, although as man he was not in time the head of the synagogue except in the last days, yet as God was always the head of the whole Church. Nay, even as man who was to come and suffer, he was already then the head, to whom the Hebrews were joined by faith and into whom they were grafted. Whence in 1 Corinthians 10 the Jews in the desert are said to have tempted Christ; and in Apocalypse 13 it is said, “The Lamb which was slain from the beginning of the world.” The same definition seems to fit the preached word of God too; for by the word of God too we are initiated, and received into the Church, and grafted into Christ.
Chapter 2. On the Matter of Baptism
About the matter there is almost no dissension, although not a few errors have at times arisen on this matter, or even exist. The first was the error of the Manichees, who, by the testimony of Augustine, book On Heresies, chapter 46, thought water ought not to be used in Baptism, because, namely, they thought that water, like the other bodily things, was created not by God but by the devil. The Marcionites were more modest, who, although they believed that water was the work of an evil principle, that is, of the devil, not of the good God, yet used it in Baptism on account of Christ's command. Theodoret relates, book 1 On the Fables of the Heretics, that he had seen a certain old Marcionite who confessed that water was to be used in the mystery, and yet so hated it that he preferred to wash his face with his own spittle rather than with water, lest, namely, he should seem to need the Creator.
The second error was that of Seleucus and Hermias, who excluded water from Baptism, and that on account of the authority of the Scriptures, which, wherever they compare the Baptism of John with the Baptism of Christ, always affirm that John baptized in water, and that Christ would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire, Matthew 3, Luke 3, John 1, Mark 1, Acts 1. Philastrius relates this error in the book On Heresies, and Augustine, On Heresies, chapter 59.
The third error, from the same foundation, was that of the Jacobites, who in place of the water of Baptism printed the figure of the cross on the forehead with a red-hot iron. The witness is Bernard of Luxemburg, in the catalogue of heretics.
The fourth is that of the Paulicians, who, by the testimony of Euthymius, in part 2 of the Panoplia, title 21, substituted for the element of water in Baptism these words: “I am the living water.”
The fifth error is Luther's, who, in the Table Talk, chapter 17, asked whether, water being lacking, it is lawful to baptize in milk or beer, first answers that this is to be committed to the judgement of God; then he adds that whatever can be named by the name of bath is fit for baptizing. But certainly that baths of wine and milk, not to say of beer, can be made, no one ever doubted.
Against all these ravings the Council of Trent, session 7, canon 2, laid down that true and natural water is required for Baptism. From which we understand two things. First, that no liquid is the matter of Baptism which is not true and natural water. Second, that all true and natural water, however much altered and changed accidentally, is fit matter for Baptism. And this is plain from most open Scriptures. For in John 3 it is said, “Of water and the Holy Ghost.”
Likewise in the same place there arose the jealousy of John's disciples, because they saw that Christ baptized through his disciples in water, as John too baptized. Acts 8: “See, here is water: what doth hinder me from being baptized?” Ephesians 5: “By the laver of water in the word of life.” In 1 Corinthians 10 Paul compares Baptism to the Red Sea; in 1 Peter 3 Peter compares the same Baptism to the flood. Lastly the prophets too expressly foretold the Baptism of water, as Ezekiel, chapter 36: “I will pour upon you clean water.” And why God chose water rather than another element, the authors give causes, bringing various properties of water, which see in St. Thomas, part 3, question 66, article 3, and William of Paris in the book On the Sacraments, the chapter on Baptism.
Nor do the testimonies brought by the Seleucians conclude. For they do not teach that the difference between the Baptism of John and of Christ is that one was in water alone, the other in the Spirit alone, or fire; but that one was in water alone, the other not in water alone, but in water and the Spirit, as is said in John 3. Whence 1 John 5: “This is he that came by water and blood”; “not by water only, but by water and blood.” And what is added about fire, Matthew 3 and Luke 3, does not signify some elemental fire, as the Jacobites foolishly thought, but a certain heavenly and divine fire; for this is why it is joined with the Holy Spirit. And that fire can signify either the fiery tongues which came down on the apostles on the day of Pentecost; or the fire of purgatory, as Jerome teaches on chapter 3 of Matthew and Bede on chapter 3 of Luke; or also the fire of divine judgement, as Hilary expounds, canon 2 on Matthew; or lastly the fire of tribulation in this life, which is lacking to no baptized person, as the author of the Unfinished Work expounds, on chapter 3 of Matthew.
Chemnitz, on this canon, notes nothing else than that it is not necessary for the water to be exorcized and blessed, if true and natural water suffices. But he gathers this badly: for although the blessing of the water is not required for the substance of the sacrament, yet it was rightly instituted, as we shall say below.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
DE SACIUMEKTO BAPTISMI
Argumenlum el partitio dispulalionis de Baplismo
CAP.
I
»
11.
V
III.
))
IV.
»
V.
»
VI.
»
VII.
»
VIII.
»
IX.
)>
X.
XI,
XII
XIII,
\IV.
XV.
. De nomine, defmilione et parlibiis CAP. XVI
Baplismi.
. De materia Baptismi.
. De forma Bapiismi. n XVII
De necessitate et instUulionc Bap-
tismi. )) XVIII
Quo tempore coeperit Baptismiis esse
necessarius.
De Baptismo sanguinis et jlaminis. a XIX.
De ministro Baptismi.
De Baplismo inl'antiu7n,contra Ana- )> XX,
bapiistas.
Solvuntur objectiones Anabaptista-
rum. 1)
Quid sentiant adversarii de (ide,
quae requiriiur in Baptismo par-
vulorum. )) XXII,
Declaratur quae fides requiratur in
Baptismo parvulorum,et refellmi-
lur errores advcrsariorum. n XXIII.
Qui sintveri, aut falsi effectus Bap- » XXIV.
tismi. )) XXV.
Quod Baptismus vere tollal pecca-
tum. )) XXVI.
Quod Baptismus non facit Jiomines
impcccatrilcs. » XXVII.
Pcr Baptismnm non liberari homi-
nes a servanda le<je Dei,
Per Baptismum non libemri homi-
nes ab obligalione legis ecclesia-
sticae.
Per Baptismum non fieri irrita o-
mnia vota.
Sola memoria Baptismi non posse
dimitti peccata, quae fiunt posl
Bapiismum.
De Baplismo Joannis,qui fuerint er-
rores.
Baplismum Joannis non fuisse sa-
cramentum idem cum Baptismo
Christi.
Baptismum Joannis non habuisse
eandem vim et efficaciam, quam
habet Baptismus Christi.
Quod post Baplismum Joa^mis ne-
cessario percipiendus eral Christi
Baptismus.
Solvuniur objectiones.
De caeremoniis Baptismi.
Cacremoniae anle Baptismum sunt
duodecim.
De caeremoniis, quae Baptismum
comilantur.
De caeremoniis , quae scquuntur
Bapiismum.
132
I.NDKX.
MHKh SECLVDLS
I)i: SACUAMEMO CO.M^IHM.VTIONIS
CAl».
1.
11.
111.
IV.
V.
VI.
Vll.
l)c erroribus vt mcndacii^ civcasa-
cramentum Conlirmatiouis.
Prolnitur c.r Srriptura i>acramen-
lu)n Conjirmationis.
Probatur vcrilas teslimoniis suni-
viorum })onlilicum.
Idcm }irobalur cx conciliis.
Idcm j>robalur c.v Patribus graecis.
Idcni probatur c,v Latiniii.
Diluuntur soluliondi advcrsnrionm
ad Valruni tcslinionia, quacxn)U
C\V
ctiam av<iumenta ip^oruni conlra
rcvilaton.
Vin. />(! malcriasacra))icnti Confirmalio-
nis.
IX. Soivunlur objcclioncs conlra matc-
riani Conlunialionis.
\. De for))ia sacramcnti Confirmalio-
nis.
XI. Dc cffcctu hujus sacramoili.
XII. Dc ministro hujus sacramcnlt.
XIII. Dc cacrc))ioniis Confirmalionis.
LIBEIl PRIMUS
DE
SICRAMENTO BAPTISMI
ArgumGntum et partilio disputalionis de liaptismo
De Baplismo, quae disputari solent, ad novem quibus omnibus controversiis explicandis, duos
capita revocari possunt. Primum est de nomine praecipue fines intuebimur. Vnum, ut canoncs
et definitione. Secwnditm, de materia.rerfiwm^de concilii Iridentini de Baptismo, qui habcnlur in
forraa. Quartum, de necessilale. Quintum, demi- septima sessione, defendamus contra Calvinl A.nti-
nislro. Sextum, de suscipientibus. Septimum, de dotum, et Examen Remnitii. AUerum, ut praeci-
elTectis. Ocfaijwm, de coraparatione Baptismi Chri- puorum hujus temporis haereticorum senlcntias,
sti et Joannis: praecipua enim coniparatio circa ef- et arguraenla bene intelligaraus, et eflicaciter, Dco
fecla versatur. Nonum, de ritu ct caeremoniis. In adjuvanie, refellamus.
/^'css&^^^
CAPUT PRIMUM
De notnuie deJinUione et de parlibus Baplismi.
De nomine Baplisml nulla dissensio esl:uluntur magis conlrahens, et dislinguens ab aliis sacra-
cnim omnes liac voce, quod in Scripluris passim mentis novae legis. Etsi enim caelera non dicun-
liabeatur. Significal autem Ba~o-{/.a proprie im- tur proprie regenerare, tamen justificant impium,
mersioncra.Ordinarie enim Baplismus fil per mer- ac praesertim Poenitentia: justificalio aulem impii,
sionem,idque ad Clirrsli sepulturam repraesenlan- praesertim haeretici, aul apostatae, parum aut ni-
(lam, juxta ilJud Coloss. 2. ConsepuUi ei per Jki- hil dirfert a regeneratione. Unde Galat. 4. Paulus,
ptismum. Habet autem apud Patres alia multa no- Filioli mei, quos ilerumparlurio. Sed cum addi-
mina, de quibus vide praecipuc Clemenlpm lib. 1. lur, per aquam,']am perspicua diffcrentia est.Non
Paedagogi, cap. G, Nazlanzenum orat.de Baptismo, enim reconcihatio poenitenlium est regeneratio
el Chrysoslomum, homil. ad baptizatos;qui vocant per aquam,sed reformatio quaedam,et quasi revo-
Baptisraum illuminationem, gratiam,donum, sigil- catio ab inferis.
lum, myslerium, expurgalionem, et alla quaedam: Ubi et illud observandum esl, sacramenlum Ba-
sed praecipuum nomen, et comraunissimum est ptismi non esse ipsam aquam, quae est res per-
'iiLo-i(T'^.bz, idest, iiluminatio: hoc enim praeter Ires manens. sed ablutionem, qtiae est res transiens.
citatos Palres, utunlur omncs alii Graeci posterio- Ilaque Baptisraus est sacramenlura regencralionis
res, et ante eos Dionysius areopagila de eccles. per aquam, idest, signum extcrnuin sanctificans
hierarch. cap. 2. irnmo et ipse Aposlolus, IIebr.6. per aquae aspersionein. Dotiiquc additur, iiiverbo
cum ail: Impossibile est eos, qui semel sunt illu- vitae, ut exprimalur etiam forma sacramenti, quae
minall etc. Et cap. 10. Jlememoramini prisiinos est praecipua pars essenliae.
dies, in quibus illuminati magnum certamen su- Pliilippus in locis, anni fjS. lit. de sacrificio. ita
stinuislis passionum. l'nde cliam Cyrlllus hlero- dcfinil r>;iptismum: Bapliwius siqnum est qun
solymilanus Calecheses suas de Baplisrao, vocat Deus nobiscum ogil, et recipil nos in gratiam.
Cateclicscs illuminatorum. Dicilur aulem Bapti- Sed haec definilio convenit omni sacramento, im-
srnus illuminatio, quia in co infundilur habitus fi- rao ctiam ipsi vcrbo, quod tameii non esl sacra-
dei. raentum.
Quod autcm attinet ad definilionem, s. Tliomas Calvinus lib. 4. Instilut. cap. lo. § l.ita definil:
'.i. par. quacsl. 0«>. art. 1. aliquol definitiones ad- Baplismus estsigjiuminitiationis, quoin Ecclc-
fert.Sed ex Scripturis calechismus romanus aptis- siae cooplamur socielatem, ut Ckristo insiti inler
sime ita darmiul: Baplismus est sacramentumre- filios Dei censeamur. Quac definilio multa habel
generalionis per aquam in verbo vitae. Quae de- vitia. I\am neque est cssentialis. cmn non atlingai
linitio partim sumilur ex Joan. .3. partim ex Paulo ullam parlcm cssenliac Baplismi; nequc explical
ad Ephes. o.Et quidcm primo loco ponilur,Sac?Yt,- cffectum. seu finem principalem hujus sacramen-
mentum, quod «;st genus. Deinde additur,rcfyc?ie- ti. Nam fiuis principalis secundum catliolicos, iin-
rationis, quae difrerentia cst contrahcns genus, ct mo secundum Scripluras est justificare el rcgene-
distinguens a sacramentis veteris legis. Tcrtio ad- rarc; secundum Calvinrmi (ul ihidera ipse subjun-
dilur, per aquam, quae esl alia diflercntia, adhuc gil) esl alere fidcm more diploraalis signali, qui
15C
m SACRAMKNTO HAPTISMl
cerle llnis in ca dcflnilionc non cxplioaUir, scd so-
Itiin rmis (luiilam stH-uiiilariiis, qui csl loslari liilc-
lilaleni. quani Doo cl Kcclcsiac ilcbcmus, cl sic a-
gnosci ac numcrari inlcr tilios Dci.
Adilc.(iuotl isla ilcrmilio convcnil (Miam circuin-
cisioni. .\am circumcisio cral sii^juum inilialioiiis,
Huo Judaci cooplabaulur iu Kcclcsiac sociclalcm,
el Chrislo infcrcbaiilur. Nam eliamsi .Uuiacorum
coclus ilicalur syuajzo^ja. t]uando liistin^milur cou-
Ira Kcclcsiam; lauuMi at)Solulc Kcclcsia eral.cl Kc-
clesia Dei veri, anlctiuain Clirisluin ncj;arel. Ipsc
eliam Clirislus. liccl nou fucril liomo tcmport^. sy-
najio^MC. nisi in ultimis dicbus, lamcn ut Dcus,
scnipcr fuil capul lolius Kcclcsiac. Immo cliam ul
homo veuiurus el passurus . jnm luni cral capul,
cui pcr rult-m llt^braci conjun^^obaulur. citiuc iusc-
rcbautur. liuic 1. Coriutli. 10. Judaci dicuntur in
dcscrlo lcntassc Cliristum. Kt Apoc. \',\, dicilur:
Agiuis occisus ab origiuc mundi. Kadcm ctiam dc-
tiiiitio vcrbo Dci praciiicato couvcnirc vidclur:nam
cliam pcr vcrbuin Dci iuitiamur, et cooplamur in
Ecclesiam cl Cbrislo inscrimar.
CAPLT II.
De malcria Baptismi.
De materia nuUa fcro disscnsio cst, tametsi non
pauci errores de liac rc aliquando exslitcrint , vcl
cliam exislanl. Primus fuit crror 3Ianichacorum ,
qui lcstc Auguslino, lib. de haeres. cap. 46. Ba-
plismum in aqua non putabant adhibcndum, quod
vidcliccl aquam, ut rcs caetcras corporalcs , non
Dcus, scd diabolus procrcassel. Magis verocundi
fuerunl Marcionislae.qui elsi credcrcntaquam esse
opus mali principii. idcst. diaboli, non Dei boni :
tameneam adbibebanl inBaplismo ob Christi prae-
ceptum. Uefcrt Theodoretus, lib. l.fabul. haeretic.
se vidisse senem quendam Marcionistam, qui fate-
balur in myslcrio aquam atihibeudam, cl tameu ita
illam oderat. ul faciem sunm mallcl proprio spulo,
quamaqua ablucre, ne videlicet creatore indigere
vidcretur.
Secundus error fuit Seleuci ct llermiae, qui a-
quam ex Baplismo cxcludcbanl, idque ob auctori-
talem Scriplurarum, quae ubicumque comparani
Baplismum Joannis cum Clirisli Baplismo. semper
aflirmanl Joannem baptizasse in aqua , Christum
baplizalurum Spirilu sanclo eligne, Matth.S.Luc.
3. Juan. 1. Marc. 1. Actor. 1. Refcrunl hunc erro-
rem Philaslrius in lib.de haeresibus,el Auguslinus
de haercsibus, cap. .'iO,
Tertius error ex codem fundamenlo fuit Jacobi-
tarum. qui loco aquae Baplismalis ferro candente
imprimcbanl in frontibus crucis figurani.Tcslis est
Bernardus lulzemburgensis ia catalogo haerelico-
rum.
Quarlus csl Paulicianonim, qui lcsle Kulhymio
in 2. par. Panopliae, lit. 21. pro elcmenlo aquae
in B.ipiismo illa verba subslituuiit:Ef/o sum aqua
viva.
Quintus error Lutheri est , qui in symposiacis
colloquiis, cap. 17. interrogatus, num deficicnle
atpia, liccal bapliznro in lactc, aut ccrevisia , pri-
muiii res|)t)udit: jiulicio divino id esse coiimiillcn-
dum: iloiiulc addit, tjuidipiid baliiei nomine iiun-
cupari potest, illud cssc aptum ad ba|)ti/.antluin,
Al corlc baluca viui ol lactis , notlum ccrcvisiac
licri i)osst;, iicmo tiubitavit imquam.
Atlvcrsus haec omnia dcliramcitta staluil conci-
lium liidcutinum scss. 7. can. 2. aquam vcram cl
u.ituralcm rctpiiri ad Ba|ilismum. Kx tpio iiitclligi-
mus duo. Primi) iiiilliim litiiiorcm csse materiam
Baptismi: t^ui noii sil vcra cl naturalis aqua. Sc-
cuiulo, omnem vcram cl naluralciu aquain, qiian-
tumvis acciilcntalilcr altoratam cl mutatam, essc
malcriam idoncam ad Baplismum. Id vero palet
ex apcrtissimis Scripturis. Nani Joan. .'$. dicitur :
Ex aqua cA Spiritu sancln.
Item ibidem orla est acmulatio discipulorum Jo-
nnnis. quia vidcbanl Chrislum baptizare pcr disci-
pulos suos in atpia. tit cliam ipsc Joannes bapti-
zabal. Act. 8. Ecco, aqua, quis proldbel mc bapli-
zari? Kphcs. o. Lavacro aquac in vcrbo vilac, 1.
Cor. 10. Paulus comparat IJaplismum mari rubro,
1. Pct. .3. comparal Polrus eiindcm Baplismum di-
luvio.Denique ctiam prophctac expresse praedixe-
runt Baplismum aquae. utKzechicI cap.3(). J^//*tm-
dain super vos aquam mundam. Cur aulcm a-
quam Dcus eiegcrit potius, quam aliud elemcn-
lum, caussas reddunl auctores, adfercntes varias
aquae proprietates: quas vide apud s. Thomam 3.
part. quaest. GG. arlic. 3. et Guliclmum Parisien-
sem in lib. dc sacramenlis cap. de Baptismo.
Neque tcslimonia a Seleucianis allata conclu-
dunt. Nam noii docent discrimen esse intcr Bapli-
sma Joannis el Christi, quod unum esset in sola
aqua, altcrum in solo Spiritu, vel igne; sed quod
unum csset in sola aqua,alterum non in sola aqua,
sed in aqua et Spiritu, ut dicilur Joan. 3. Undo 1.
Joan. 3. Ilic est, qui venii per aquam oA sangui-
nem, non in aqua solum, sed in aqua el sangui-
nc. Quod antcm addilur de igne 31atlh. 3. et Luc.
3. non significat igncm aliquem clementalcm, ul
slulle pularunl .Tacobilae,sed ignein quendam coe-
lesiem et divinum:nam ideo conjungitur cuin Spi-
rilu sanclo. Potest aulem ille ignis, vel significare
linguas igneas, quae descenderunt in apostolos in
die pentecosles, vel ignem purgatorii, ulHierony-
inus docel in cap.3. Matth. et Beda in cap. 3.Luc.
vel eliam ignem divini judicii, ut exponil Hilarius
can. 2. in 3Ialth. vel denique ignem Iribulalionis
in hac vila, qui nulli baplizato deesl, ut exponit
auclor opcris imperfecti in cap. 3- Matlh.
Kemnilius in hunc canonem nihil aliud notat,
nisi non esse necessarium, ul aqua exorcizclur et
benedicalur: si aqua vera et naluralis sufTicit.Sed
male id colligil: nam eliamsi ad subslanliara sacra-
monli non requiratur boncdictio aquae, lamcn re-
cte esl inslilula, ul infra dicemus.