Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Sacrament of Baptism
Chapter 5: When Baptism Began to Be Necessary; and On the Baptism of Blood and of the Spirit
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).
Chapter 5. At What Time Baptism Began to Be Necessary
At what time Baptism began to be necessary is a question among the theologians. But since it is not a controversy with the heretics, I will only set out in a few propositions what seems to me the more probable opinion.
The first proposition: Baptism was instituted before the Lord's passion. Note that it cannot be denied that Christ had some baptism in use before his passion. For in John 3 and 4 Christ is said to have baptized through his disciples. But it can be doubted whether that baptism was the sacrament which we now have, and of which mention is made in the last chapter of Matthew, or whether it was a certain preparation for the sacrament of Baptism to be instituted afterwards, as the baptism of John was. And indeed Chrysostom, homily 28 on John, and Theophylact on John 3 openly teach that that baptism with which the disciples of Christ baptized, in John 3, did not remit sin and was in water only, without the Spirit; and that there was no difference between the baptism of Christ's disciples and that of John, but that both were a preparation for faith; and that Christ therefore did not baptize by himself but through his disciples, because it did not befit him to baptize without the Spirit. St. Leo seems to hold the same, letter 4 to the bishops of Sicily, chapter 3: “The very character of the work,” he says, “teaches that the lawful day for celebrating the grace of regeneration is that,” that is, the day of the resurrection, “on which both the power of the gift and the form of the action arose. For the confirmation of which it avails very much that the Lord Jesus Christ himself, after he rose from the dead, handed on to his disciples, in whom all the heads of the Churches were being taught, both the form and the power of baptizing, saying, Going therefore now, teach ye all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Of which surely he could have instructed them even before his passion, had he not properly willed it to be understood that the grace of regeneration began from his resurrection.” So he. Yet what we said is more probable. Which Cyril teaches expressly, book 2 on John, chapter 57 and following, and Augustine, tractates 13 and 15 on John and letter 108 to Seleucianus, and Hugh of St. Victor, book 2 On the Sacraments, part 6, chapter 4.
This is the more common opinion of the theologians, with the Master, book 4, distinction 3. And the reason is, first, because in John 3 Christ is said to have baptized, though he did not baptize himself, but his disciples, as the evangelist adds in the same place. Therefore that baptism was properly the Baptism of Christ, as distinguished from the baptism of John; otherwise not he, but John, would be said to have baptized those whom the disciples of Christ baptized. And if it was properly the Baptism of Christ, it was necessarily in water and the Spirit, not in water only. For Scripture always sets this difference between Christ and John, that John baptized in water, Christ not in water only, but also in the Spirit. Nor was it fitting that Christ should institute an empty ceremony, or take to himself John's office, namely of baptizing in water only. Add that in John 1 it is said of Christ in the present tense: “He it is that baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.”
Second, the same is proved because in Acts 19 we read that those were rebaptized whom John had baptized. But we nowhere read that those were rebaptized whom the disciples of Christ had baptized before his passion. Nay, it is most probable (as Augustine teaches in letter 108) that the apostles were not baptized except before Christ's passion.
Third, the Fathers teach by common consent that Christ, when he was baptized in the Jordan, gave to the waters the power of sanctifying; as is plain from Tertullian, the book against the Jews, the chapter on the passion; from Hilary, canon 2 on Matthew; Ambrose, book 2 on Luke, chapter 12 [on Luke 3]; Jerome in the dialogue against the Luciferians; Nazianzen in the oration on the holy lights; Bede on Luke 3; and from others. But surely the waters did not have the power of sanctifying except from the time at which they began to be the matter of Baptism.
Lastly the foundation of the contrary opinion is not solid. For they bring only Chrysostom and Theophylact on that of John 7: “As yet the Spirit was not given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.” But this place is understood of the fullness of the Holy Spirit, which began to be given visibly at Pentecost; for otherwise all the saints had the Holy Spirit even before Christ's passion.
The second proposition: The Baptism of Christ was instituted when the Lord himself was baptized by John in the Jordan. Note that on this matter, that is, at what point of time Christ instituted Baptism, there are very many opinions of the Scholastics; but that the more common and more probable is the one we follow, which the catechism of the Council of Trent also embraces, and the Master with St. Thomas and others, on book 4, distinction 3, and those after them.
Note besides that we do not mean to say that Christ on the day of his Baptism taught the matter or form of Baptism in words; for that is false. But that he then first established and decreed what he afterwards declared to Nicodemus, in John 3, and at another time to his disciples: that water should be the matter of Baptism, and that the form should be the invocation of the three divine persons. For he fixed the waters as the matter of Baptism when he deigned to consecrate and enlighten them by the touch of his most pure flesh, as the Fathers cited teach. And at the same time he fixed the form, when at his baptism the whole Trinity appeared to the senses, as is plain in Matthew 3. For when Christ was baptized the heavens were opened, and the voice of the Father thundered, and the Spirit appeared in the form of a dove, and the Son of God himself was present in the flesh he had taken; where also at the same time (as Hilary testifies in the place cited) the effect of the Baptism instituted by Christ was declared: namely that heaven is opened to the baptized, and they are adopted as sons by the Father, and are filled with the Holy Spirit, and so on.
The third proposition: The Baptism of Christ was not necessary, by necessity of means or of precept, before the death of Christ. It is proved, because up to the death of Christ the old law kept its force; as is plain, because Christ kept it up to his death. For the day before he suffered he kept the ceremony of the paschal lamb; and in Matthew 23 he warned men to observe and do what the scribes and Pharisees taught from the chair of Moses. Therefore circumcision too, if it had been given as a remedy for sin, was in force up to the death of Christ. Not, then, during all that time was the Baptism of Christ necessary as a means to salvation, since without it men, even little ones, could be justified. Wherefore that word of Christ, John 3, “Unless a man be born again,” and so on, does not signify that Baptism was necessary from the day on which the Lord was speaking with Nicodemus, but signifies that it would be necessary in the new law, after the ceremonies of the law should cease, as Bernard rightly expounds it, letter 77 to Hugh. And in the same way is to be expounded what Fulgentius says, in the book On the Faith, to Peter, chapter 30: that from the time when it was said, “Unless a man be born again,” no one can be saved without Baptism. For by the word time he takes not that day on which these things were said, but the time of the new law. Lastly, that of Luke 16 too, “The law and the prophets were until John,” does not signify that the law then ceased as to its force or obligation, but as to its preaching. For John was the last of the prophets; hence it is added, “From that time the kingdom of God is preached.”
Besides, at the death of Christ the efficacy of the ceremonies and of the whole old law ceased; therefore the force of circumcision too ceased; therefore up to that time the old law had its force. And that the force of the law ceased at the death of Christ is plain from the Gospel, Matthew 27, that the veil was rent; and John 19, “It is consummated.” Likewise from the Apostle, Romans 7: “You also are become dead to the law, by the body of Christ.” Likewise almost all the ceremonies of the law were figures of Christ, Colossians 2 and Hebrews 10; and Christ at his death completed the work of redemption.
The fourth proposition: The Baptism of Christ began to be necessary, by necessity of means and of precept, from the day of Pentecost. Note that the old law ceased simply at the death of Christ, because then the reason of the law ceased universally; yet that through ignorance of this matter it still bound the Jews until the public promulgation of the Gospel. And on the other side, that the law of the Gospel and the Christian sacraments were founded, and did much good, even before the death of Christ, yet did not have the force of a precept except after the solemn promulgation, as the Council of Trent, session 6, chapter 4, says of Baptism. And the reason is, because promulgation is of the essence of a law, as St. Thomas teaches, part 1 of the second part, question 90, article 4. And the solemn promulgation of the new law was made on the day of Pentecost.
Which is proved, first, because, as we have said, the old law was in force up to the death of Christ; and from that time up to Pentecost neither Christ nor the apostles spoke publicly to the people. Second, the new law ought not to have been solemnly promulgated except when all the mysteries of the redemption were completed; and the mysteries were completed at the ascension of Christ. Third, the old law was solemnly promulgated on Mount Sinai on the fiftieth day after the first pasch of the Jews; therefore the new law ought to be promulgated on the fiftieth day after the first pasch of the Christians. For that that promulgation of the law was a figure of the promulgation of the Gospel is taught by Augustine, letter 119, Leo, sermon 1 on Pentecost, and others. Fourth, all the conditions of a solemn promulgation agree with the first sermon which St. Peter gave, Acts 2, on the very day of Pentecost. For it was given in the royal city of Jerusalem, in the presence of men of all nations, as Luke testifies, by the chief herald of the Gospel, who was the apostle Peter; and in that sermon the chief heads of the whole doctrine of the Gospel are contained. Lastly, the use of the sacraments too began at once.
Chapter 6. On the Baptism of Blood and of the Spirit
As regards the last part of the disputation on the necessity of Baptism, the question is whether the Baptism of water can be supplied by martyrdom, both in little ones and in adults, and by true conversion of heart in adults.
Martin Chemnitz, in part 2 of the Examination, pages 90, 91 and 92, admits these three baptisms, and says that three baptisms were elegantly distinguished by the ancients: of blood, of the Spirit, and of the river. But he dissents from the Catholics in the manner of explaining it. For he will not have martyrdom or penance remit sins, as the Baptism of water does, but that faith alone, which in the time of martyrdom and of penance lays hold on Christ, is what justifies. Illyricus too, Century 5, chapter 4, column 517, says that Prosper, against the word of God and with great injury to Baptism, made martyrdom equal to Baptism. But Illyricus brings no arguments. Chemnitz proves it, because martyrdom and penance are our works; and it is absurd and impious to make our works equal to the blood of Christ and to the power of Baptism. He confirms it from Augustine, who, book 4 against the Donatists, chapter 22, says that the good thief who hung with Christ on the cross obtained the remission of sins not by his suffering but by faith laying hold on Christ; the contrary of which Cyprian had taught, but Augustine refuted him in the place noted.
This opinion of Chemnitz is not only false, but also fights with itself, and does not lack its lies. For since the same Chemnitz everywhere teaches with his master Luther that even in the very Baptism of water faith alone justifies, does he not openly fight with himself when he says that martyrdom and penance do not remit sin in the way Baptism does, because in them faith alone justifies? And there are two lies in this opinion of Chemnitz. The first, when he says that Augustine asserts that the good thief was justified by faith alone laying hold on Christ. For Augustine does not say this; but that the good thief was justified by faith and by the conversion of the heart to God. The second, when he says that Cyprian, who had believed that martyrdom justifies in the way Baptism does, is refuted by Augustine. For that is a shameless lie. For Augustine not only does not refute but even praises Cyprian's opinion. For so he says: “That suffering sometimes fills the place of Baptism, the same blessed Cyprian takes no light proof from that thief, to whom, though not baptized, it was said, This day thou shalt be with me in paradise.” So he. Augustine does indeed teach a little below that that thief cannot be called a martyr, nor saved by the Baptism of blood, but by the Baptism of the Spirit. But he says this to confirm Cyprian's opinion; for if the Baptism of the Spirit justifies, much more the Baptism of blood, as Cyprian had said. And that the whole matter may be explained, I will set down some propositions.
The first proposition: Martyrdom is rightly called, and is, a kind of Baptism. This proposition is proved by a twofold reason. First, because divine Scripture and the holy Fathers are wont to name martyrdom a baptism: Mark 10, “Can you drink of the chalice that I drink of: or be baptized with the baptism wherewith I am baptized?” And, “How am I straitened until it be accomplished?” The Fathers also teach the same everywhere. Tertullian in the book On Baptism, speaking of martyrdom: “This,” he says, “is the baptism which stands in the place of the laver not received, and gives it back when it is lost.” Prosper in the epigrams:
And whatever the mystic form of the sacred laver bestows,
the glory of martyrdom has fulfilled it all.
Cyprian, in the preface to the book On the Exhortation to Martyrdom, says that martyrdom is a baptism, and a baptism more excellent than that of water. Ambrose, on Psalm 118, sermon 3, distinguishes three baptisms: one of water, another of blood, a third of the purgatory in the other life. Jerome, on Ephesians 4, on that, “One baptism,” distinguishes the baptism of water from the baptism of martyrdom. Augustine, book 13 of the City of God, chapter 7; letter 108 to Seleucianus; book 1 On the Origin of the Soul, chapter 9; book 4 On Baptism, chapters 21 and 22. Cyril, catechesis 3, also sets down these two baptisms, as Nazianzen too does, in the oration on the holy lights; Damascene, book 4, chapter 10; Bernard in letter 77; and Hugh of St. Victor, book 2 On the Sacraments, part 6, chapter 7.
The other reason is that martyrdom agrees with the Baptism of water in three effects: namely, first, that it conforms a man to Christ's passion and death; second, that it remits original sin and all others, if any have been committed; third, that it remits all the punishment due to sin, both eternal and temporal, which among the sacraments properly belongs to Baptism alone.
Here yet it must be observed that these are not all equally certain. And first it is certain that martyrdom is a conforming to the Lord's death, as is well known, and a nobler conforming than that of the Baptism of water; because that one is real, this one sacramental. It is certain too among all that it remits all punishment, so that martyrs come at once to the crown. Which is plain even from this, that the Church never prays for the souls of martyrs, but rather commends herself to them. “He does wrong to a martyr,” says Augustine, sermon 17 on the words of the Apostle, and Innocent, the chapter Cum Marthae, in the Extravagants on the celebration of Masses, “who prays for a martyr.” Hence Cyprian, book 4, letter 2, to Antonianus, comparing the martyrs with other Christians who die: “It is one thing,” he says, “to stand waiting for pardon, another to come to glory; one thing to be sent into prison and not go out thence until one pays the last farthing, another at once to receive the reward of faith and virtue; one thing to be cleansed and long purged by fire, tormented for sins with long pain, another to have purged all sins by suffering; one thing, in short, to hang in suspense till the day of judgment on the sentence of the Lord, another to be at once crowned by the Lord.”
About the second effect there is greater difficulty. For there are theologians, as Dominic Soto and Martin Ledesma, on book 4, distinction 3, the single question, article 11, who teach that martyrdom does not give grace ex opere operato, but only ex opere operantis, and does not give any degree of grace beyond that which answers to the merit of the charity of the martyr himself. For martyrdom undergone without charity profits nothing, as Paul says, 1 Corinthians 13. And he who is in charity is without doubt in grace. Hence also we believe that all true martyrs had true, nay even the highest, charity before they underwent martyrdom, according to that of John 15: “Greater love than this no man hath, that a man lay down his life for his friends.”
The more probable opinion is that martyrdom confers the first grace ex opere operato; so that if anyone comes to martyrdom still being in sins, yet without attachment to that sin, and with faith and a begun love, and penance at least imperfect, such as is required even before the Baptism of water, he will be justified and saved by the power of martyrdom ex opere operato. So St. Thomas teaches expressly, on book 4, distinction 4, question 3, article 3, to the first, and question 4, at the end; and John Major, Gabriel and others on the same distinction 4 of book 4.
And it is proved, first, from the martyrdom of the infants. For it is certain that the infants slain for Christ are not only saved but are also held by the Church in the number of the martyrs, as is plain from the feast of the Holy Innocents, whom St. Bernard mentions in the sermon on the Innocents, and before him Augustine, book 3 On Free Choice, chapter 23, and letter 28 to Jerome, and before Augustine, Origen, homily 3 on diverse places of the Gospel, and Cyprian, book 4, letter 6, to the Thibaritans. But little ones can do nothing, and they are sinners until they are baptized with the Baptism of water or of blood.
Some answer that those Innocents had been circumcised, and so were justified before their martyrdom. But this is nothing. For it is uncertain whether all those who died were circumcised; nay, it is most probable, and almost certain, that not all were circumcised. For Herod slew all the boys who were in Bethlehem and its borders; nor did he order only the sons of the Jews to be slain, but all without exception; and perhaps there were not a few Gentiles among them. Besides, he ordered all infants from two years old and under to be slain; and so those too who had not yet come to the eighth day, on which alone they could be circumcised. Lastly, it is not of faith that circumcision justified; and yet the Church believes absolutely and for certain that all those infants are saved. Besides, the Church honours those Innocents not only as saved but also as martyrs; therefore suffering undergone for Christ conferred something on them ex opere operato. Nor does what Soto answers avail, that this is a privilege of little ones; for that is asserted without any foundation. For if martyrdom profits infants ex opere operato, why not adults? Surely the martyrdom of adults is no less a martyrdom, nor less powerful and effective, than that of infants, but on the contrary rather nobler and more effective.
Second, it is proved by the reason of St. Thomas. For the grace which is given to a martyr, of the remission of all punishments, cannot be ex opere operantis; for it would be either from the very bearing of the punishment, or from the fervour of charity. Not from the bearing of the punishment, because many martyrs were before most wicked men, who had deserved many deaths; and without doubt a certain very light suffering, as by the cutting off of the head, was not sufficient satisfaction for them; and yet, if they are truly martyrs, all punishments are forgiven them. Many Confessors too often suffer more than martyrs, and yet the whole punishment is not always forgiven them. Nor can it be ascribed to the merit of charity; many holy confessors also had greater charity than many martyrs, and yet did not have the pardon of all punishments; while martyrs, even if they had but one degree of charity, yet by the very fact that they are martyrs have the pardon of all punishments. It must be admitted, then, that martyrdom confers grace ex opere operato, that is, from the covenant and institution of Christ. And if martyrdom confers grace ex opere operato, surely it will be able to confer the first grace too; for this alone seemed to stand in the way, that it did not have force ex opere operato.
Third, the Church, in order to honour someone as a holy martyr, never examines whether he was in grace before, but honours indifferently all who are known to have been slain for Christ in the confession of the true faith and in the unity of the Church. For heretics and schismatics cannot be martyrs, since they set an obstacle to the grace of God by the sin of unbelief and of schism, in which they persevere in the act itself.
Fourth, if martyrdom did not confer the first grace ex opere operato, but worked only from the fervour of charity, the Baptism of blood would not be well distinguished from the Baptism of the Spirit, but both would be a Baptism of the Spirit, since both would consist in the inward conversion and movement of the soul to God. But in truth the Baptism of blood is distinguished from the Baptism of the Spirit, because the very shedding of blood supplies Baptism in martyrdom; while in the Baptism of the Spirit it is only the inward conversion and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
Fifth, let there be someone who, caught in a persecution, would rather die than deny Christ, and in fact dies; and yet before that martyrdom had not true contrition, but only a certain attrition for his sins; and in short had no greater disposition than that which is necessary for the Baptism of water. Either this man will be justified and saved, or not. If so, then martyrdom gives the first grace ex opere operato; for neither could this man merit anything before the martyrdom itself, since he was not just. If not, then the Baptism of blood does not supply the Baptism of water; for this man is truly baptized in his own blood, and is truly a martyr, since he dies for the true faith. It must be admitted, then, that he is justified ex opere operato.
Sixth and last, this seems altogether the opinion of the Fathers. Cyprian, in the letter to Jubaianus: “Can the power of Baptism,” he says, “be greater or better than confession, than suffering?” Likewise Augustine, book 13 of the City of God, chapter 7: “Whoever, even without having received the laver of regeneration, die for the confession of Christ, it avails them as much for the forgiveness of sins as if they were washed in the sacred font of Baptism.” So he. But these things will be false if Baptism confers the first grace and forgives sins even as to the guilt, while martyrdom can do neither; for so the power of the Baptism of water will be far greater than that of the Baptism of blood, the contrary of which the Fathers teach.
To the argument which is usually made against it, from 1 Corinthians 13, “If I should deliver my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing,” and from John 15, “Greater love than this no man hath, that a man lay down his life for his friends,” I answer: These places do not conclude that the martyr must have true charity before the martyrdom itself, and so be justified. For the first place does not require that charity go before, but that it accompany the other goods; for without charity nothing suffices for salvation. And this is most true; for even martyrdom would profit nothing if the martyr departed this life without charity. But he cannot depart without charity, since by the power of the martyrdom itself, from the covenant and privilege of God, grace is poured in, and therefore charity. And that it is not necessary, because of this place of Paul, that charity go before the martyrdom itself, at least in time, is plain, because in the same place Paul says that faith and knowledge do not profit without charity; and yet ordinarily faith, and often knowledge too, is in a man before charity; and yet if faith and knowledge always remain without charity they do not save a man, as the Apostle rightly said. Add that what the Apostle says of martyrdom we can say of Baptism too: for he who has Baptism, if he has not charity, is not saved; and yet no one denies that Baptism gives the first grace.
The other place teaches that it is the highest charity on the part of the work to lay down one's life for a friend, because a man has nothing greater to give for a friend than his life. Yet this place does not teach that everyone who gives his life for a friend has the highest charity as to the habit or the inward act, as is well known; since many who did not give their life had greater charity than those who gave it, as is plain of the Blessed Virgin, of St. John the Evangelist, and of others. Besides, even if he who lays down his life for the love of Christ has without doubt a great and true charity, as this place of the Gospel teaches, and very many martyrs seem to have been such, yet it can also happen that someone not yet fully justified, snatched away to martyrdom, resolves to lay down his life not so much for the love of God, which he does not yet have, as from fear of hell or hope of the heavenly reward. Surely of such a one it cannot be said that he has true charity; and yet he does well in laying down his life in the confession of Christ, and is a martyr, that is, a witness of the truth. And of such we say that their sins are forgiven them, and grace is poured in, ex opere operato of the martyrdom.
The second proposition: Perfect conversion and penance is rightly called the Baptism of the Spirit, and supplies the Baptism of water, at least in necessity. Note that not every conversion is called the Baptism of the Spirit, but a perfect one, which includes true contrition and charity, and at the same time also the desire, or vow, of Baptism.
Note second that this proposition was not so certain among the ancients as the former was. For of martyrdom none of the ancients, so far as I know, denied that the Baptism of water is supplied by it; but of conversion and penance there are some who denied it. For the book which is titled On Church Doctrines, which is falsely ascribed to Augustine, chapter 74, says openly that a catechumen is not saved, even if he has lived in good works, unless he has been cleansed by the baptism of water or of blood. That there were also in the time of St. Bernard those who held the same is plain from his letter 77.
But without doubt it is to be believed that true conversion supplies the Baptism of water when some depart without the Baptism of water not from contempt but from necessity. For this is expressly had in Ezekiel 18: “If the wicked do penance for his sins, I will not remember his iniquities any more.” Ambrose openly teaches the same, in the oration on the death of Valentinian the younger: “Him whom I was about to regenerate,” he says, “I have lost; but he has not lost the grace which he had hoped for.” So too Augustine, book 4 On Baptism, chapter 21 [22], and Bernard, letter 77, and after them Innocent III, the chapter Apostolicam, on a priest not baptized. Hence also the Council of Trent, session 6, chapter 4, says that Baptism is necessary in fact or in desire.
Lastly, true conversion agrees with martyrdom and with the Baptism of water in the name of Baptism, and in two effects; therefore it is credible that it agrees also in the other effect, which is to forgive guilt and justify a man, and in that way to supply the Baptism of water. The antecedent is proved. And first, of the name of Baptism, we read in Mark 1 and Luke 3: “Preaching the baptism of penance for the remission of sins.” And 1 Corinthians 15: “What shall they do that are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not again at all? why are they then baptized for them?” For no apter exposition can be given to this place than if by baptism we understand the works of penance and affliction which the living undertake for the souls of the departed. Besides, penance conforms a man to Christ's passion, as martyrdom does, though not so perfectly as martyrdom does; and perfect conversion also forgives the whole punishment, as it was in the conversion of Mary Magdalene, of the good thief, and of others. For inward conversion is not called the Baptism of the Spirit absolutely and simply except when it is so perfect and fervent that it takes away all the rust of sin. For otherwise, if it does not take away the whole punishment, as mostly happens, it is not a baptism except imperfectly.
The third proposition: Both martyrdom and penance remit sins; not faith alone, by which the martyrs or penitents lay hold on Christ. This is against Chemnitz, and is proved by the Scriptures, the Fathers and reason. First, the Scriptures ascribe the remission of sins to the suffering itself and to penance: Matthew 10 and 16, “He that shall lose his life for me, shall find it”; Mark 8 and Luke 9, “He that shall lose his life for my sake, shall save it”; Ezekiel 18, “When the wicked turneth himself away from his wickedness, and doeth judgment and justice, he shall save his soul alive.” And in Luke 7 it is said of Magdalen, “Many sins are forgiven her, because she hath loved much.” Second, the Fathers cited above never ascribe justification to faith alone, but to the suffering itself, or to penance and the desire of Baptism. Third, if faith alone worked in martyrdom and penance, there would not be three baptisms, but two, or rather only one; and so Chemnitz would not rightly say that three baptisms were elegantly distinguished by the Fathers. And if he says that there are three baptisms because they are three instruments for stirring up faith, I will say that there are many more, because there are many more instruments for stirring up faith, as is plain.
Nor does Chemnitz's argument conclude. For we do not make our works equal to the power of Baptism or to the blood of Christ when we say that through martyrdom and penance sins are remitted and Baptism is supplied; but we make the grace of God equal to the grace of God, and Christ's covenant and institution equal to Christ's covenant and institution. For as in the Baptism of water what chiefly works is the divine institution and grace, so too in martyrdom and penance. For the suffering of the martyrs has no power of justifying of itself, but from the covenant and promise of Christ. Likewise penance and conversion is only a certain disposition, on which, from the covenant and promise of God, justification follows. Add that not even the disposition itself is chiefly our work, but God's, who first inspires penance and the love of martyrdom, and afterwards helps to accomplish it.
The fourth proposition: Martyrdom and conversion to God, although they are certain baptisms, are yet not sacraments. It is proved, first, because they do not have the essence of a sacrament. For in martyrdom there is no form of words belonging to its essence; in conversion there is neither a form of words nor an outward sensible sign which is necessarily required. Second: the sacraments are the ordinary remedies against sins, and suited to every time. But martyrdom is not an ordinary remedy, nor can it be had at every time. Third: the sacraments are causes of grace, as actions of God through his ministers. But the slaying of a martyr is not an action of God through his minister, but an action of the devil through his henchman; and the suffering concurs in justification only by way of disposition, as conversion also does in the Baptism of the Spirit. And so the sacraments and martyrdom justify ex opere operato in different ways. For there the work done is an active instrumental cause of grace; here it is only a disposition.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPIT V.
Quo tcmporc cocpcrU Birptismus cssc
neccssarius.
Quo tempore cocperit Baplismus esse necessa-
rius, quaeslio esl inter tbeologos. 5ed quia non csl
conlroversia cum haereticis, exponam solum pau-
cis proposilionibus , quac raihi esse probabilior
senlenlia videatur.
Prima propositio: Baptismus ante passionem
Domini inslituliis cst. iNota negari non posse,(juin
aliquem Baplismum Christus in usu babucrit aiile
passionem. JVam Joan. .*). et 4. dicilur Clirislus
baptizasse per discipulos suos. Scd dubiiim esse
polest, an ille Baptismus fueril sacramenliim iliud,
quod nunc habemus , et dc quo fit menlio Matlh.
ult. an vero lueril pracparatio quacdam ad Baptis-
ini sacramenlura poslca inslituendura, ul crat Ba-
ptismus Joamiis. El quidera Chrysostomus homil.
28. in Joan. el Theopliylactus in cap. 3. Joan. a-
perle docent Baptismum illum , quo discipuli Cliri-
sti baplizabant Joan. 3. non reraisisse peccatura,
et fiiisse in aqua tantum sinc Spiritu ; ncc ullam
iuissc diflercntiam inlerBaplismum discii)ulorum
Cbristi ct Joannis, scd utrumquc fuisse pracpara-
lioncin ad fidem: cl ideo Christum ntin haplizassc
per se, sed per discipulos, quia non dccebal eum
Ijaptizarc sine Spirilu. Jdem vidclur scntirc s. Lco
epist. 4. ad episcopos Siciliae cap. 3./psa.in(piil,
operis qualitas docctcclcbrandac rfcncratitarfjra-
tiae eum essc lcjjitimuni diem, idesl, diem resur-
lectionis, in qao orta cst ct virliis munoris , ct
spccics actionis. Ad cujus rci confirmalioncm
plurimum valct, quod ipsc Dominus Jcsus Cliri-
stus. posteaquam resurrexit a moi-tuis.discipulis
suis , in quibus omnes Ecclcsiarum pracsutcs
docebantur, etformom, ctpolestolcmtradidit ba-
ptizandi, diccns : Euntes ergo nunc docclc o-
mncs (jcnles, baptizantes cos in nomine Palris ,
ct Filii et Spiritus sancli. Dc quo utiquc eos et~
iam anle passioncm potuisset instrucre. nisi pro-
pric voluissct inlcltiji^rcgcneralionis graliam cx
sua resurrectione coepisse. Haer, ille. Probabilius
tamen est, quod nos dixiraus. Quod cx professo
docent Cyrillus lib. 2. in Joan. cap. 57. et sequen-
tibus. ct Augustinus tractat 13. ct \o. in Joan. et
opisl. 108. ad Selcucianum, et Ilugo de s. Victore
lib. 2. de sacraraentis parl. G. cap. 4.
Esl haec commuiiior llieologorum sententia.ciim
Magistro in 4. dist. 3. El ratio esl. Primo, quia Jo-
an. 3. dicilur Chi-islus l)aplizassc, cum tamcn nun
ipsc baptizarel,sed discipuli (!jus,ut ihidem adjun-
gil eviingclista. p]rgo ille ba|)lismus (srat proprie
Chrisli Baplisraus, ut distingiiilur ii Biiplismo Jo-
annis; alioqui non ipse, sed Joannes dicerclur ba-
ptizasse eos, quos discipuli Clirisli baplizabanl. Si
aulem erat proprie Christi Baplismus. necessario
er;it in aqua el spirilu, non in sola aqua. Semper
cnim Scriplura ponil hoc discrimen inter Chrislum
et Joannem. quod isle in aqua, ille non in sola
aqua. sed etiam in Spirilu baptizaret. Nec deccbat
ut Clirislus instiluercl inanem ciieremoniam, auc
munus Joiinnis sibi usur|)arel, nimirumbapliziindi
in sola aqua. Adde, quoci Joan. 1. dicitur de Chri-
sto in praesenti: Hic est, qui baptizal in Spirita
sanclo.
Secundo probatur hoc idem, quia Aclor. 19. le-
giraus rebaptizatos, quos Joannes baptizaverat. Al
nusquara lcgimus rebaptizatos,quos discipuli Chri-
sli anle passionem cjusdem baptiz;iver<inl. Immo
probabilissiraura esl (ul Augusliii. docet m epist.
108.) apostolos non fuisse baplizatos, nisi ante
Clirisli passionem,
Tertio Palres communi consensu docenl, Chri-
slum, cum baptizaretur in Jordanc, dedisse aquis
vim sanctificandijiit palet ex TerluIIiiino libro con-
Ira Judaeos cap. de passione; ex llihirio canon. 2.
in 3Iatlh. Arabrosio lib. 2. in Luc. ciip. 12. Iliero-
nymo in dialogo conlra Lucifcrianos:i\azianzeno in
oralionc in sancla Luraina; Beda in Ciip. 3. Luc.ct
cx aliis. At ccrte non iiabucrunl aquae vim sancli-
ficandi,nisi ab eo lerapore,quo coepcrunl esse ma-
tcria Baptismi.
Dcnique fundanientum conlrariac scnlcnliae non
est solidura. Soluin cnim adfcrunt Chrysostomum
et Theophylaclum in illud Joannis l.iSonduni erat
Spirilus datus, quia nonduni Jesus crat [jlorill-
catus. At hic locus intelligilur de plcniludinc Spi-
ritiis sancti,qunc diiri coepit visihiliter in pcnteco-
ste;alio(]ui enim omnes Siincti habuerunl Sj)irilum
sanctum, ctiani anle Chrisli passionem.
Scciinda propositio: Baptismus Cliristi institn,-
tus est, quando Dominus ipse in Jordanc a Jo-
a,nne l)aptizatus est. i\ota dc liac rc, idesl. ipio
puncto lemporis Chrislus Baptismum inslilucrit,
essc plurimas o|)inioncs Scholaslicorum,sed com-
nmniorcra el prohiibiliorcin csse , quam nos sc-
quimur, quain etiani ainplcclitur calcchisnms con-
fsi ni: svr.n\Mu:.>TO iiAPTisMf
cilii Iri.lcnlini, cl .M;i;;i.slor ciim s. Tlioiii;i. cl ;iliis 7iw<'.ssa)-/iis ncccssUalc mcdii, cl pracco.pli a dic.
liii. 4. ilisl. W. poilcroslc^. .\()l;i, lei,'oni vo.ltToiii siiuplicilcr cos-
.>'ol;i pr.irlcroa, iumi vclli' iios «licoro. Clirisliini s;issti iii inorl(! Clirisli, (|iiia iiinc. coss;ivil uiiivcir-
iii «lic sui I>.i|>li>iiii vcrliis tldcuisse iii;il(M'i;iiii, ;iul s;ililcr r:ili(i lcj^is; l;iincii oii ij,Mi()i;iiili;uii liujiisrci
furiiiani Biipli.>iiii; id cnini r.ilsiiin csl.scd liiiii pri- ;iiiliiic oiilij^MSse Judncos, us(pio ud piil)lic;iiii jiro-
iniiiii >laliii>so.acdci rcvissc.ipnid postcii dccl;ii;ivil iiiiilL;;ili(Hiciii i-viiii^fclii: cl coiilni Ic^mmh (;v;m;4cli-
Jii.in. iJ. .Nicoilomii.<'l alm lcmporc siiis discijmlis: c;iiii ct s;ici;iii)c,iilti clirisli;iii;i cuiidil;i liiissc,cl mul-
ul aiiua esscl ni:ilcria lJ.i|ilismi, el ul forma csscl liim proluissc cliam aiilc (lliristi iiiortcm, lamcii
invocalio Iriuin di\in:irniii pcison;iriiiii. Oclcrmimi- ihmi li;il)iiissc vim priicccpli.iiisi posl |)romuIt,';ilio-
vil otiiin aipias. ad r.;ipliMiii m;itoriiim. cuiii c;is nciii solcmiicm. ul coiiciliiim IridiMiliimm scss. 0.
liiclu nuiiidissiin;ic ciiriiis sii;io,coiisccr;iro cl illu- cap. i. dicil dc l{;iptism(), VA r;ilio cst, ipiia pro-
slrarc tliijnalus osl. ul tloccnl Palics cil:ili. El si- iiuilii;ilio csl dc cssciilia lcpsis, ul s. Tliomas doccl
nuil (lolcrmiiiaMl roniuiin. cum in cjtis I);iptism;il.» |i;ir. 2. (|U;iosl. {)(). arl. i. I*romiil^;i!io iuitcm solc-
lol.i T'riiiil;is sciisiliilittM" ;ipp;iruil, ul patct .M;iltli. miiis iiovac lo^is racl;i csl iii dii; pciilccostcs.CUiod
.1. Cliristo cniiii liaplizaio apcrli suiil cocli. cl vox probalur Primo, quia, ul (]i.\iimis, lex vclus vif,'uil
l»alris inloiuiiUol Spirilus apparuil iii spooic colum- iis^iuc ;id Clirisli morloin: ab oo aiilcm lcmporc u-
h.io. ol riliiis ipsc Dci iii ^ ;iriio assiimpta pr;ics(Mis S(pio ad poiilccostom, ncrjiio Clirislus, iicquo apo-
cral: iibi oli;iiii siiiiul iUiUirio lcsti; loco cit;ito) dc- sloli publico ad populum kKpiuti sunl, Sccuiido,
claialus Cil ciroclus I>;iplismi a Clirislo iiistiluli.ni- non dobuil promuli;ari solemnil(M- lox nova, nisi
niirum. (juod b^ipti/alis apiMitiir cocliim. ol :i Vi\- complclis omiiibus myslijriis rodoiiipliouis, mysbv
Irc iii lilios ado|)lJUlur, ol Spirilu sauclo rcplcu- ria autoiii complcta siiiilin asconsiono Cbrisli.Ter-
lur clc. l'o. lcx vclus solomiiibM' promulgabi fuil in monle
Tcrlia proposilio: JUipliswus Chrisli non fuil Syna dic quiuquajicsimo posl primum pascba Ju-
iicccssarius.noccs^ilalc mcdii.aulpracccpli nnle daoorum; crgo lcx nova promulgari dcbuit dic
Chrii^ti morlcui. Probatur, quia usquc ad Christi quinquogcsimo poslprimum pascliaClirislianorum.
inorlom lcx anliqua viin suam rcliuuil, ul palel, Fuisse ciiim illam lcgis promulgalionem, figurain
(piia Cbrislus c;im sorvavil usqiie ad mortcm. Aam promulgaliouis evangclii,docciit Augustinus opisl.
pridic quam p;il(Mctur. scrvavil caeremoniam agni 111). Lco serm. 1. de penlecosle, et alii. Qu;irlo,
p;isclialis, el Mallli. i'.). moncbat bomines, utser- concioni primac, quam habuit s. Pelrus Aclor. 2.
varcnl el faceronl, quae scribae cl pliarisaci doce- ipso dic pcnlccoslcs, conveuiunl omnes conditio-
bant cx cr.llicdra .Moysis; ergo eliam circumcisio, ncs promulgalionis solemnis. Nam habita est in
si in remedium pccc;ili diila fuorat, usque ad Cliri- urbc rcgia Ilicrosolymorum.pracsentibus omnibus
sli inorlem vigcbal. Non igilur loto co teniporc 13a- hoininibus omnium nationum, ul Lucas teslatur, ii
plisnius Chrisli nccessarius cral ul medium ;id sa- suinmo praccone cvangelii, qui erat aposlolus Pe-
lulcm, quiindo(piidcm siiie eo polcriinl bomincs.e- lrus,et in ea concione comprebensa sunl praecipua
liam p;irviili. jusii(icari.Quare illud Clirisli vorbum capita lotius doctrinae evangelicae. Denique con-
Joan. 3. yisiquis rcnalus fucril etc. non signifi- linuo eliam coepit usus sacramcntorum.
oal iib 00 dic. quo Duiiiinus cum .Moodemo loque-
Latur.fuisse Biiplisimim iieccss;irium,sed signilicat
nec(^ssariuin fuiurum fuisse in lege nova.poslquam CAPUT VI.
ccssanMit caoromoniac logalcs, ul rccle c.xponit
Bornardus Ci)ist. 77. ;id Hiigoncm. Kl eodem iiiodo n n ,• • • , n • -^
"^ , ' 1 .i. i,\.i „.,i;,.^ iii> in (;,!« Dc Bapiismo sanguinis ei flamims.
exponcndum csl. quod ail rulgiMiliii» lib, de lide ^ «^ '
ad Pclrum, cap. 3.ex quo lcinpore diclum est:A7si
(juis rcnalus fuerit, iKMiiiniMu sinc B;q)tisnio pos- Quod atlinet ad poslremam partem dispulationis
sc salvari. xVccipil eiiim iKMiiino lempoiis, iioii il- de necessilalc Biiplismi, qiiaeslio est, an Bapli-
lum dicm.quo ea diccbanlur,scd lcmpus legis no- smus aquae suppleri possit j)er martyrium, tam in
vao. Doniquc illud cliiiiu Luc. 10. Lcx, cl prophe- parvulis, quam in adullis;et per verara cordis con-
tae usque ad Joanncm: noii signilicat lunc legem versioupm iii adultis.
ccssasse. quoad vim, aut obligalioncm, sed quoad Marlinus Remnitius in 2. par. Exam. pag. 90.
praedicalioneiir.Joannes enim fuit ullimus prophe- 91. et 92. admiltit haec tria Baplismata, ac dicit,
liirimi.Uiide sul)jungitcr:/:Jx eo rcfjnum Dei evan- ab anliquis venusle distincta esse tria Baptismata,
(jelizalur. PriMMcrca fn morlc Cbiisli ccssavil clli- sanguinis, fliiminis et fluminis. Sed dissentila ca-
cacia caeremoniarum. el tolius legis veleris; ergo tholicis in modo explicandi: non enim vult marly-
cessavil cliam vis circumci5ioiiis;ergo usque ad il- rium aut Poenitentiam remittere peccata, ul facit
lud lenipus viin habuil Icx vetus. Porro iii morle Baplismus aquae, scd solam fidem, quae lempore
Clirisli cossasse vim lcgis. palct cx ev:iiigelio Jlat- marlyrii el Poenitcnliae,apprehendilCbristum,essc
lli. 27. Scissum esse velum. El Joan.l9. Consum- eam quae juslificat.Illyricus quoque Cenlur.S.cap.
mdhim csl. llcm c\ Aposlolo Rom. 7. Morlilicali 4. col. 517. dicit, Prospcrum contra veibum Dei,
Gs/ts lciji per corpus C/i/"t;^/t.Item omnes fere cae- et cum inogna injuria Boptismi aequasse marlyrium
remoniae legis figurac erant Chrisli. Coloss. 2. et Boplismo.Scd Uiyricus non adfcrt argumenta:Rem-
ilt-br. 10. Cbrislus aulem in morle couiplevit opus nilius autcm prcJbal, quia marlyrium et Poeniten-
rcdemptionis. tia sunt opera noslra; absurdum autem el impium
Quarla proposilio: Baplismus CJiristi coepit essc esl, opera noslra acquare sanguini Chrisli et virlu-
LintU rillMUS
m
li Bnplismi. Confirmal ox Anjjustino, qui lib.4.con-
Ira Donnlisliis cap. 22. flicil, bonnm latroncm, qui
cnm Christo pendcbat in cruc(.\ non pnssionc sua
oblinui-^sc remissioncm peccatorum. scd cx (icJc
tippriilicndente Chrislum. cujus conlrnrium docue-
rai Cyprianus, sed euin Auguslinus loco nolalo rc-
futavil.
Hnec sentciitin Kcmnitii non solum estfalsa.scd
cliam secum ipsn pugnat. cl mcndaciis suis non
circl.^iam cum idcm Kcnuiilius passim doccat cum
Magistro suo Lulhcro,in ipso cliam Biiptisuio afjuai;
sohim Gdem jusldicare: an non apc,|-te sccum pu-
i][nal cum dicit: Mnrtyrium el Pocnitcntiam nou rc-
miltcre peccalum. co modo. quo Baplisums, quin
in eis soln fuics justificnl? I^Icudacia vcro (hio suut
in luic scnlcntia Remnitii. Primum, cuiii ait Angu-
stinum nsscrere l)onum Inlroiiem sola iidii Chri-
slurn apprehcndcnlc jusliricalum. i>'on euimhoc
Augusliuus dicit; sed l)onum hdronem flde cl con-
versiouc cordisad Deum luslificatum essc. Sccun-
dum. cum ait, ab Augustino refulnri Cyprianum,
qui crcdidcrat mnrtyrium justilicare, co modo.quo
facit Baptismus.Id cuim est impudens uieudaciura.
Aupusliuus cnim non inodo non rcfulal, scd eliam
laudat Cypriani sculentiam. .Sic cnim wW.: Uaptlwii
sane vicem aliquando implerc passionem, de la-
irone illo cui non baplizato dictuni esl: Ilodie
viecuni eris iwparadiso. non leve docnmenlum
idem b. Cijprianus assamil. llacc ille. Docct qui-
dcm paulo infra Anguslinus, latronem illum nou
jiosse dici marlyrcm, nec snlvnlum Baptismo san-
guinis.sed Baplismo flaminis.scd lioc dicit nd con-
lirmnudnm Cypriani scutcntinm:si cnim Bnplismus
flaminis juslilicat, mullo magis Baptismus sangui-
nis, ul Cyprianus dixcrnt. Ut auicm res lota expli-
cctur, poiiam aliquot proposiliones.
Prinfw proposilio: Marfi/rinni recte dicilur. et
cst quoddam Baptisma. Probalur hacc proposilio
duplici ralione. Primo. quin Scriplura divinn, et
sancti Patrcs mnrlyrium Baplismn nomiu;irc solenl,
Mnrci 10. Pote.itis bibere calicem, quem ego bibi'
turussum; aut Bapfismo, quo ecjo baptizor, ba-
plizari? Et quomodo coarctor. donec perfkiam
illud? Idern etinm Patrcs passim docent. Terlullia-
nus iu lib. dc Baptismo, dc martyrio loqucns: Hic,
iruiuit, est Baptismus qni lava.cruni re.fjeneratio-
nis non acceptum refert, vel perditmi reddit:
Prosper in epigi-nminalis:
El qui(hiuid smri f<irl mystica forraa lavacri.
Jd tolum implevil f/lona marlyrii.
Cyprianus praefalioue lib. dc exhortalionc marty-
rii, dicit martyrium essc Baplismum, ct quiiiciu
Jiaptismonqnne pracslanliorcm.Ambrosiusinpsalm.
IIH. scrm. .'{. iria Baptismala (hslinguit, uiiiim n-
qiiae, allcrum sanguinis, lcrliuiu purgatorii iri alia
vita. Ilicronymus in cap. i. ad Ephcs. in illud:
Inuni Baplisnia, distinguit Baptismum a(|uac, a
Baptismo marlyrii. Auguslinus lib.l.'}. dc Civil.Dci
cap. 7. epist. 108. ad Sidcucianum lib. 1. dc ori-
gmc animac cap. 1). Iih. i. dc Bnptismo cap. 21.
et 22. Cyrillus cntcchcsi 3. ponit (;tiam diio isla
Baptismaiii, ut fiiciuiit (luoque Niiziiinzcuiis. or;it.iu
I;m.(ai!mi.m VoI. III.
sancta lumina. Damasociius lib.i.cap. 10. Bcrnar-
dusin cpisl. 77. ct Ilugo de sancto Viclorc lib. 2,
dc sacramciitis parl. G. cap. 7.
Altcr-a ralio est, quia martyrium convenit cuu'
Biiptismo aquac iu tribus cfreciibus;niniirum.(|uo(i
Primo configurat homiuem Chrisli passioni el mor-
li. Sccundo rcmiilit peccalum originalc, el rcliqu;!
omuia, si quae sint admissa. Tcrlio, quod remilti!
omnem poenam pcccato debitam, lam aclernam.
qunm temporalcm:quod intcr sacramcutn proprium
cst solius Baptismi.
Hic tnmeu Observnndum csl, non essc hncc o-
mnia acque cerla. Ac Primum certuin csl, qn.od
marlyrium sil configuratio morlis Domiui,nl nolum
cst, ct coufigm-alio nobilior, qu;im Baptisiiii aquac;
(piia illa est realis, linec sacramcntalis. Itlnncer-
tiirn cst npud omncs, quod remiltat omncm poe-
n;)ui, itn ut mnrlyres conlinuo pcrveniant ad coro-
nnm.Jd quod pnlet vel ex co, quod Ecclesia num-
qunm ornt pro nnimnbus mnrlyrurn,sed illis potius.
se commendal: rnjuriam, iiiquil Auguslinus scrm.
17. de vcrbis Apostoli, el Innocentius cnp. cum
Miirlhne, exlrn, de cclcbralione missarum, facit
viartijri, qui orat j^ro inartijre. Undc Cyi^rianus
lib. i. cpist. 2.;id Anlonianum confcrens marlyrcs
cum aliis Chrislinuis moricntibus: Aliud, \nqu\l.
est ad veniam stare.aliud ad gloriani porvenire.
aliud missum in carcerem non cxire inde donec
solvat novissimum quadrantem, aliud statim (i -
dei ei virtulis accipere mercedem.filiud pro pcc-
catis loufjo dolore cruciatum emendari etpur-
fjari diu vjneMiud pcccata omnia passione pur-
gasse, aliud denique pendere diejudicii ad sen-
tentiam Domini, aliud statim a Domino coro -
nari.
De Secundo erfcctu est major dinicultas. IVnm
non dcsunt theologi, ut Dominicus a Soto, et Mar-
tinus Ledcsmiiis in 4. dist. ?». quaest. un. arl. II.
(pii doceut, marlyriiim non dare gratiam cx opcrc!
operato, scd laiilum ex opcro operanlis, ncc darc
ullum gradum gratiac, praeler eum, qui rcspondcl
mcrito ciiiirilatis ipsius marlyris. Martyrium cnim
siuc charitiito susccptum niliil prodcst, ul Paulus
nit 1. Corinth. 1.3. Qui iuilem cst in charilatc. sinii
dubio est iu gratiii. Unde ctiam crcdimus, omnes
vcros martyrcs liabuissc vcram, immo eti;im sum-
mam charitalcm, anlcqunm martyrium subircnl.
juxla illud Joan. 1.'). Ma/jorem ckaritatem nemo
hfibct. quam ulquisponat a,nimani suani 2^ro a-
micis suis.
Proliabilior scntcntia esl marlyrium c.\ opere
operato confcrre primam gratiam, ila ut si quis ad
ni;ii'lyrium iicccdiil ;idliuc in pecc;ilis cxlsteiis. la-
mcn sinc ;inccl"u ;id iiiiipiod pcccatum. elcnm fidc
ct di]cction(! inchoala.el pocnitentia sallcm imper-
fcct;i.quahsrcquiriturcti;im antcBaptismum aqiiae,
is virlutc ni;ulyrii ok opcre opcralo justific;ibitur
cl salvabilur. Ila docct cxprcsso s. fhomas iii i.
dist. 4. quaesl. :\. ;irt. .'{. ad 1. el quaesl. 4. loln.cl.
.Io;iiincs m;ijor, C.abr. cl alii cndem disl. i. lih. i.
et probatur Primo cx mnrlyio infantium: conslat
eiiim infantcs pro Chrislo o(;cisos non soliim sal-
vari, sed ctiam hnl)(!ri nb Kcidesin in numcro mnr-
tynmi, ut jialcl dc rcslo SiiiicUMMim lunoccnlium,
22
IG6
iii: .s\i:u\mi:m() li.MTisMi
ciij'.is mnninil niTM:ir.lii> In sortn. tlo linioooiilib.
♦■I ,inle tMnn \iijju>liiins lil». .'{. dc IiIjimo ;irl)il.c;ip.
23. ol ppist- 2S. ])(i MiiM-onyiiuim. (M ;inlo Anjinsli-
nuin. Ori^riMifs lioni. .*{. jii ilivorsos (•v;iiij,M'lii lo-
cns. cl (:N(»ri;iiiiis lib. \. cpisl. ('», :ul Til);iril;iiios.
.^l p;irvuli niliil opiM-jiri possiinl.cl pccc;ilorcs mihI
nnlciiiKini l)n|)liz(Milur l>;ii)lisnio ;i(iii:io. vcl s;iii-
5,Miinis.
llcspondiMil (luiihim, ros Innoocules rnisso cir-
ruiucisos. proinde anlc miirlyrimn juslilioiilos.Scd
lioo niliil osl. .>ani incorjum ost.;iii rnoriiit illi oin-
ncs cironnioisi: iinnio prob^ibiJissimuin csi. ol Iim-o
cortiim iion fuissc omiics ciroiimoisos..^am oooidil
llorodcs omiios pueros. (ini cranl in Bollilcliom ct
linibus (»jus. noc jussit lilios lanluin .liidaoorum.
sed oimics omniuo oocidirrorlassc autoiii iioii p;ui-
ci cranl Cioiililcs inler cos. Pniclerca jussiloccidi
,i liimalu cl inTra omncs iiif;iiilos: proiiidc cos cl-
iain. (iiii noiulum porvoiUMMiil ;ui oolnviim dicm.
quo solo poloranl circnnuidi. l)(Mii(]uc iion csl
de lide. ciroumcisiomMn jnslilicasse. cl lamoii Kc-
clcsia absoluto omnos illos infanlcs oorlo (M-odil
cssc salvos. Pr;ictcrca KiMdosia cos innooiMilos
nonsolum ul salvos, sed cliam iil marlyros lioiio-
ral: cr?o passio pro Clirislo susocpla :i'liqiii(l cis
conUilil cx opcrc opcralo. Ncquc valot quod Sotiis
rcspondel, essc lioc privilegiuin parviilonim : id
cnim sinc ullo fiimlamcnto asscrilur. Si euim mar-
lyrium cx oporc opcralo iiifanlibns prodosl, cur
non adullis? ocric non minus csl marlyriuin , ncc
nimus polcns cl cllica.v adullornm , quam' in-
fanlium , scd conlra polius , nobilius cl clTioa-
cius.
Secundo probalur ralionc s. Tliomac. Nam i^ra-
li;i,qiiae dalnr marlyri.rcmissionis omnium pocna-
riim. non potcsi cssc ex opcrc operanlis. nam vol
cssot c\ ipsa loI(M-anlia pocnac; vcl cx forvorc clia-
rilalis. Non loleranlia pocnae. qnia multi marlyrcs
fiicrnnt anlca Iiomincs sccleslissimi , qui miilios
niorltMii promcrit! fucranl, cl >inc dubio non crat
siinicionssatisfaclio nii.rsquacdam lcvissima.ulpcr
capitis abscissioncnv.iit lamen si vcre sinl marlyrcs
dimiitunlur eis omncs poenac.MuIli otiam CouYos-
sorcs. plurasacpe paliunlur, quam marlvros,cl ta-
Jiien non semper cis dimittilur lola pocna.Xou et-
iam id polcst Iribui mcrilo cbaritalis: multi etiam
sancti conlcssorcs majorcm habucrunl charitatcm
mulli martyribus, et tamen non habueriinl indul
gentiamomnium poenarum:\Iarlyres autcm cliain-
si non haberent nisi unum irradum charilalis, l;i-
mrn hoo ipso quod sunt maVlyres. haboiit indul-
irenliara oranium poenarum. Falcndum cst i£ritur ,
martyrium cx opcre oporalo . idcst, ex pacto et
institiiiione Christi coiifcrrc grati^im. Quod si mar-
tyrmm cx operc oporalo oonrert <ir;iiiam, certe po-
lcril eliam primara praliam conferrc: id enim solnm
obsiriro videbatur, quod non haberel vim ex opcrc
openilo.
Terlio Ecclesia, ul aliqucm colat ut s. Martyrom
numqnam cxaminal. an anlea fuerilin cralia, sed
indilTcrenler omnes honoral.quos constal pro Chri-
sto occisos in confcssione vcrae fulei,cl unitale Ec-
clesiae. Haerclici enim, ct schismatici martyrcs cs-
se non possunl.cum ponant obicem gratiac Dei pcr
poci-alum iiilidclihilis cl sohismilis. in quo nclu
p(MNCV(MMIlt.
Oii;irlo. si ni;irlyriuiii uon oonforrct prininm {?ra-
li;im o\ oporc opcr;ilo, sod hiiiliim c\ forvorc clia-
rilatis optMMrotur. iiou vimm; (lisliii_irucrcliir liaptis-
iiuis s;iii^Miinis ;i n^iptismo Ibiminis, scd ulriiiiupuj
csstl Kaplisma flaiiiiiiis, cum utrumque consistcret
in inttMii;i conversionc ct motionc niiimi iii Deum.
.\l rovoni l»;iptisiiius s;inj^uiiiis disliiij^uilur ;i IJa-
piismo flaiiiiuis,quia ipsa s;ini,niinis cirusio supplct
llaplisiiiiiiii in iii;irlyrio:iii l);iplismo aiilom namiuis
soI;i iiit(M'ii;i oonvcrsio et nspiratio Spiritus s;iiioli.
. Quinto sil aliijuis, qui oomprchciisus in p(M'sc-
quuliono malit mori.iiuam Chrislum nci,Miro,(M rci-
ps;i nu)ri;itiir: ct t;iiiUMi noii h;il)uerit ;iiilc ipsiiiii
iiiiirlyrium vcram ooiitritioncm, scd soluiii ;illiiiio-
ncm qu;ind;im snorum pcccalorum; eldeiiKpic nou
luibuoril iiuijorcm disposilioucm. qiiam cain, (jiuio
iicocss;iri;i cst iid l!;ii>lisniuin a(]uac. Ant juslilica-
biliir istc. (;l salv;il)iUir, ;iiil non: si sic, cr^-o mar-
lyriiim c\ opcrc oporato dat primam graliam; ne-
(pic oniin islc aliquid morcri fioluil anlc ipsiim
marlyrium, cum non cssct juslus: si non; crgo Ua-
plismus saiiguinis non supplel Baptisraum aqiiac;
islc cnimvcre l)apli/;itiir in suo s;inguinc, et vcre
m;irlyr est. ciim pro vcr;i fide moriatur ; falendum
csl igilur cum cx opcrc oporalo justificari.
Scxto el ultimo vidctur omuino hacc sentenlia
P;ilnim. Cyprianus in cpisl. ad Jubiijanum: Niim-
qvid potcsl. inqiiit, vis Bapiismi esse viajoi\ aut
polior, quam confes^io, quampassio? llcm Aii-
guslinus lib. \^. dc Civitat. Dci cap. 7. Quicum-
qiic cliam non pcrceplo regcncralionis lavacro
pro Clirisli confessionc moriunlar.tanlam eis va-
lct ad dimillcndapeccata.quantum si ablueren-
lur sncro fonte naptismatis. llacc iHi. Al falsa
haoc cruiit, si BapUsmus primam graliam confcrt ,
ct peccata cliam quoadculpam dimitlil; miirtyrimn
aulom nculrum faccre potest: sic enim erit longe
m^jor virlus Biiplismi aquae, qmim Baplisini san-
guiiiis; cujus conlrarium Palres docciit.
Ad argumenUim, quod coulra fieri solel, cx 1,
Corinlh. 13. Sitradidcro corpas meum,itaut ar-
deam. charitalcm aulcm non habuero niliil mihi
prodest. El Joan. 15. Majorem charitatcm nemo
liabct, quam ut animam suam ponal qais pro a-
micissuis. riespon(leo:H;iec locii non concludere,
oportero marlyrem iinle ipsura m.nrlyriuin luibcre
vcrani cliarilatem,et proinde osse justifioalum.IVam
prior locus non reqiiirit, uloharil;is pr;ieccdiil,sed
ut oomilclur roiiqua bona; siuc cliarilale eniin ni-
hil sulTicit ad salulem. Et hoc est vcrissimum: nani
eliam martyrium nihil prodesset, si martyr de hac
vitii dt^cederet sine charilale. Scd non potesl dece-
dore sine charilalc, cum vi ipsius martyrii. cx pa-
clo et privilcgio Dei infundalur gralia. el proiude
charitas.Ouod autem non sit necessc propler hunc
locum Pauli, oharitatem praecederc, sallcm tcmpo-
rc, ipsum marlyrium. patel , quia ibidem Paulus
dicit, sine charilale non prodesse fidem el scien-
tiam; el tamen ordinarie prior est Gdes , el saepe
eliam scicntia in homlne, quam charitas: el lamen
si fidcs el scienlia sempcr raaneanl sinc charilale
non salvant horaincm.ut recle Apostolus dixit. Ad-
LI1]EU 14U.MUS
m
de, quod id, quod dicil Aposluhjs de marlyrio, di-
cere possumus cliam dc Baplisiuo: qui enim habel
Baplismuiii. si iion habcat charilalcm.iion salvaUir;
ct tameii nemo negal Baplismum dare primamgra-
tiam.
Aller locus docet: Summam esse charitalcm ex
parte operis, ponere vilam pro amico.quia non lia-
bct aliquid majus homo, quod dct pro amico,quam
vitam: lamen non docct hic locus, omnem qui dat
vilam pro amico, hnbcre suinmam charilalem quo-
ad habiluiu, vel aclum inlernuiii , ut nolum est ;
cum mulli qui non dederunt vilam, habuerint ma-
jorem charitalem iis, qui dederunt , ul palet de b.
Virgine, de s. Joanne evangelisla, et aliis. Praele-
rea eliamsi (jui vitam ponit pro Chrisli amore , ha-
bel sine dubio magnam etveram chariliileiu,ut hic
locus evangelii docct, et tales vidcnlur fuisse mar-
tyrcs plurimi: lamen potesl etiara fieri : ul aliqnls
nondum plene justilicatus, raplus ad martyrium ,
vitam ponere decreveril, non lam propter Dei clia-
ritatem,quam nondum habel,quam niclu gehcnnae
vel spe coeieslis praemii: ccrte de laii non polcst
dici, quod habeat veram charitalem; et lamen benc
facit ponendo vilam in confcssione Chrisli, et mar-
tyr est, idest, teslis verilalis. Ac de ejusmodi dici-
raus, remilli illis peccala, et infundi graliam ex o-
pere opcralo marlyrii.
Secunda proposilio: Perfecta conversio ac Poc-
nitentiarecle Baj)tismus jlaminis dicitur et lia-
ptismum aquae saltem in necessitate supplet.^o-
la, Baplismum flaminis non dici.quamlibet convcr-
sionein, sed pcrfectam, quae includit veram con-
tritionem, et charilalcm, et simul eliam deside-
rium, seu volum Baplismi.
INola sccundo: Non fuisse apud veteres tam ccr-
lam hanc proposilionem, ut erat superior. Nam de
martyrio nullus velerum, quod sciam , negavit eo
suppleri Daptismum aquae : at de conversione et
poenilentia, non desunl , qui id negaverinl. Nam
liber, qui inscribitur de ecclesiasticis dognlalibus,
qui falso tribuitur iV.ugusiino, cap. 74. apertc dicil:
Oatcchumenum nun salvari, eliamsi in bonis ope-
ribus vi.\.erit , nisi baplismo aquae , aul sanguinis
purgalus fuerit. Tempore etiam s. Bernardi fuisse,
qui idem sentirent. pal.U ex epislola ejus 77.
At sinedubio crcdendum est, veram conversio-
nem supplcre B;iptismum aquae, cuin non ex con-
tcmplu, sed ex necessitale sine Baplismo aquae ali-
qiii deccdunl. Id enim expresse iiabelur Ezech.18.
Si impius cgerit poenitentiam a pcccatis suis, i-
niquitatum ejus non recordahor amplius. Idem
aperle doccl Ambrosius oratione dc obilu Valenlin.
juniuris: Quem eram, inquil. regeneraturus,ami-
ai: sed itle (jraliam, quamsperavcral, non ami-
dt. Idem Augustinus lib. 4. de Baptismo, cap. 21.
ct Bernardus episl. 77. et posl eos Innoccnlius lll.
ca[). Apostolicarn, dc presbylero non baplizalo.
Unde etiam concilium Irident. scss. 0. cap. 4. Ba-
plismum dicit csse neccssarium in re vel in volo.
I>eni(iue vera cunvcrsio convcnit cum martyrio et
cum Baplismo aquae, in nomine Baptismi, cl in ef-
leclibus duobus; crgo credibile est couvenire cl-
iain in alio eHVclu, (jui estdimillerc culpam, el ju-
slilicarc homincm,cl eo niodo supplcre Baplismum
aquae. Anlecedens probatur. Ac primum dc nomi-
ne Baplismi, Icgimus Marc. 1. el Luc. 3. Pracdi-
cans Baptismum poenilentiac in remissioncm
peccatorum. El 1. Curinlh. Ki. Quid facient qui
baptizanlur pro morluis?Simortui nonresurrjunt
ut quid baptizantur ^^ro illis:-* Non cnim ulla dari
potest huic loco aplior expusitio. quam si per Ba-
plismum inlelligamus opera pcnitcntiae , et aflli-
clionis, quae vivcnles suscipiunt pro animabus de-
functorum. Praclcrca poenitenlia conligural homi-
nera Chrisli passioiii, ut facit marlyrium, licet noii
tamperfecle, quara facit martyrium: dimiltil eliam
lotam poenam pcrfecla conversio,ut fuit in conver
sione Mariae Magdalenae. boni lalronis,et aliorum.
Neque enim dicitur Baptismus flaminis absolule
el simplicilcr, inlerna conversio, nisi quando esl
ila pcrrccta, el servens, ut omncm rubigincm pec-
cali tollat. Alioqui enim, si non tollat tolain poe-
nam, ut plerumquc sit, non est Baptisraus , nisi
imperfeclc.
Terlia propositio: Tam mart\jrium,quam Poeni-
tentia pcccala remittunt; non autem sola fides .
qua martyres, aut Pocnitentes Christum appre-
hendunl. Ilacc csl cont-a Kemnilium, et prohalur
Scripturis, Palribus ct ratione, Primo Scriplurae
ipsi passioni el poenilenliae tribuunl remissioncm
peccalorum, Mallh. 10. cl IG. Quiperdiderit ani-
mam suam propter me, invcniet eam. Marc. 8.
et Luc. y. Quipcrdiderit animam suainpropter
me, salvam faciet eam. Ezech. 18. Cum. averte-
rit se impius ab impietate sua,et feccrit justitiam
ipse anUnam suam vivificaJ)it. Ei Luc. 7. 3Iag(la-
lenae dicilui-: Remittuntur ei peccala multa, quo-
niam ditexit multum: Secundo, Patres supra.cila-
ti numquam soli rniei, scd ipsi passioiii, aut poe-
nitentiac. ct desidcrio Baplismi Iribuunt justifica-
tionera. Tertio, si sola fldcs operarelur in marly-
rio et Poenilentia. non essenl tria Baplismata, scd
duo, vel polius ununi taulum : proinde non rccte
dicerel Kemuilius Iria Baplismala venusle a Palri-
bus dislincla. Quod si dicat esse Iria Baptismala ,
quia sunl Iria inslrumimta excilandac fl^lci; dicaiu
ego esse nmllo plura, quia multo plura sunl in-
strumenta excilandae (idei. ut patel.
Ncque arguinentum Kemnilii concludil. Nam non
aequamus opera nostra virluli Baptismi, aut Christi
sanguini, cum dicimus, pcr marlyrium et Pocni--
tentiam remitli peccata, ct suppleri Baplismum :
scd acquamus l)ei gratiam, Dci graliae , et Christi
pactum ct inslilulionem, Christi pacto et institu-
tioni. Nam ul in Baptismo aquae, (luod praccipuc
opcratur, esl iustitulio divina et gralia; ita cliam
in martyrio cl Poenilenlia: non enim passio marty-
rum ex se vim habct juslilicandi, sed c\ pacto cl
promissione Christi. Simililcr poenitenlia el con-
versio, esl solnm (lisi)osilio quaedain, ad (iiiam cx
pacto et promissioiic Dei seqiiitur juslilicalio.Ad-
de, quod nec ipsa dispositio esl pr;iecipuum opiis
nostrum,sed Dei, (pii primo inspirat pocnilentiam
el ainorem marlyrii, el poslea juvat ad perlicien-
dum,
Quarla proposilio: Itlartjirium et conversio ad
Dcjim, Ucet llaptismala (juaedam sint. nun suiU
tamcn sacramcnta. Probalur prinio, ([uia uoii lia-
DL SACUA.Mi:.Ml> UAIMISMI
itcin oss 'lUi.iiii sacrninonli: Naiii iii inarlyrio iioii
osl iilln luriiia vcrhoriMii ile cssoiUia: in cDiivursio-
iie, ncquc csl forma verboriiin, ncquc sij^nuin cx-
lernuin sensibilo. quod ncorssario rtMiuiralur. St»-
nin<!o: SacraiiuMUa suiU rLMUtMlia tM)iilia ptMMMluiu
ordinaria, cl oinni l(Mn|)orc convcniciUia. Al niar-
lyrium non esl ordinarium riMucdium. noc oiuui
lcni|>oro polcsl li.ibtMi. TiM-lio: Sacr.inuMila suiU
causs.i ;:ruliac. ul aclioncs Dci pcr suos minislros:
iil niarlyris occisio non csl aclio Dci pcr suum mi-
iiislrnm, scd aclio dialioli pcr suum salcllilcm, vU
aulcm esl passio concurrit ad juslilicalioiuMU di-
sposilive tanlum. ul cliam convcrsio iu Daplisino
lUiminis: alque ila divciso modo iusliRcnul cx o-
pcrc opcralo sacranuMUa cl marlyrium. Ihi cuiiu
opus opcralum csl ciuissa acliva iiislruuicnlalis
Ijraliac, hic solum csldisposilio.