Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Sacrament of Confirmation
Chapter 2: The Sacrament of Confirmation Is Proved from Scripture
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. III, De Sacramento Confirmationis, 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).
It is to be proved by five arguments that Confirmation is a sacrament truly and properly so called, as the Council of Trent teaches, session 7, canon 1 on Confirmation. First, from the Scriptures. Second, from tradition and the testimonies of the supreme pontiffs. Third, from the testimonies of the councils. Fourth, from the testimonies of the Greek Fathers. Fifth, from the testimonies of the Latins.
As regards the first: three things are required for the essence of a Christian sacrament properly so called. First, a promise of grace. Second, a sensible sign with a word, which is the means or instrument by which the promise is applied. Third, a divine command by which it is ordered to be ministered. These three Calvin, book 4 of the Institutes, chapter 19, section 5, and Chemnitz, in part 2 of the Examination, page 276, demand to be shown them from the Scriptures in the question of Confirmation. “In this question,” says Chemnitz, “which are those means through which it is to be believed that the Holy Spirit wills to be effective, we ask before all things that an express command and a divine promise be shown us from the word of God; for when we have these, then we know that those means, as instituted by God, are to be used reverently; we know also what is to be ascribed to them.” So he. And so they require nothing else; and rightly, for all things are brought back to these, and by the consent of all it is a sacrament properly so called where these three are found.
And the promise indeed, and surely a most ample one, is had in John 14, where the Lord promises the Spirit, the Paraclete, who will comfort in all adversities. Likewise in chapter 15, where he promises the same Holy Spirit, who will make the disciples strong and fearless in bearing witness to the truth; and in chapter 16, that he will convince the world of sin, of justice and of judgment, that is, who will give strength to the apostles to reprove the unbelief of men, and to bear witness to the justice of Christ, and to announce that the prince of this world is now judged. Likewise the last chapter of Luke: “Stay you in the city till you be endued with power from on high.” Lastly Acts 1: “You shall receive the power of the Holy Ghost coming upon you, and you shall be witnesses unto me,” and so on. That this is a divine promise, and is had in the Scriptures, and that by it a fuller grace of the Holy Spirit is promised to men already baptized and just, by which they become strong in the confession of the faith, can in no way be denied.
Now the means, or instrument, or sensible sign consisting of things and words, by which that promise is applied, was the laying on of hands with prayer. For the apostles indeed, by a singular miracle and favour, received that promised grace without any means or sacrament on the day of Pentecost, as is well known from Acts 2. But the others received the same grace through the ministry of the apostles by that means, as is plain in Acts 8: “Then they laid their hands upon them, and they received the Holy Ghost”; and before it had said that they had come and prayed. The same is had in Acts 19. And that this means is the means by which the promise made about sending the Holy Spirit is applied is plain from the effect: for on whatever baptized person the apostles laid hands, the Holy Spirit came upon him. Lastly, that that gift which was then given to all the baptized through the laying on of hands was that very thing which was promised to the apostles is plain from the testimony of St. Peter, who in Acts 2 preached to the people and promised them the gift which he himself had received, if they believed and were baptized; and he alleged Joel, who had foretold that that gift would be poured out not on the apostles only but on all flesh. The same Peter too, Acts 15, testified that Cornelius and his companions had received the same gift which the apostles received at Pentecost: “He put no difference,” he says, “between us and them”; and yet Scripture nowhere mentions any other means or sensible sign by which that gift was given except the laying on of hands with prayer.
There remains the command. But in place of the command we give them the carrying out of the command. For never would the apostles have laid hands so ordinarily and so securely on all the baptized, that the Holy Spirit might come upon them, unless the Lord had commanded them this. As also here on earth, when a servant does something which cannot be done except by the master's order, and he is not a fool, all understand that he has the command, even if he does not say that he has the command; as if the lictors seize some great man in the middle of the forum, or if the messengers announce to the senators that the senate is to be held on such a day, and so on. And that that rite was ordinary and common to all the baptized is plain from chapters 8 and 19 of the Acts, and from the letter to the Hebrews, chapter 6. And so Calvin himself too, when in book 4 of the Institutes, chapter 19, section 4, he had demanded that the command be shown him, answers himself in the name of the Catholics, section 6: “They defend themselves,” he says, “by the example of the apostles, whom they think did nothing rashly”; and admitting the answer, he says: “That indeed rightly; nor would they be blamed by us, if they showed themselves imitators of the apostles,” and so on.
Now we must see what the adversaries answer to this argument. The first solution is Calvin's, in the place cited: that that laying on of hands was not a sacrament, but a certain offering of the baptized to God; for they used through the laying on of hands to offer to God those whom they had baptized.
But this solution is easily refuted. For in the first place Calvin only says this, but does not prove it, nor can prove it by any testimony except his own authority. For so he says: “I think no higher mystery lies under this laying on of hands, but I interpret it as a ceremony of this kind used by them, that by the very gesture they might signify that they commended to God and as it were offered him on whom they laid hands.” Then Scripture says that upon that laying on of hands there followed at once the pouring out of a wonderful gift; nay, Scripture even asserts that through that laying on of hands the Holy Spirit was given, Acts 8, as it says in Titus 3 that we are saved through the laver of regeneration. As, then, the laver is not a simple offering but a mystery conferring grace, so too is the laying on of hands. Besides, to offer the baptized to God is not anything greater than to baptize, especially according to Calvin, who says that no mystery lies under this ceremony; therefore those very men who had baptized could have offered them. But Scripture teaches the contrary. For in Acts 8 Philip baptizes, and yet cannot lay on hands, but Peter and John come to do this. And in Acts 19, with Paul present, twelve men are baptized, and it is not expressed by whom, because anyone could do that; but on the baptized Paul himself lays hands. Lastly, what need was there of a new offering, when by the very fact that someone is baptized he offers himself to God and subjects himself to his laws and service?
The second solution is of the same Calvin in the same place, and of Brenz in the Württemberg Confession, the chapter on Confirmation, who say that God at the beginning of the rising Church gave the faithful, through the hands of the apostles, certain visible gifts of the Holy Spirit, as the gift of tongues, the gift of miracles and the like; from which it follows that that laying on of hands was not a sacrament, because it did not give the grace of justification. And they confirm it from like things; for by the shadow of Peter men were cured, Acts 5, and by the handkerchief of Paul, Acts 19; and yet we do not make sacraments of these.
But this solution too can easily be rejected. For what they say, that that laying on of hands gave only certain gifts of speaking in tongues and of miracles, is false. For in the first place those graces freely given are not called simply the Holy Spirit in Scripture, nor is the Holy Spirit said to dwell in one in whom there are only those gifts; nay rather, on the contrary, the Holy Spirit will flee from the deceitful, nor will he dwell in a body subject to sins, Wisdom 1; while those graces freely given are sometimes found even in sinners, as is plain in Matthew 7. But through the laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Spirit himself is given, Acts 8 and 19; therefore not only those graces freely given were given. Second: that was given through the laying on of hands which the Lord had promised, John 14, 15 and 16 and the last chapter of Luke, as we showed above. But what the Lord promised was not the gift of tongues or of healings (for that was a certain addition), but grace helping and confirming in the faith. Third: those gifts were not common to all, as is plain from Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 12: “Are all prophets? Do all speak with tongues?” But the Holy Spirit was given to all through the laying on of hands, as is openly gathered from the places noted, Acts 8 and 19. Fourth: the Apostle, Hebrews 6, counts the laying on of hands with Baptism, with faith, with penance, with other things which belong to salvation; nay, even to the foundations of religion, as the Apostle says in the same place. But surely to speak with tongues and to prophesy does not belong to salvation, much less to the foundations of religion. Fifth: if the Holy Spirit given through the laying on of hands conferred nothing else than those gifts of miracles, surely the chief apostles Peter and John would never have gone down from Jerusalem into Samaria to lay on hands. For Philip was working miracles enough in Samaria, so that others were not needed there to work miracles. Sixth: the examples which the adversaries bring of the shadow of Peter and the handkerchief of Paul show the same; for we nowhere read that the Holy Spirit was given through those instruments, but only bodily health.
The third solution is the one which Calvin touches indeed in the place cited, but Chemnitz follows out more broadly, page 290. It was a singular privilege in the apostles that they gave the Holy Spirit through the laying on of hands; for they had a peculiar command and promise about this matter. But we do not have such a command and promise; therefore we rashly try to imitate them. The argument is confirmed from the outcome. For upon their laying on of hands the effect followed; upon ours nothing follows; for even if someone lays on his hand a thousand times, fiery tongues do not come down. That gift, then, has ceased; and so an idle and empty ceremony has remained.
This solution too can easily be rejected. For in the first place the adversaries will not show where the Lord commanded the apostles to lay on hands for receiving the Holy Spirit. We read indeed in the last chapter of Mark, “They shall lay their hands upon the sick, and they shall recover”; but those things are said to all the faithful, and not to the apostles alone: “These signs,” he says, “shall follow them that believe,” and so on. And besides, this is a laying on of the hand to drive away sicknesses, not to call down the Spirit. We read likewise that Ananias, Acts 9, received the command to lay his hands on Paul; which place Calvin wrongly expounds of the laying on of hands of which we now treat, both in the Antidote to the Council of Trent, session 7, canon 3 on Confirmation, and in the Institutes, book 4, chapter 19, section 10. But that place does nothing for the matter. For that laying on of the hand was healing, to drive away bodily blindness, not to give the Holy Spirit; hence it was also done before Baptism. Second, neither will they show that a promise was anywhere made to the apostles that the Holy Spirit would be given to whomever they laid hands on. The Lord indeed promised the apostles the Holy Spirit, whom they also received on the day of Pentecost; but that they themselves should give him to others we nowhere read; and yet they gave him, and indeed ordinarily. A peculiar promise, then, was not required. Third, the promise is general, made not to the apostles alone but to the whole Church; therefore the ceremony too by which the promise is applied ought to be general and perpetual. The antecedent is proved. For although the Lord was speaking to the apostles when he promised the Holy Spirit, yet in them he was speaking to the whole Church, as St. Leo says, sermon 9 on Lent: “The whole Church,” he says, “heard universally its own salvation in those who were present.” Hence too the Lord says, the last chapter of Matthew: “I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.” Where he speaks to those who were all to die within a hundred years, and yet says that he will always be with them, because they too would always be there in their successors. Likewise from what he says in Luke 22, “Do this for a commemoration of me”; which surely belongs to others too who were not apostles. Hence blessed Peter, who understood these promises most rightly, in Acts 2 promised the Holy Spirit to all if they believed and were baptized, and alleged the prophecy of Joel: “I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh.” There is added also an evident reason. For the cause why God promised and gave the Holy Spirit has no less place in us than in the apostles; since at every time the faithful need the power of the Holy Spirit for resisting in persecution and confessing the faith. Nor could or would the Lord provide for his Church for ten or twenty years, and not for ever, since she needs that help.
But Chemnitz answers that the promise is indeed general, but that the instrument by which it is applied is no longer the laying on of the hand, but other instruments, namely Baptism and the Eucharist. But this is rashly and at will, nay even against the word of God, to feign instruments by which the divine promises are applied. For if Baptism and the Eucharist apply the said promise, why did the apostles use the laying on of hands? Were Baptism and the Eucharist perhaps lacking to them? Then the apostles had been baptized before the passion of Christ, and had received the Eucharist, and yet after all these things the Holy Spirit is promised them. They had not, then, received this gift, namely in that fullness which was to be given in the sacrament of Confirmation, through Baptism and the Eucharist. Besides, in Acts 8 the Samaritans had been baptized, and yet Luke says in express words that the Spirit had not come upon any of them except after the laying on of the apostles' hands. Lastly, since Scripture itself teaches so openly that the means for receiving this gift is the laying on of hands, how great a rashness it is to reject this means and make up others!
But, they say, that effect has ceased which followed upon the laying on of the hand. I answer: it has ceased as to the visible signs, not as to the invisible grace. For that the Holy Spirit can be given invisibly too is established from the deed of the Lord, John 20, where he breathed on them and said, “Receive ye the Holy Ghost”; and that he ought always to be given, at least invisibly, was proved a little before. And there was a reasonable cause why he was then given visibly, now only invisibly: because at the beginning of the Church, for planting and nourishing the faith, such miracles were necessary. Hence Augustine, book 3 On Baptism, chapter 16: “For not now,” he says, “is the Holy Spirit given through the laying on of hands with temporal and sensible miracles bearing witness, as he was given before, for the commending of the untaught faith and for the spreading of the beginnings of the Church. For who now expects this, that those on whom hands are laid for receiving the Holy Spirit should suddenly begin to speak with tongues? But it is understood that divine charity is breathed invisibly and secretly into their hearts through the bond of peace.” Lastly the same is plain from like things. For at the beginning of the Church those who believed worked miracles, according to that of the last chapter of Mark: “These signs shall follow them that believe: they shall lay their hands upon the sick, and they shall recover.” Now that effect of faith has ceased; and yet faith is not idle and empty, because it has its chief effect, which is to give life: “My just man liveth by faith,” Hebrews 10. See Gregory in the homily on the Gospel of the Ascension. By a like reason at the beginning of the Church sinners were punished with visible punishments, as is plain of Ananias and Sapphira, Acts 5; of Elymas the magician, Acts 13; of those who received communion unworthily, 1 Corinthians 11. But will these sins now, because they are not punished with visible punishments, therefore remain unpunished, and not be punished at least invisibly, both here and in the other life? So too, then, in good things.
The fourth solution is Chemnitz's, page 291: that the whole place of Acts 8 and 19 does nothing for us, since we have rejected the laying on of the hand and put in its place the anointing with chrism.
This solution is nothing. For, to leave aside what is to be said below about chrism, it is false that the laying on of the hand has been rejected. For the bishop lays hands on those to be confirmed twice, as can be understood from the Roman Pontifical: once when he stretches his hands over them and prays; and again when he signs them on the forehead and anoints them; for the anointing itself and the signing, since they are done with the hand, are most rightly called a laying on of the hand, as Hugh teaches, book 2 On the Sacraments, part 7, chapter 2. Hence too in Mark 7, when certain men had asked that the Lord would lay hands on a lunatic, he did so; for he touched his tongue and his ears with his finger.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT II.
Prohatur ex Scriplura sacramcntum
Confirmalionis.
Quinque argumentis probandum est, Confirma-
tionem esse sacramentum vere ac proprie diclumi
ul concilium tridenlinum docet sess. 7. canon. 1.
de Confirmalione. Primo, ex Scripturis. Sccundo.
ex traditione, et testimoniis suramorumponliGcumi
Tertio, ex testimoniis conciliurum. Quarlo,ex lesli-
moniis Patrum graccorum. Quinto, ex teslimoniis
Latinorum.
Quod ad Primum atlinet: Tria requiruntur ad es-
sentiam sacramenli chrisliani proprie dicti.Primo,
promissio gratiae. Secundo, signum sensibile cum
verbo, quod sit medium, seu orgauum, quo appli-
cetur promissio. Tertio. mandatum divinum, qu(»
id jubealur ministrari. Haec tria postulant sibi o-
stendi exScripturis in quaeslione de Confirmatio-
ne, Calvinus !ib. 4. Institut. cap. 19. § 5. et Rem-
nilius in 2. part. Exam. pag. 27G./71 /lac quaesllo-
ne, inquit Remnilius, quac sint illa media , pcr
quae credcndum sit Spiritum sanctuni velle c(fi,-
caccm esse:ante omnia petimus cx verbo Dei no-
bis monstrari, expressum mandatum, et promis-
sionem divinam: quando enim illa habemus,
lunc scimus mediis illis, utpote divinitus insli-
tutis.rcverenter csse ulendum:scimus etiam quid
illis tribuendum sif. Ilaec ille. Ilaque nihil aliud
requiruni; el merito: nain ad haec revocanturo-
mnia; et omnium consensu sacramenlum est pro-
prie dictum, ubi haec Iria inveniunlur.
Ac promissio quidem. elcerle amplissimn habe-
tur, Joan. 14. ubi Dominus promittit Spiritun) pa-
rncletiim, qui consolcturin oinnibus ndversis.lt(!ni
cap. lo. ubi promittit cundem Spirilum sanctum,
qui faciat discipulos fortes, atque intrepidos in te-
stificatione verilatis: Et cap. 10. ut arguat munduni
de peccalo, de justitia et de judiciu, idcsl. qui
det robur aposlolis ad arguendam in(idelilalcm ho-
minum, et testificandam Chrisli justitiam,cl annun-
ciandum principem hujus mundi jam csse jiidica-
tum. Ilem Lucae ult. Scdctc in civitalc, doncc in-
duamini virtute ex alto. Denique Actor. 1. Acci-
pietis virtutem supervenicnlis Spirilus sancti in
vos, et crilis milii tcsles etc. Ilanc cerie divinaiu
esse promissioiiem, et in Scripluris haberi, et ea
promilti hominibus jam baptizalis, ct juslis gra-
tiani ampliorem Spinlus sancti, qua liaul fortcs in
conlessione fidei, nullo modo negari polest.
Jam vero mcdium, seu organum , sive sigiiuni
sensibilc conslans ex rcbus el vcrbis , quibus ap-
licelur illa promissio. hiit manus imposilio ciiui
oratione. IVain aposloli ([uidem singulaii miracuh»
cl henelicio reccpcriinl illam gratiam promissam
sinc ullo medio, seu .sacramento in dic penleco-
2>>
i\l
in: s\«:uvMK\ro (:o.\riii\ivrio.M^
sles, ut iiolmn i;sl cx Aclor. 2. .Vl vcn» raclori ro.-
n|>ii'banl ill;im (Miiiicjn ;;r;ili;nn niinislerio ;ipi)slo-
loriiin por illnil incilimn. ut p.iici .\r[o\-. S. i'nnr
imiumcbant vmnuit supcv iUos , ct accipichanl
SpirilHtn ^'inctiiin: c\ ;inlc;i di.vcnil illn.-^ vciiissc. .
ul ur.iroiU. Moin luibelur .Viior. U). Ki (pioil lioc
niodiuin sil inciliuin . (]ijo Jipplio^ilur proini^^sio \',\-
rl;i do mitlondo Spinlii s;iiicto, [);iloi o\ cllV'ctii :
n;iin ouicuinipni b;i|iliz;ito ;ipos|oli m;imis impiiMc-
b;iiit, voiiiob.it Mipcr oiim Spiriuis s:iiicliis.i)ciii(pic
(]Uod islud donmn.ciuod dab;ilnr Innc oimiibiis l);i-
p!iz;itis por m;miis imposilioiiom . fticiit ilhid i-
psuin, quovl proimssum luit aposlolis , palol c\ to-
sliinoiiio saiicti Potri. (]ui .Vclor. 2. conoioii:i!>;iliir
populo, el promilt(!b:!l nlom donnm, (]uod ipsc ;ic-
cepcral. si orodciont, ol l);ipti/.;iioiiliir , o[ allo;,';'-
<,'al)at JCtelom, (]ui praodi.\or;il doiiimi iiliid clVmi-
dondmn. noii supor aposlolos laulum, sod supcr
oinuiMii o;iriioiii. Jdem oliam l'clrus .4cior. II. lc-
.^l;ib.iliir. roriiciium, ol ojiis ooinitos ;ioccpissc i-
dcin donnm, quod aoccporunl aposloli lu poiiiooo-
coste: MhiL iiupiii, discrcvil inter nos ci illos, oi
taincn Soripliira nusqu^im mominit ailcrins incilii,
scusigni seusit)iiis . quo darclur donum illii.l. iii-
si mauus imposilionis cum oralionc.
Uosl;il maiidalmn. Scd |)ro maiidalo d;imiis illis
maiidati exc(|Uulioncm.I>'um(iiiiim cnimaposloli iia
ordinaric. ol scoure imposiiissoiU omnihus bapti-
zalis m;iuus, ul venirel supor cos Spirilus sauclus ,
nisi Domiiius lioc cis iii;iudassol. Oucnuidmoduiii
eliain hic iii tcrris oum lamuius ;ili(pii(l ;i!i;j|. (pjod
non pob!sl nisi jussu Domiui, cl non csl slullus ,
omnes inlcliigunl. oum habcrc niandalum. cliamsi
is noii dicat sc li;iboro maiidalmn ; ul si licloros
oapianl mdgnum ;di(|uoiii viruin in moJio foro, inil
si vialoros imlioant seiialoribus lali die habcudum
semilum elc. Fuisscaulom rilum iliiini ordin;irii,m.
ot oommuncm umuibus b;ipliziilis. p^ilel cx cnp. 8.
cl 19. Aclorum. Ei cx cpislobi ad llcbracos caj). G.
Itaque ipse cti;im Calviiuis cuiii lib. i. luslil. cap,
VJ. § 'i. posluliissi.i i;i;ind;ilum sibi oslendi. ro,-
spon.lot ipsc sibi iiomiiic oiUholicoriim § 0. Tucii-
tur, inquit, si quidcni aposlolorum cxeniplo quos
nihil lcniere fecis^e exislimant: ac rcspon.-«ioiicm
;idmiltens. ail : Id sane recte: ncc a nohis rcprc-
li^^nderenlur, si se aposlolorum imHaiorcs oslen-
dcrcnt elc.
?iunc vidcndum cst, quid nd hoc ariiumcnliim
respoiidc;iiU aJvcrsarii. rrimii solutio csl Ciilviiii
loco cilalo; quod illa manus imposilio non hieril
Siicr;iinciiluiii. scd quiicdam obiiiiio baplizalorum
Doo: solobaiU cniin per manus imposilioiicm oircr-
rc Deo, quos baplizaverant.
At haec solutio f.icile rcfeliilur.Nam in primi^ id
Calvinus liiiUum dicil. sod ncc probal, ucc polcst
prubire uilo lcslimioiio, iiisi smi ipsius ;iiiclorila-
tc. Sic cniiu ail: Ilaic nianus imposilioni non al-
tius subesse mnsicrium cofjilo, sed hujusniodi
cdcrcmonium ab illis adlUbilum inlerprelor, ut
ipso yestu significarcnl se Deo commcndare et
i:elul ojfcrre cum, cui manus imponebanl. Dein-
d.' Scri|)iura dicil.quod ad iliam niiinus imposilio-
ncm. sequebalur coiiliiiuo cffusio doni mirabilis;
imiuo eliam asseril Scriplur.i. per illain imposilio-
nein maiuium diilum Spirilum Siiiiiiuo), A(ior. 8.
sioul dicil 'rilum .'{. [)cr iiiv.icnim rogoiioriiliuuis
sidvos iins licri. Ul igitiir l:iv;ioriiiu non cst sini-
plcx oblalio, scd myslcrium confcrens grali;im; ila
(ii;im iiuposilio ni;iiiuiiin. Priictcrcii oircric Dco
biiptizatum, nou csl aiiqiiid m;iiiis. (]Uiiin biipliza-
rc. |)r;iosortiiu S'!cuudum Calviiiuiii. (]ui dicil niiiil
subossc luyslorii in hac cacrcmoiiia; orgo polcrant
(drcrr(> iiii ij^si, qiii baplizavoraut. Al Scriptura
ooiilriiniim doocl. .\iim .Viior ^S. lMiili|)pus bapli-
Ziil, cl taincu nou polcsl imponcrc ni.iuus, sed vc-
niuiil ad hoc r;icioiiduin Potriis (i .lo;iiiii(>s. l']!, A-
(ior. l!).P.uilo |)riicsonlc b;i|)liziiiiliir duodccim vi-
ri. (i noii cxprimilur a qiio, quia quiiiiict polcr;it
h\ fiiccre: al baplizalis Paulus ipsc imiiius iiuponit.
I)ciii(]iic quid opiis or;U nov;i obliilionc, ouiii hoc
i|)So. (piod (piis biiplizalur, oircral sc Dco (;jiiS(iuc
Icgibus, et obsoquio sc subjicial?
Scciiiidii solulio osl c;iisdcm Calvini ibidcin, cl
liroiUii iii Coufossionc Wiilombcrgcnsi c;ip, do
CoiUirmaiione. qui dicuiil, Dcum inilio iiiisijcritis
Ecclcsiac pcr manus aposlolorum dedissc lidelibus
dona quacdam visibiliii Spiiilus sancti, ul dbnuin
linguiirum, doiium miracuiorum, cl similiii; cx
(luo soquitur iiiam imposilioncm manuum nou fuis-
sc sacr;iinoiiliim, (piia non diibal graliam juslilica-
lioiiis. El ooiUirmiinl cx sinUIibus; nam uinbra Pe-
Iri curabiiiUiir homiiics Aclor. li. (i pcr sudiirium
Pauli Aclor. 11). cl lamen nou fncimus indc sa-
cr;imonla.
Scd iiiicc cli;im solulio facile rcjici polesl. N;im
quod diounl, ilbiin imposilionem manuum non dc-
dissc nisi doiia quacdam loqucndi linguis. cl mi-
riioiilorum, ralsuin cst. Nam in primis don;i iila
gralis diila non dicunlur in Scriplura siinplioilcr
Spiriliis sanclus. ncc dicilur fjpirilus sanclus habi-
tiirc in 00, iu quo uon suiU nisi ilhi doii;i; (pjin po-
lius c coiitrario Spirilus sanclus oiriigiclfiolum,uec
hiibilabit in corporc sul)dilo |)ecoa!is. Sa[)iciU. 1.
douii aulcm ill;i gralis dala, cliam in peoo;iloribus
iiUcrdum iiiv(!niun!ur; ut palcl M.itth. 7. At per
lUiiiius imposilioiicm aposloiorum d.iiiiilur ipsc Spi-
riliis sanclus Aclor, 8. cl ID. nou i^ilur solum do-
ii;i illa gralis dabi. Scoundo; Id d;U);ilur por ma-
nus i(ii|)osilioncm,quod proiuisoral Domiiius Joan.
\\. lo. 10. cl Luc;ic ullimo, ut supra osliuidimus.
Al quod promisit Dominus. iioii eral donum lin-
guiiriim, aiU curalionum (id cnim fuil addiliiinen-
tum quoddiim) scd gridiii ndjoraiis, el ooiUirin;ius
in fide. Terlio; Dona illa non eranl communia o-
muibiis. ul paicl ex l»om. 12. cl 1. CoriiUli. 12.
Numquid omncs prophelanl? numquid omncs
loquunlur linguis? Al Spirilus saucius pcr ma-
nus imposilionem dabalur omnibus. ul apcrlc col-
ligilur cx loois nolalis Aclor. 8. el 19. Ouarto; A-
[lostolus ilcbr. G. numcral iinposilioncin lUiinus
cum Baplismo, cura fide. cum poenitcnlia, ciim a-
liis rebus, quae perlincnl ad sidulem; immo eliani
ad fundaineula religionis, ul ibidcm Apostoius di-
cit. Al ccrlc loqui lingiiis. et prophelare, iion per-
tinel ad sidutem, muUo minus ad fund;imenla reli-
gionis. Ouinlo; Si nihil aliud conferebat Spiritus
sanctus dalus per manus imposilionem, nisi doiia
iila miraculorum, ccrle numquam aposloli prima-
LIBKR SKCUNDUS
215
rii Polius. cl Joaimes ex Hi(M'usiilcm iii Sariuinam
desceiulisscnl. ut manus imponercnl. Nam salis
mulla miracula operabalur IMiilippus in Samaria,
ul noM cssenl ibi necessaril alii, qul miracula la-
cerenl. Sexlo; Iilein oslomiunt cxfMiipla, quae ad-
versarii profcrunl dc umbra Pelri, ol sudario Pau-
li: nusquam eiiim lcijimus per ca inslrumeiila da-
lum essc Spirilum sanclum, scd solum leinpora-
lcm sanilaltMu.
Terlia solullo est ea, quam allingit quidem loco
cilato Calvinus. sed lalius eam persequiliir Rcmni-
lius pagina 290. In aposlolis privilegium singula-
re fuil, ut Spiritura sanclum darent per manus iin-
posilioncm: habuerunt cnim illi peculiarc manda-
tuin, cl promissionem de hac re. Al nos nnn lia-
bemus cjusmodi mandatuin, et promlssioiiem; igi-
lur tcmere imitari conamur. Confirmalur argumeu-
lum cx eventu. Nam ad eorum manns imposllio-
nein S(;quebalur eflectus; ad noslram njliil sequi-
tur, etlarasi enlm quis millles manum Imponat,
non descendunt Jinguae igneae. Cessavlt igiliir do-
num illud: proinde otiosa, el inanis cacremonia
remansll.
Ilacc quoque solulio facile rejici polcst. :\am in
priinis non oslendent adversarii, ubl mandaveril
Doininus aposlolls, ut manus Imponereiil ad Spi-
rilum sanclum reclpienduin. Legimus qnidem
Marc. ult. Super aerjros manus iinponenl, et be-
ne hahebunl; sed illa dlcunlur omnlbus fidelibus.
non aulem solis apostnlls; Signa, inquil. eos qui
crediderint, Jiaec sequenlur etc. Et piaclerea ista
esl im|)osilio nianus ad morbos pellendos, non ad
Spiritum advocanduin. Legimus ilem Ananiam A-
ctoriiin O.accepisse inandalura,iil Paulo manus iin-
poneret; quem locum pcrperam Calvinus exponil
de mamis imposllione, de qua nunc agimus, cum
In Antidolo concilil tridcnlini sess. 7. can. 3. de
ConGrinalione, tum In Institut. lib. 4. cap. 19. §
10. Si;d is locus niliil facil ad rem. Nam illa impo-
sillo manus fuil curativa ad depellendam caccila-
tem corporalcm, non ad dandum Spiritum san-
ctum:unde eliam anle Bapllsmum facla est. Secun-
do, neqiic ostendent aposlolis usquain faclam esse
proralssioncin, ul cui manus irnponerenl, daretur
Spiritus sanclus. Proinisit quidem aposlolis Domi-
nus Spirilura sanctum, quein cl acccpcriinl in die
pcntecostes: at ul ipsl aliis darcnt, nusquam lcgi-
nms; el tamen dabant. ct quidem ordinarie. Non
igilur requirebaiur pcculiaris promissio. Tertio,
promissio generalis est non solis aposlolis, sed
toti Ecclesiae facta; igilur el caeremonia, qua ap-
j)licaliir promissio, gcneralis essc debct ct perpe-
tua. Probnliir antecedens; Nam ellamsi nominus
aposlolos alloqiiebalur, ciim proinittcbat Spiritiim
sancluin, lanien in eis Ecclesiarn totam alloqueba-
lur, ut ait sanclus Leo serm. 9. dc quadragiisimn:
Tola, inquit, Eccksia salularc sunni iii iis qui
aderant, universaiiler andiebal. Undc eiiam I)o-
miniis alt .Uatth. iilllmo: yobiscum. suni oninil)US
diebus, nsque ad niundi consumniationein. Ubi
alloquilur eos, qui erant omnes morituri intra cen-
tum annos, el lamcn dicll sc cum els somper fu-
liiniin . qiiia iiiiniriim, cl Ipsl semper crtint in po-
sleris suis. llem ex eo, quod ait Lucae 22. lloc
facilc in nieain coniinemoralioneni ; quod cerlc
ad alios etiain perlinel. qui apostoli non erant. Un-
de b. Petriis, qui nas promissiones reclissimc in-
tclligebat Aclor. .3. omnibus poUicebatur Spirllum
sanctum. si crcderent, ct bapti/.arentur; el allega-
bat vaticiniuin Jdidis: Effundain de Spirilumeo
super oinneni cffrnem. Accedit etiam ratio evidens.
Nam caussa, cnr Deus promlsil. et dedil Spirilum
sancliim, non mlniis locuin habet in nobis. quam
in aposlolis; slquidein omni leinpore cgent lideles
virluteSplrilus s.incli ad resistendum in persequu-
tionc et confilenda fidc. Neque Dominus providere
poluit, autvoluit Ecclesiai», siiae ad annos decem,
aulviginli, et non perpetuo.quando illa auxilio in-
dlget.
Sed respondel Kemnillus:Promissionern quidem
csse gencralem, sed organum. quo illa applicalui",
non essc jnin impositionem manus.sed alia inslru-
menla, nimirum Bnptismum clEucharisllara. Atqui
hoc est lc.mcre, el pro arbllrio, immo eliani conlra
verbum Dei fingerc organa. quibus appliccntur di-
vinae promissiones. Nam si Baptlsmus, et Eucha-
ristla applicnnt promlssionem praedictam. eur apo-
stoli ulebantur manus im|)()sitinne:deerant fortassc
illis Bnptisinus el Eucharistia; Deinde aposloll anlc
Christl passionem baptizall fuerant et Eucharisliam
sumpserant, et lamen |)osl illa oranla proniiiiiiur
eis Spiritus saiiclus. Non iglluracceperant hoc do-
num, nimirum iii ea pleniludine. quae danda eral
in sncramcnlnConfirmalionlSjpcrKnplismiiin el Eu-
rlinristiam. Praeterca Actorum 8. Samnrllniil ba-
|)lizati erant, el lamen Lucas disertis verbis dicit ,
Spiritum non venissc In quemquain illoriiin, nisi
posl manus impositlonem aposlolorum. Denlquc
cura ipsa Scriplura tam aperle doceal, inedium ad
recipicndum hoc doniim esse manus impositionem;
quanla temerilas ost hoc medium rejicerc, et alia
confingere?
At, inquiunt, cessavit effeclus ille, qui sequeba-
lur ad imposilionem manus. Kespondeo; Cessavlt
quond visibilia symbola , non qiinad invisibilem
graliam. Nain posse dnrl elinm iiivisibiliter Spiri-
Inm sanclum. conslal ex faclo Domini. Joan. 20.
ubi insufrtavil.et dixit:Acci/)i7e Sinrilum sanctum;
debnisse autcm darl seinp(M% saltcm invlsibillter ,
paulo ante probntum est. Fuit autcrn caussa ratlo-
nabilis, quarc lunc daretur visibililer. nunc soluin
invisibiliter; quin Inilio Eccb^sin^! nd fidem plan-
taiidnm ct nnlrlendnra, ejii^^modi mirnculn ncces-
snria eranl. Unde Aiigiistinus lib. 3. de Raptismo
cap. 10. Neque enini temporaJibns, inquil, cl sen-
sibilibus mirnculis alteslanlibus jier manus iin-
positionein. modo dalur Spirilus sanctus , sirut
anlea dabalur ad comniendalioneni rudis fidei ,
p.l Ecclesiae primordia dilalnnda.Quisenim nunc
hor exspcclat. ul ii. quibus ma,nus ud accipien-
duni Spiriluni sanctum iinponilur, repcnlcin-
cipiani 1o(iui linquis? Sed invisibililer et lalcnler
inlelliqilur pervincnbunpacis eorum cordibus
divinacharilnsinspirari. Deniiiue idem pnlet cx
similibus. Nam inilio Ecclesiae, qui credebnnt, o-
perabantiir miraciila juxla illiid Mnrci iill. Siijna .
eos, qui crediderunl, har.c srquenlur: suprr ar-
fjros manus iinivynenl, et bcne habcbunl. iViinc
2IG
DK SAl.UAMEiMC) Cd.M-lll.^hMlO.NiS
«Cijsavil islc ellVclus llilci. .\cc. l;imon (>sl lidos o-
liosa, cl iiKinis, qiiia liabcl clTccliiin suiiin princi-
palein. qni csl \ivilicari':ji/sM/s vniinrx jidc vivily
Ih-lir. !U. Vnlc tirciiorinin in honiilia cvaii^M'lii n-
sccnsionis. I'ari r.ilionc iii principio Kcclcsiac pn-
nicbanlur peccalores visibilibus poenis , ul palcl
(lc .\nania cl v>apliyra, Aclor. li. dc Kliina ma^o A-
clor.ri. ilc iis, c|ui iiuiij;iic connnunicabanl, 1. Oo-
rnilli. il. .Vl num hoc lcmpore, quia non pnniun-
inr isla pcccala visibilibiis pooiiis, itlco impnnila
inancbunl: cl non sallcin invisibililer pnnicnlur ,
cl hic, el in alia vila? lla ij,'ilur cl in bonis.
Quarla solulio csl Kemnilii pag. 291. lolum lo-
cum Aclor. 8. cl 10. niliil pro nobis faccrc cnm
iMS iinposilioncm maiius rcjccerinuis. el in ejus
Jocum unclioncni Chrismalis subjccerimns.
Maec solulio nulla csl. Nani ut omillam quac
infra de Chrismalc diccnda sunt, falsum csl rejc-
ciam essc manus iinposilioncm. Bis cnim episco-
pus manus imponit conlirmandis, ul c.k pontificali
lUtmano intelli^i potest, semcl cum super eos ma-
iius cxlendil, alijue oral: el rursum cura signat in
rronlc, alquc ungil: ipsa enim unctio , ct signatio
cum manu liat. nianus imposilio rectissime dicilur,
ul doccl Ilugo lib. 2. dc sacramcnlis part. 7. cap.
2. Unde cliam Marc. 7. cum poslulassenl quidam,
ut Dominus manus imponerct lunalico; ille id fc-
cil, nam digilo tetigit linguara, el aures ejus.