Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On Grace and Free Choice · Book V: Grace and Free Choice in Moral Works
Chapter 28: The testimonies of St. Augustine for free choice written after the rise of the heresy are brought forward
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. VI, De Gratia et Libero Arbitrio, Book V. 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).
Now indeed, as regards the second rank of the books of St. Augustine — those, namely, which were written after the heresy of Pelagius arose — Calvin disputes many things which make little or nothing to the matter. For he boasts with great confidence that all those books make for him, because in them Augustine repeatedly says that man can do nothing of good without the aid of grace. But that is another question; nor do we deny the necessity of grace, but we contend that, the help of grace being present, man is still truly and properly of free choice, so that he can keep the precepts if he will, and not keep them if he will not. And since the adversaries — and Calvin above all — affirm the contrary: that with the help of grace present man cannot act ill, and with it absent cannot act well, and thereby never has free choice of the will, and that this very word is not rightly used, being a title without a thing — therefore we bring forward the testimonies of Augustine for the confirming of free choice.
Leaving aside by-matters, then, let the first testimony be that in which St. Augustine simply confesses the liberty of choice, in the book On Grace and Free Choice, chapter 1: “God has revealed through his holy Scriptures that there is in man free choice of the will.” He has like things in epistles 46 and 47 to Valentinus, and elsewhere in many places. Calvin answers that, as regards the name of free choice, St. Augustine yielded to a custom already inveterate, which he was not able to resist; but as to the thing, no liberty of choice is acknowledged by Augustine except from coercion. But if blessed Augustine judged that one must prudently yield to a custom received in the Church for four hundred years, how great is the rashness of Calvin, who judges that one must not yield to a custom now inveterate for a thousand and five hundred years! Then, if Augustine desired (as Calvin indicates) this name to be abolished, why did he not at least attempt to do it? Why did he not only not attempt it, but contrariwise most diligently foster that custom? For that he fostered it we manifestly gather from this: that he himself admonishes that no one, on account of the preaching of grace, dare deny the liberty of choice. “Believe the divine oracles” (says he in epistle 46) “that the choice of man is free.” And again in epistle 47: “As much as we could, we have dealt with those brothers of yours and ours, that they persevere in the sound Catholic faith, which neither denies free choice, whether unto an evil life or a good one, nor attributes so much to it that it avail anything without grace.” And in the book On Grace and Free Choice, chapter 4 [al. 1]: “Since there are certain men who so defend the grace of God as to deny the free choice of man, or who, when grace is defended, think free choice is denied — hence I have taken care, charity compelling, to write something to your charity, brother Valentinus, and to the rest who together serve God.” Nor can these places of Augustine be twisted to a free choice from coercion alone. For St. Augustine confesses, and admonishes that there must be confessed, that free choice which was being denied by the Monks of Valentinus; and they did not deny choice free from coercion, but from necessity — which alone seems able only with difficulty to be conjoined with grace. For liberty from coercion is most easily coupled with grace — nay, even with fate, and with any cause whatever determining to one; and therefore no one ever denied it.
The second testimony is taken from those places where the heresies of Pelagius are recited. For wherever St. Augustine recounts the Pelagian errors concerning the liberty of choice, he always says that the Pelagians attributed too much to free choice; but nowhere does he say that they erred in this, that they preached free choice. But certainly, if the assertion of free choice were erroneous, it would without doubt pertain to the errors of Pelagius. See this testimony in book 1 of the Retractations, chapter 9; in epistle 107; in the book On Heresies, chapter 88; and in book 1 to Boniface, against the Two Epistles of the Pelagians, last chapter — for in these places the errors of Pelagius are enumerated. And not only does Augustine not place among the errors of Pelagius the acknowledging of free choice, but he approves this in the Pelagians, when he writes, book 4 [al. 3] to Boniface, chapter 3 [al. 8], that they lie hidden in the praise of the law and of free choice — because, namely, the Pelagians praised the law and free choice, which they knew were not denied by Catholics. And book 2 On Marriage and Concupiscence, chapter 3: “That choice in men is free, and that God is the maker of those who are born, we both say; you are not on this account Celestians and Pelagians.” Finally, St. Augustine took it very ill that the Pelagians said free choice was denied by him — which certainly he would not have taken ill, had he believed it a Pelagian heresy to confess free choice; just as at this time the Lutherans and Calvinists do not take it ill if we say that they have changed free choice into servile choice. Book 2 On Marriage and Concupiscence, chapter 3: “It is not as thou sayest; thou art much deceived, or meditatest to deceive: we do not deny free choice.” And book 1 to Boniface, chapter 2: “Who of us says that by the sin of the first man free choice perished from the human race?” And book 4 [al. 1] against Julian, chapter 8 [al. 2]: “Much less would I say what thou liest that I have said: that free choice is denied if grace be commended, and grace denied if free choice be commended.”
The third testimony is taken from those places where St. Augustine numbers among the heresies of the Manichaeans the denying of free choice. For — to omit the three books On Free Choice, which the same Augustine testifies, book 1 of the Retractations, chapter 9, were written properly against the Manichaeans — certainly in book 4 [al. 2] to Boniface, chapter 4, he most openly writes that the Manichaeans manifest themselves when they dare to censure the law, marriage, nature, the saints of the old Testament, and the free choice of the will; that is, they show themselves manifest heretics, when they deny and condemn those five things which the Catholic Church receives and commends. Augustine, then, holds the Lutherans and Calvinists for manifest heretics, since they deny and condemn the free choice of the will so plainly that they do not fear to entitle their books “On the Servile Choice.” Nor will Calvin be able to have recourse to a free choice from coercion alone, since it is certain that this is not what the Manichaeans censured.
The fourth testimony is taken from those places where St. Augustine brings forward arguments for free choice. For he proves free choice, after the heresy of Pelagius arose, by the same arguments by which he proved the same before that heresy arose. For in the books On Free Choice, and in the book On True Religion, which he wrote before the name of Pelagius had begun to be heard, Augustine proves free choice against the Manichaeans chiefly by these reasons: that otherwise the judgment of God is taken away; laws, admonitions, exhortations, punishments, rewards, and other things of that kind are taken away. But by altogether the same reasons he proves the same free choice in epistles 46 and 47, and in the book On Grace and Free Choice, which it is agreed were written on occasion of the Pelagian heresy. For thus he speaks in epistle 46: “If there is not the grace of God, how does he save the world? If there is not free choice, how does he judge the world?” And below: “Unless we understood and were wise by free choice, it would not be commanded us, Scripture saying: Understand, ye senseless among the people; and, you fools, be wise at last.” And in the book On Grace and Free Choice, chapter 2: “Those divine precepts would not profit man, unless he had free choice of the will, by which, doing them, he might arrive at the promised rewards.” And below: “How does he command, if there is no free choice?” You see, then, that St. Augustine did not change his opinion on free choice on account of the rise of the Pelagian heresy.
The fifth testimony is taken from those places where St. Augustine writes that free choice is helped by the grace of God. For nothing is helped except that which is; nor does liberty from coercion alone need help, but liberty from necessity, as we said also above. In epistle 89, question 2: “Free choice avails,” says he, “for good works, if it be divinely helped.” And below: “For the choice of the will is not taken away because it is helped; but it is helped precisely because it is not taken away.” And this he repeats a thousand times in his writings against the Pelagians.
The sixth testimony is taken from those places in which he teaches in express words that it is in the power of man to will and not to will. In the exposition of Psalm 7, near the end: “He who made us willed that not to consent to the devil should be in our power.” Likewise in the book On the Spirit and the Letter, chapter 33: “Free choice, naturally bestowed by the creator on the rational soul, is that middle power which can either be bent toward faith, or inclined toward unbelief.” And chapter 34: “To consent to the calling of God, or to dissent from it, belongs to one’s own will.” We judge it, then, sufficiently proved that St. Augustine always preached the liberty of choice in that sense in which the Catholic Church now preaches it, and has always preached it.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XXVIII. Adferuntur testimonia sancti Augustini pro libero arbitrio scripta, post e&ortam haere- sim Pelagii. Jam vero quod attinet ad secundum ordi¬ nem librorum sancti Augustini, eorum vi¬ delicet, quae scripta sunt post exortam haeresim Pelagii, multa Calvinus disputat, quae parum, aut nihil ad rem faciunt. Jactat enim magna confidentia, eos omnes libros pro se facere, quod in illis Augustinus iden¬ tidem repetat, nihil boni hominem facere posse sine adjutorio gratiae. Atqui ista alia quaestio est, neque nos negamus necessita¬ tem gratiae, sed contendimus praesente auxi¬ lio gratiae, hominem vere ac proprie adhuc esse liberi arbitrii, ut possit praecepta ser¬ vare, si velit, et non servare, si nolit. Et quoniam adversarii, et Calvinus in primis contra affirmant, praesente auxilio gratiae non posse hominem male facere, eo vero absente non posse bene facere, ac per hoc numquam habere liberum voluntatis arbitrium, et hoc ipsum vocabulum non recte usurpari, cum sit titulus sine re, idcirco testimonia Augu¬ stini ad liberum arbitrium confirmandum adferimus. Omissis ergo parergis, primum testimonium sit illud, quo sanctus Augustinus simpliciter libertatem arbitrii confitetur, in libro de gra¬ tia et libero arbitrio, cap. 1. « Revelavit, inquit, Deus per Scripturas suas sanctas, esse in homine liberum voluntatis arbitrium» . Similia habet in epist. 46. et 47. ad Valen- tinum, et alibi multis in locis. Respondet Calvinus, quod attinet ad no¬ men liberi arbitrii, sanctum Augustinum cessisse inveteratse jam consuetudini, cui resistere non valebat. Quantum autem ad 400 LIBER V. rem, non agnosci ab Augustino libertatem arbitrii, nisi a coactione. At si Beatus Augu¬ stinus prudenter cedendum esse judicavit receptae consuetudini in Ecclesia per annos quadringentos, quanta est Calvini temeritas, qui cedendum esse non judicat consuetudini jam per annos mille, et quingentos invete¬ ratae? Deinde, si cupiebat Augustinus (ut Calvi¬ nus indicat) hoc nomen aboleri, quare non tentavit saltem id facere ? Quare non solum id non tentavit, sed contra potius eam consuetudinem diligentissime fovit? fovisse enim manifeste colligimus ex eo, quod ipse monet, ut nemo propter gratia) praedicatio¬ nem negare audeat arbitrii libertatem : « Credite ( inquit in epist. 46. ) divinis elo¬ quiis, quia liberum est hominis arbitrium » . Et rursum in epist. 47 : « Quantum potui¬ mus, inquit, egimus cum istis vestris et no¬ stris fratribus, ut in fide sana, Catholica per¬ severarent, quae neque liberum arbitrium negat, sive in vitam malam, sive in bonam, neque tantum ei tribuit, ut sine gratia valeat aliquid » . Et in libro de gratia et libero arbi¬ trio, cap. 4. « Quoniam, inquit, sunt quidam qui sic gratiam Dei defendunt, ut negent hominis liberum arbitrium, aut quando gra¬ tia defenditur, negari existiment liberum arbitrium, hinc aliquid scribere ad vestram charitatem, Yalcntine frater, et cauteri, qui simul beo servitis, compellente charitate cu¬ ravi ». Neque possunt haec Augustini loca detor¬ queri ad liberum arbitrium a sola coactione. Nam illud liberum arbitrium sanctus Augu¬ stinus confitetur, et confitendum esse monet, quod a Valentini Monachis negabatur. Illi autem non negabant liberum arbitrium a coa¬ ctione, sed a necessitate, quod solum diffi¬ culter cum gratia conjungi posse videtur. Libertas enim a coactione facillime cum gratia copulatur ; imo etiam cum fato , et quavis sua causa determinante ad unum ; et ideo nemo unquam illud negavit. Secundum testimonium sumitur ex illis locis, ubi recitantur haereses Pelagii. Ubi¬ cumque enim sanctus Augustinus Pelagianos errores, circa libertatem arbitrii commemo¬ rat, semper dicit Pelagianos nimis multum tribuisse libero arbitrio. Nusquam autem di¬ cit errasse in eo, quod liberum ai’bitrium praedicarent. At certe si assertio liberi arbi¬ trii erronea esset, ad errores Pelagii sine dubio pertineret. Vide hoc testimonium in lib. i,, retractationum, cap. 9. in epistol. 407. in lib. de haeresibus, cap. 88. et lib. i. ad Bonifacium contra duas epist. Pelagia- norum, cap. ult. nam in his locis enumeran¬ tur errores Pelagii. Nec solum Augustinus non ponit inter errores Pelagii, agnoscere liberum arbitrium, sed probat hoc in Pela- gianis, dum scribit lib. vi. ad Bonifacium, cap. 3. eos in laude legis et liberi arbitrii delitescere. Quia videlicet laudabant Pela- giani legem, et liberum arbitrium, qua) scie¬ bant a Catholicis non negari, et lib. n. de nuptiis et concupiscentia, cap. 3. « Liberum, inquit, in hominibus esse arbitrium, et Deum esse nascentium conditorem, utrique dici¬ mus, non hinc estis Ccelestiniani et Pela- giani ». Denique sanctus Augustinus valde aegre ferebat, quod Pelagiani dicerent, ab ipso negari liberum arbitrium, quod certe non aegre tulisset, si credidisset haeresim esse Pelagianam, liberum arbitrium confiteri, si¬ cut hoc tempore non aegre ferunt Lutherani et Calvinistae, si dicamus, eos liberum arbi¬ trium in servum arbitrium permutasse. Lib. ii. de nuptiis et concupiscentia, cap. 3. « Non est, inquit, ita ut loqueris, multum falleris, vel fallere meditaris, non liberum negamus arbitrium » Et lib. i. ad Bonifa¬ cium, cap. 2. « Quis nostrum dicit, quod primi hominis peccato perierit liberum ar¬ bitrium de humano genere ? Et lib. iv. ad¬ versus Julianum, cap. 8. « Multo minus, in¬ quit, dicerem, quod me dixisse mentiris, negari liberum Arbitrium, si gratia commen¬ detur, et negari gratiam, si liberum com¬ mendetur arbitrium » . Tertium testimonium sumitur ex locis illis, ubi S. Augustinus numerat inter haereses Manichaeorum, negare liberum arbitrium. Nam ut omittam libros tres de libero arbi¬ trio, quos contra Manichaeos proprie scriptos esse testatur idem Augustinus lib. i. Retra¬ ctationum, cap. 9. certe in lib. iv. ad Boni¬ facium, cap. 4. appertissime scribit, Mani¬ chaeos se manifestare dum vituperare audent legem, nuptias, naturam, sanctos veteris Testamenti, et liberum voluntatis arbitrium ; hoc est, ostendere se manifestos haereticos, dum quinque ista negant et damnant, quae Catholica recipit et commendat Ecclesia. Habet igitur Augustinus Lutheranos et Calvinistas pro haereticis manifestis, quo¬ niam liberum voluntatis arbitrium ita per¬ spicue negant et damnant, ut libros suos de CAPUT XXIX. 101 servo arbitrio inscribere non vereantur. Neque recurrere poterit Calvinus ad liberum arbitrium a sola coactione, cum certum sit, non hoc esse, quod Manichaei vituperabant. Quartum testimonium sumitur ex iis locis, ubi sanctus Augustinus profert argumenta pro libero arbitrio. Siquidem isdem argu¬ mentis probat liberum arbitrium post haere- sim Pelagii exortam, quibus idem probabat ante exortam illam haeresim, nam in libris de libero arbitrio, et in libro de vera reli¬ gione, quos scripsit antequam nomen Pela¬ gii audiri coepisset, probat Augustinus libe¬ rum arbitrium adversus Manichaeos; his po¬ tissimum rationibus, quod alioqui tollatur judicium Dei, tollantur leges, admonitiones, cohortationes, poenae, praemia, et alia id ge¬ nus, at iisdem omnino rationibus idem libe¬ rum arbitrium probat in epist. 46. et 47. et in libro de gratia et libero arbitrio, quae scripta esse constat occasione haeresis Pela- gianae. Sic enim loquitur in epist. 46 : « Si non est gratia Dei, quo modo salvat mun¬ dum? si non est liberum arbitrium, quomodo judicat mundum ? » Et infra : « Nisi libero arbitrio intelligeremus, atque superemus, non nobis praeciperetur dicente Scriptura, Intel- ligite insipientes in populo, et stulti aliquan¬ do sapite » . Et libro de gratia et libero ar¬ bitrio, cap. 2. « Illa praecepta divina homi¬ ni non prodessent, nisi haberet liberum vo¬ luntatis arbitrium, quo ea faciens ad promissa praemia perveniret ». Et infra : Quomodo jubet, si non est liberum arbitrium? » Yides igitur S. Augustinum non mutasse senten¬ tiam de libero arbitrio, propter exortam hte- resim Pelagianam. Quintum argumentum sumitur ex illis lo¬ cis, ubi sanctus Augustinus scribit, liberum arbitrium adjuvari gratia Dei. Non enim adjuvatur, nisi id quod est, nec auxilio eget libertas a sola coactione, sed libertas a ne¬ cessitate, ut etiam supra diximus. In epist. 89. quaest. 2 : « Yalet, inquit, liberum arbi¬ trium ad bona opera, si divinitus adjuvetur ». Et infra : « Neque enim voluntatis arbitrium ideo tollitur quia juvatur, sed ideo juvatur, quia non tollitur. » Et hoc millies in suis scriptis contra Pelagianos repetit. Sextum testimonium sumitur exiliis locis, in quibus disertis verbis docet, esse in pote¬ state hominis velle, et non velle. In exposi¬ tione Psalm. vn. prope finem : « Diabolo, inquit, nonjconsentireinpotestate nostra esse voluit, qui nos fecit». Item inlibro de spiritu et littera, cap. 33 : « Liberum, inquit, arbi¬ trium naturaliter attributum a creatore ani¬ mae rationali, illa media vis est, quae vel in¬ tendi ad fidem, vel inclinari ad infidelitatem potest ». Et cap. 34: « Consentire vocationi Dei, vel ab ea dissentire propriae voluntatis est ». Satis igitur probatum existimamus, S. Augustinum libertatem arbitrii in eo sensu semperprajdicasse, in quo nunc illud Catho¬ lica praedicat, semperque praedicavit Eccle¬ sia.