Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Grace of the First Man
Chapter 2: That man was not created at the beginning such as he is now born, but far happier
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. V, De Gratia Primi Hominis. 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 against those contrary errors we have determined to bring forward and prove four propositions.
The first proposition: Man was not created such as he is now born — prone to evil, weak, ignorant — but upright, just, wise, without the concupiscence and the difficulty which we ourselves assiduously experience in ourselves. The second: The first man received in creation not any rectitude of soul whatever, but the very grace that makes pleasing. The third: The first man, adorned with original righteousness and the habit of the grace that makes pleasing, did not need that special help by which he might be stirred to work well, or to avoid sins. The fourth: That integrity with which the first man was created, and without which after his fall all men are born, was not his natural condition, but a supernatural raising.
The first proposition, then, which fights against the error of the Pelagians, is gathered plainly enough from the divine writings. For what we read in the first chapter of Genesis — God created man to his own image and likeness — the common exposition of the Fathers teaches is to be so taken that “image” is referred to the nature of the intelligence and the will, “likeness” to wisdom and righteousness. From which it follows that the first man received in creation not the nature alone, with which we see men born even now, but also the ornaments of wisdom and righteousness, which without doubt we lack. But let us hear the judgments of the Fathers.
St. Irenaeus, book 5 against Heresies, chapter 6: “If the spirit be wanting to the soul, such a one is truly animal, and, being left carnal, will be imperfect — having the image in the formation, but not taking up the likeness through the Spirit.”
St. Cyprian, in the sermon on the good of patience, not far from the beginning: “Thus he said that we become perfect sons of God; thus he showed and taught that we are consummated — restored by the heavenly birth — if the patience of God the Father remain in us; if the divine likeness, which Adam had lost by sin, be manifested and shine in our acts.”
St. Ambrose, in the book On the Dignity of the Human Condition, chapter 2, teaches that the image of God is seated in the nature of the three faculties of the rational soul — memory, intelligence, will; then, chapter 3, he teaches that the likeness consists in righteousness and probity: “And the more of these virtues each man has in himself, the nearer he is to God, and the greater likeness of his Creator he bears.”
St. Basil, homily 10 on the Hexameron, asks why Moses, having said, “Let us make man to our image and likeness,” straightway adds, “God created man to his own image,” and says nothing of the likeness. He answers that the cause of this is that the image, which is the very nature of mind and will, could be made by God alone; but the likeness, which consists in virtue and probity, is perfected also by us, God helping. And among other things, of the difference of image and likeness he speaks thus: “Through the image impressed on my soul I have obtained the use of reason; but being made a Christian, I am made like to God.”
St. Jerome, in the commentary on chapter 28 of Ezekiel, explaining that verse, “Thou wast the seal of the likeness”: “And it is to be noted that the image was then only made; the likeness is completed in Baptism.” Which words are not to be so taken as though in creation itself we did not receive, in our first parent, the likeness of God — for that would be contrary to Scripture, which says, he made him to the likeness of God, Genesis 5; and it would be repugnant to Jerome's own judgment, who a little above had said that man through Christ receives back the likeness which by his own fault he had before lost. And so in the words cited he meant to signify that from the first creation we have only the image — which, as he himself teaches in the epistle to Damasus on the prodigal son, is seated chiefly in the nature of free choice — but that we receive the likeness not from the first creation, but from the regeneration of Baptism. For although Adam had had it at the beginning, yet by sinning he had lost it both for himself and for us.
St. John Chrysostom, homily 9 on Genesis: “As he said 'image' by reason of dominion, so also 'likeness,' that, so far as human powers allow, we may become like to God — be made like to God, I say, in gentleness and mildness and the virtues; as Christ also says: Be like to your Father who is in heaven.”
St. Augustine, in the book against Adimantus, chapter 5: “The sons of God are men renewed to his image, and made like even to the loving of an enemy.” In which place St. Augustine places the likeness in virtue. And he says man is renewed to the image, not because the image had perished, but because it had been deformed through sin and darkened, the perfection being lost which accrued to it from the virtues — which perfection of the image we call the likeness.
Eucherius, book 1 on Genesis: “Between the likeness and the image there is this difference: the image of God is of all; the likeness, of few. For here the image differs from the excellence of the divine likeness in this, that the sinning soul does not cease to be the image of God; but to the likeness of God the soul does not attain unless it be holy: because the one was created through nature, the other will be given, to be conformed through grace.”
St. John Damascene, book 2 On the Orthodox Faith, chapter 12: “By these words, 'to the image,' is signified the power of understanding and the liberty of choice; by these, 'to the likeness,' the expressed likeness of virtue, so far as it can be.”
St. Bernard, sermon 1 on the Annunciation: “To the image and likeness of God was man made: having in the image the liberty of choice, in the likeness the virtues. And the likeness indeed perishes; yet in the image man passes on. The image indeed can be burned in hell, but not burned away; it can burn, but not be destroyed. Not so the likeness: it either remains in good, or, if the soul sin, is wretchedly changed, made like to the beasts without understanding.” Like things the same author has in the treatise On Grace and Free Choice.
From these so many testimonies of the Fathers, then, we are compelled to admit that image and likeness are not altogether the same, but that the image pertains to nature, the likeness to the virtues; hence that Adam by sinning lost not the image of God, but the likeness; and since men are now born like to Adam in that which he was when he begot sons after sin, not in that which he had been before sin, therefore we rightly conclude that the first man was not created such as men are now born, but of a far better and happier condition.
Next, in Genesis 2 we read of our first parents: And they were both naked… and were not ashamed. The cause of this the Fathers assign: that our first parents before sin lacked that shameful rebellion of the members on account of which we now blush if we are seen naked. St. Augustine, book 14 On the City of God, chapter 17: “As it is written, They were naked, and were not confounded — not that their nakedness was unknown to them, but their nakedness was not yet base, because lust did not yet move those members apart from their choice; the flesh did not yet, by its own disobedience, in a manner bear witness for the convicting of man's disobedience.” St. Bernard, sermon 1 on the Annunciation: “Had they not found a contrary law in their members, whom the nakedness had newly begun to shame?” Nor unlike these write Chrysostom, Eucherius, Rupert, and others in the commentary on the second chapter of Genesis; Gregory Nazianzen, oration 2 on Easter; and Cyril of Alexandria, book 3 against Julian. Hither also pertains that of the Apostle, Romans 7: it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me — for he calls the rebellion of the flesh “sin” because it had been born of sin. From which it follows that Adam before sin lacked that rebellion without which no man is now born.
Besides, God at the beginning made man right, as we read in Ecclesiastes 7; and clothed him with strength according to himself, Ecclesiasticus 17. But now we are by nature children of wrath, as the Apostle says, Ephesians 2; therefore we are not now born such as the first man had been created at the beginning. Furthermore, God created man incorruptible, Wisdom 2; and therefore, for the keeping of the precept, he had threatened that punishment: in what day soever thou shalt eat of it, thou shalt die the death, Genesis 2. Wherefore, since we now from our very birth carry about the debt of death, nor is there any who can escape the empire of death, it certainly follows that the propagation of men is of a far worse condition than the first creation was.
Finally, that the life of those two human beings who before sin dwelt secure in the paradise of delight was plainly happy, the divine Scripture briefly indicates in the second chapter of Genesis; which St. Augustine explains a little more fully in these words, book 14 On the City of God, chapter 10: “What could those human beings fear or grieve at, in such affluence of goods, where neither was death dreaded, nor any ill health of body; nor was anything absent which a good will might attain, nor anything present which might offend the flesh or mind of man living happily?” And below: “How happy were the first human beings, agitated by no perturbations of mind, injured by no discomforts of body! So happy would the whole society of mankind be, if neither they had transmitted the evil which they passed on to their posterity, nor any of their stock had committed the iniquity which should receive damnation.” See a fuller description of the felicity of the first human beings in Prosper [Julianus Pomerius], in book 2 On the Contemplative Life, chapter 18. But now we all experience so great a misery of body and mind that the Apostle exclaims, Romans 7: Unhappy man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this death? And before him Ecclesiasticus, chapter 40: A heavy yoke is upon the children of Adam, from the day of their coming out of their mother's womb, until the day of their burial into the mother of all. And Job, more ancient still, chapter 14: Man born of a woman, living for a short time, is filled with many miseries. Who cometh forth like a flower, and is destroyed, and fleeth as a shadow, and never continueth in the same state. See more on this matter in the third book On Original Sin, where we discourse of the punishment and the consequent evils of original sin.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
nunc nascitur, sed multo feliciorem.
Nuncadversus contrarios illos errores, qua-
tuor propositiones adferre, ac probare de¬
crevimus.
Prima propositio. Homo non fuit creatus
qualis nunc nascitur, pronus ad malum, in¬
firmus, ignorans; sed rectus, justus, sapiens,
sine concupiscentia, et difficultate, quam
ipsi in nobis assidue experimur.
Secunda. Primus homo non quamlibet
animi rectitudinem, sed ipsam etiam gra¬
tiam gratum facientem in creatione acce¬
pit.
Tertia. Primus homo justitia originali, et
habitu gratia} gratum facientis ornatus, non
eguit auxilio illo speciali, quo excitaretur
ad bene operandum, vel ad vitanda peccata.
CAPUl II.
171
Quarta. Integritas illa, cum qua primus
homo conditus fuit, ct sine qua post ejus la¬
psum homines omnes nascuntur , non fuit
naturalis ejus conditio, sed supernaturalis
evectio.
Prima igitur propositio, qua; adversus Pe-
lagianorum errorem pugnat, ex divinis litte¬
ris satis aperte colligitur. Nam quod legimus
in i. cap. Geneseos : Creavit Deus hominem
ad imaginem et similitudinem suam (1), com¬
munis expositio Patrum, ita accipiendum esse
docet, ut imago 'ad naturam intelligentia},
et voluntatis , similitudo ad sapientiam et
justitiam referatur. Ex quo sequitur, ut pri¬
mus homo non solam naturam in creatione
acceperit, cum qua nunc etiam homines na¬
sci videmus, sed etiam ornamenta quantam
sapientia}, et justitia}, quibus sine dubitatio¬
ne caremus. Sed Patrum sententias audia¬
mus.
S. Irenaeus lib. v. adversus haereses, cap.
6 : «Si defuerit, inquit, animae spiritus, ani¬
malis est vere, qui est talis, et carnalis dere¬
lictus imperfectus erit, imaginem hahens in
psalmate, similitudinem vero non assumens
per Spiritum. »
S. Cyprianus in serm de bono patientiae,
non procul ab initio : « Sic, inquit, perfectos
dixit fieri filios Dei, sic consummari osten¬
dit, et docuit, .coelesti nativitate reparatos, si
patientia Dei Patris maneat in nobis, si si¬
militudo divina, quam peccato Adam per¬
diderat, manifestetur, et luceat in actibus
nostris. »
S. Ambrosius in lib. de dignitate condi¬
tionis humanae, cap. 2, docet, imaginem
Dei sitam esse in natura trium facultatum
animae rationalis, memoriae , intelligentia}'
voluntatis. Deinde cap. 3. docet, similitudi¬
nem in justitia, et probitate consistere :
« Quas virtutes, inquit, quanto plus quis¬
que in se ipse habet, tanto propius est Deo,
et majorem sui conditoris similitudinem ge¬
rit. »
S. Basilius homil. 10. Examer. quaerit cur
Moses cum dixit : Faciamus hominem ad
imaginem, et similitudinem nostram , adjungat
continuo : Creavit Deus hominem ad imagi¬
nem suam , et nihil dicat de similitudine. Re¬
spondet hujus rei causam esse, quoniam ima¬
go, qua? est ipsa natura mentis, ct voluntatis
a solo Deo fieri potuit : similitudo autem,
quae in virtute, et probitate consistit, a nobis
quoque, Deo juvante, perficitur. Ac inter
alia de differentia imaginis, ct similitudinis
ita loquitur : Per imaginem animae im¬
pressam meae, obtinui rationis usum : ve¬
rum Christianus effectus, utique similis effi¬
cior Deo. »
S. Hieronymus in commentar, ad cap.
28. Ezechielis, explicans illud : Tu signa¬
culum similitudinis : « Et notandum, inquit,
quod imago tunc facta sit tantum, similitudo
in Baptismate compleatur. » Quae verba u-no
sic accipienda sunt, quasi in ipsa creatione
non acceperimus in primo nostro parente si¬
militudinem Dei. Id enim contrarium esset
Scripturae, #quac dicit, ad similitudinem Dei
creavit illum , Genes, v. et ipsius etiam Hie¬
ronymi sententiae repugnaret , qui paulo
superius dixerat hominem per Christum
recipere similitudinem, quam vitio suo ante
perdiderat. Itaque in verbis citatis significa¬
re voluit, nos ex prima creatione imaginem
solum habere, quae, ut ipse idem elocet in
epistola ad Damasum de filio prodigo, in
natura liberi arbitrii potissimum sita est, si¬
militudinem autem non ex prima creatione,
sed ex Baptismi regeneratione percipere.
Nam tametsi Adam initio illam habuerat,
tamen peccando, et sibi, et nobis amiserat.
S. Joannes Chrysostomus homil. 9. in Ge¬
nes. : « Sicut, inquit, imaginem dixit ob
principatus rationem, ita et similitudinem,
ut pro viribus humanis similes fiamus Deo,
mansuetudine, inquam, et lenitate, et virtu¬
tibus Deo similes efficiamur, quod et Chri¬
stus dicit: Similes estote Patri vestro, qui in
coelis est. »
S. Augustinus in lib. contra Adimantum,
cap. 5 : « Filii, inquit, Dei sunt homines re¬
novati ad ejus imaginem, et similes facti
usque ad dilectionem inimici. » Quo loco S.
Augustinus similitudinem in virtute ponit.
Dicit vero hominem renovari ad imaginem,
non quod imago perierit, sed quia di {formata
per peccatum, et obscurata fuerat amissa
perfectione, quae illi ex virtutibus accede¬
bat; quam perfectionem imaginis, similitu¬
dinem appellamus.
Eucherius lib. i. in Genes. : « Inter simili¬
tudinem, inquit, et imaginem hoc interest.
Imago Dei, omnium ; similitudo, paucorum.
Hic namque imago ab excellentia divina} si¬
militudinis distat, quod imago Dei anima
peccatrix esse non desinit : ad Dei autem
(1) Gen. I, 27.
172
LIBEIt I.
similitudinem, nisi anima sancta fuerit, non
pervenit, quia illa anima creata est per na¬
turam, haec dabitur conformari per gratiam.
S. Joannes Damascemus lib. ii. de fide
orthodoxa, cap. 12: «Ilis, inquit, verbis, ad
imaginem, vis intelligendi, arbitriique liber¬
tas significatur : his autem, ad similitudinem,
virtutis quoad ejus fieri potest, expressa si¬
militudo. »
S. Bernardus serm. 1 de Annuntiatione :
« Ad imaginem, inquit, et similitudinem De»
factus est homo ; in imagine, arbitrii liber¬
tatem ; virtutes, habens in similitudine. Et
similitudo quidem perit; verumtam^n in
imagine pertransit homo. Imagofciquidem in
gehenna uri poterit, non exuri ; ardere, sed
non deleri. Similitudo non sic, sed aut ma¬
net in bono, aut si peccaverit anima, mu¬
tatur miserabiliter jumentis insipientibus si-
milata. » Similia habet idem auctor in tra¬
ctatu de gratia, et libero arbitrio.
Ex his igitur tot Patrum testimoniis cogi¬
mur admittere non esse omnino idem ima¬
ginem, et similitudinem , sed imaginem ad
naturam, similitudinem ad virtutes pertine¬
re : proinde Adamum peccando non imagi¬
nem Dei, sed similitudinem perdidisse, et
quia nunc homines nascuntur Adamo simi¬
les in eo quod erat, cum filios gigneret post
peccatum, non in co quod fuerat ante pec¬
catum : propterea recte concludimus, non
fuisse primum hominem creatum quales
nunc homines nascuntur, sed conditionis
longe melioris, et felicioris.
Deinde Genes, ii, legimus de primis nostris
parentibus : Erant autem ambo nudi , et non
erubescebant (i). Hujus rei causam Patres
assignant, quod primi nostri parentes ante
peccatum carerent pudenda illa rebellione
membrorum, ob quam nunc erubescimus,
si nudi conspiciamur.
S. Augustinus lib. xiv. de civit. Dei, cap.
17 : «Sicut, inquit, scriptum est, Nudi erant,
et non confundebantur : non quod eis sua
nuditas esset, incognita, sed turpis nuditas
■nondum erat quia nondum libido membra
illa praeter arbitrium commovebat: nondum
ad hominis inobedientiam redarguendam sua
inobedientia caro quodam modo testimonium
perhibebat. »
S. Bernardus serm. 1. de Annuntiatione:
« Nonne, inquit, contrariam legem invene¬
rant in membris suis, quos de novo pudere
coeperat nuditatis?» Neque his dissimilia
scribunt Chrysostomus, Eucherius, Ruper-
tus et alii in commentario ii. cap. lib. Genc-
seos, Gregorius Nazianzenus orat. 2. de Pa¬
scha, et Cyrillus Alexandrinus lib. m. in Ju¬
lianum. IIuc etiam pertinet illud Apostoli
Iloman. vii : Jam non ego operor illud , sed
quod habitat in me peccatum (2). Yocat enim
peccatum rebellionem carnis, quia ex pec¬
cato nata fuerat. Ex quo sequitur ut Adam
ante peccatum rebellione illa caruerit, sine
qua nullus jam hominum nascitur. Praeter-
ea, Creavit Deus initio hominem rectum, ut
legimus Eccles. vii, et secundum se vestivit
illum virtute, Eccl. xvii. (3). Nunc autem
sumus natura filii irse, ut ait Apostolus ad
Ephcs. ii. (i), non igitur tales nunc nasci¬
mur, qualis initio primus homo conditus
fuerat.
Adhasc, Fecit Deus hominem inextermina¬
bilem, Sapient, ii, et ideo ad praecepti cu¬
stodiam, poenam illam comminatus fuerat :
Quacumque die commederis, morte morieris ,
Genes, u (5). Quare cum nunc ex ipso ortu
mortis debitum circumferamus, neque ullus
sit, qui mortis imperium effugere queat, certe
sequitur longe deterioris conditionis esse ho¬
minum propagationem, quam fuerit prima
creatio.
Denique plane felicem fuisse vitam duo¬
rum illorum hominum, qui paradisum vo¬
luptatis ante peccatum securi incolebant,
breviter indicat Scriptura divina in n. cap.
lib. Genes, quod paulo fusius his verbis ex¬
plicat S. Augustinus lib. xiv. de civit. Dei,
c. 10: «Quid, inquit, timere vel dolere po¬
terant illi homines in tantorum affluentia bo¬
norum, ubi nec mors metuebatur, nec ulla
corporis mala valetudo, necaberatquidquam,
quod bona voluntas adipisceretur, nec ine¬
rat, quod carnem, animumvc hominis feli¬
citer viventis offenderet ?» Et infra : « Quam
felices erant primi homines, et nullis agita¬
bantur perturbationibus animorum ; nullis
corporum laedebantur incommodis : tam fe¬
lix universa societas esset humana, si nec
illi malum, quod in posteros trajicerent, nec
quisquam ex eorum stirpe iniquitatem com¬
mitteret, quae damnationem reciperet, o
(l)Gen. II, 25. - (2) Rom, VII, 20. — (3) Eccl. VII,B0; XVII, 2. - (1) Kph. II. 3. —
(5) Sup. II, 23; Cen. II, 17.
CAPUT III.
173
Vide copiosiorem descriptionem felicita¬
tis primorum hominum apud Prosperum in
H. lib. de vita contemplativa, cap. 18. At
nunc tantam experimur omnes corporis, am-
mique niseriam, ut Apostolus exclamet Ro-
man. vil : Infelix ego homo , quis me libera¬
bit de corpore mortis hujus ? Et ante eum Ec¬
clesiasticus, c. XL : Grave jugum super filios
Adatn a die exitus de ventre matris eorum
usque in diem sepulturae in matrem omnium.
Et Job adhuc antiquior : Ilomo , inquit cap.
XIV, natus de muliere , brevi vivens tempore ,
repletur mullis miseriis, qui quasi flos egre¬
ditur, et conteritur , et fugit velut umbra, et
numquam in eodem statu permanet (1). Vide
plura de hac re in tertio libro de peccato
originali, ubi disserimus de poena, et conse¬
quentibus malis peccati originalis.
CAPUT III.
Primum hominem gratiam gratum facientem