Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On Indulgences and the Jubilee · Book II: Against the Adversaries of Indulgences
Chapter 3: Answer to the objections of Calvin from number 39 of chapter 9 of the Institutes
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. VII, De Indulgentiis et Jubilaeo, Book II, a treatise of the Controversies. 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).
In the following number, or as he is accustomed to call it, section, Calvin professes that “indulgences themselves, even wiped clean of every stain,” that is, if they are fouled by no abuse, “are nothing else than a profanation of the blood of Christ, and a mockery of Satan, by which they lead the Christian people away from the grace of God which is in Christ, and turn them from the true way of salvation.” This is a most grave accusation of indulgences, and if Calvin can prove it by solid arguments, without doubt he will win the case. Let us hear, then, the proof. “For how,” he says, “could the blood of Christ be more foully profaned than when it is denied to suffice for the remission of sins, for reconciliation, for satisfaction, unless its defect, as of something drying up and exhausted, is supplied and made good from elsewhere?” But this is not so much an argument as a lie. For no Catholic has written that the blood of Christ does not suffice for the remission of sins, for reconciliation, for satisfaction, unless its defect is supplied from elsewhere. He ought surely to have cited at least some one person who thought so. And not only has no Catholic written it, but none could write it, since Pope Clement VI himself, in the constitution on the treasury of indulgences, which is properly what Calvin attacks, and all the theologians affirm that the blood of Christ is of such infinite worth that even one drop of it could have sufficed to expiate all the crimes of the whole world. But what misled Calvin was this, that Catholics teach that in the treasury of indulgences are contained not the merits of Christ alone, but also those of the saints. But we do not join the merits of the saints to the merits of Christ as if those did not suffice, but so that the merits of the saints, which were over and above for them, may not be idle; so that the saints may rejoice in this honour; so that the efficacy of the merits of Christ may shine forth the more, which not only can expiate sins and the guilt of sins by themselves, but can also bring it about that the merits of the saints have the power of expiating the guilt of temporal punishment. Which is also the reason why God willed that each of us should acquire for himself the crown of life by his own merits, according to that of the Apostle in 2 Timothy 2, “he is not crowned, except he strive lawfully”: not because the merits of Christ do not suffice, but because this is more useful to us and more glorious to Christ. Just as the same God also appointed that second causes should not be idle, but should join with the first cause itself in producing things, although the first cause without the second could have brought about all things as easily and as perfectly.
Calvin goes on, and strives to prove from various testimonies of the Scriptures that the blood of Christ is profaned if the merits of the saints are joined to it. “To Christ,” he says, “the law and all the prophets (Peter witnesses in Acts 10) give testimony, that through him remission of sins is to be received. Indulgences bestow remission of sins through Peter and Paul and the martyrs. The blood of Christ cleanses us from sin (says John, 1 John 1). Indulgences make the blood of the martyrs the washing away of sins. Christ (says Paul, 2 Corinthians 5), who knew no sin, was made sin for us, that is, the satisfaction for sin, that we might be made the justice of God in him. Indulgences place the satisfaction for sins in the blood of the martyrs. Paul cried out and testified to the Corinthians, 1 Corinthians 1, that Christ alone was crucified and died for them. Indulgences pronounce that Paul and others died for us.” Elsewhere he says, “Christ purchased the Church with his own blood, Acts 20. Indulgences set up another price of purchase in the blood of the martyrs. By one oblation Christ perfected for ever those who are sanctified, says the Apostle, Hebrews 10. Indulgences cry out against this, that sanctification is completed by the martyrs, which otherwise would not suffice. John says in Revelation 7 that all the saints washed their robes in the blood of the Lamb. Indulgences teach to wash robes in the blood of the saints.” So he; to whom we answer that the testimonies of the Scriptures are most true, but wrongly alleged; for they speak of the remission of fault, and especially of deadly fault, that is, of the justification of the ungodly and of reconciliation, by which from sinners we are made just, which we receive in the sacraments of baptism or penance, where the merits of the saints have no place at all. Now indulgences do not remit fault, neither deadly nor venial, but only punishment, and that temporal, the guilt of which can be found in all who are justified, sanctified and washed, as it was found in David, to whom after the confession of his sin it was said by the prophet Nathan, 2 Kings 12, “The Lord also hath taken away thy sin. Nevertheless, because thou hast given occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme, the child that is born to thee shall surely die.” Indulgences, then, do not attribute to the saints what the Scriptures alleged attribute to Christ. And that this may be plainer, I shall briefly examine each testimony brought forward by Calvin.
In Acts 10 Saint Peter speaks of the remission of sin which is had through faith and the sacraments, without which no one can be saved. For this is why it was said to Cornelius by the angel, “Send for Simon, who is surnamed Peter, who shall speak to thee words whereby thou shalt be saved, and all thy house.” Nor does it stand in the way that Cornelius in the same place is said to have been a just man and one fearing God even before he heard Peter. For (as Saint Augustine writes in the first book to Simplicianus, question 2) Cornelius was just with a certain begun and imperfect justice, but he could not be saved unless he believed in Christ, and his sins were remitted to him through baptism, and he himself was incorporated into the Church. For as the same Augustine says in the book on the predestination of the saints, chapter 7: “If Cornelius could have been saved without the faith of Christ, the architect Peter would not have been sent to build him up.” Of this remission, then, the same Apostle speaks when he says, “To him all the prophets give testimony, that through his name all receive remission of sins”; of which remission Calvin falsely says, “Indulgences bestow remission of sins through Peter and Paul and the martyrs,” when it has already often been said that faults are not remitted through indulgences.
In the first epistle, chapter 1, when Saint John says, “the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin,” he speaks of the remission of fault, which properly begets a stain in the soul. For it is a stain that is removed by washing, not a punishment, which makes a man a debtor, not filthy. And so Calvin falsely adds, “Indulgences make the blood of the martyrs the washing away of sins.” For Catholics attribute to indulgences not the washing away of fault, but payment for the debt of punishment.
In the second epistle to the Corinthians, chapter 5, the Apostle Paul, after he said that Christ was made sin, that is, a victim for sin, added, that we might be made the justice of God in him. From which we understand that he speaks of the remission of sin by which we are justified and from ungodly are made godly, which effect no Catholic ever attributed to indulgences. Therefore when Calvin writes, “indulgences place the satisfaction for sins in the blood of the martyrs,” either he speaks of satisfaction for fault and everlasting punishment, and falsely charges Catholics that in their opinion indulgences place the satisfaction for sins in the blood of the martyrs; or he speaks of satisfaction for temporal punishment, and falsely sets indulgences against the words of the Apostle Paul, since the Apostle is to be understood of satisfaction for fault.
In the first epistle to the Corinthians, chapter 1, when the same Apostle testifies and cries out that Christ alone was crucified for us, he speaks without any doubt of the passion of Christ insofar as, applied through baptism, it justifies and reconciles. For this is why he joins those two things: “Was Paul then crucified for you? or were you baptized in the name of Paul?” In which sense no Catholic would bear what Calvin says: “Indulgences pronounce that Paul and others died for us.”
In Acts 20, when the same Apostle writes that Christ purchased the Church with his own blood, he manifestly speaks of the price of the blood by which we are redeemed from the captivity of the devil, and through faith and baptism are joined to the Church; for then the Church is built and purchased, when through faith and the sacraments men are incorporated into the Church. In which sense Calvin falsely says, “Indulgences set up another price of purchase in the blood of the martyrs.”
In the epistle to the Hebrews, chapter 10, when the same Apostle writes that Christ by one oblation perfected for ever those who are sanctified, he signifies that Christ by the one oblation of his body on the Cross offered a sufficient price by which all men can be redeemed from all iniquity, and so redeemed that the redemption itself can be perpetual; with which redemption it is not inconsistent that men so redeemed, that is, justified and reconciled, should have some guilt of temporal punishment, for the paying of which they have need of indulgences; for as venial faults, without which this life is not lived, do not hinder redemption, justification and sanctification, so neither does the guilt of temporal punishment hinder them. Accordingly Calvin falsely adds, “Indulgences cry out against this, that sanctification is completed by the martyrs, which otherwise would not suffice.” For Catholics neither say that sanctification is completed by indulgences, and much less affirm that the sanctification of Christ does not suffice. But this is not the first thing that Calvin falsely attributes to Catholics.
In Revelation 7, when John says that all the saints washed their robes in the blood of the Lamb, no one can doubt that he speaks of justification from fault, both original and actual, which, as we said above, properly begets a stain. Therefore Calvin falsely adds, “Indulgences teach to wash robes in the blood of the saints.” For Catholic indulgences teach nothing of the kind, nor ever taught it. We see, then, that the column of Calvinist arguments, armed with so many darts of Scripture, had more of show than of solidity. For since the whole consisted either of false things, or of true things not bearing on the matter, when it came to close quarters and the standards clashed, the true things that did not bear on the matter refused to fight, and the false ones readily turned their backs to the enemy.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT III. Respondetur ad objectiones Calvini ex num. 39. cap. 9. Instit. In sequenti numero, sive ut ipse vocare solet, sectione, Calvinus profitetur ipsas « indulgentias, etiam abstersas omni labe, id est, si nullo abusu foedentur, nihil e e aliud nisi sanguinis Christi profanationem,. Satanseque ludibrium, quo Christianum po¬ pulum a Dei gratia, avita, quse est in Chri¬ sto, abducant, et a vera salutis via aver¬ tant ». Gravissima haec est indulgentiarum accusatio, quam si Calvinus solidis argumen¬ tis comprobare queat, sine dubio causam ob¬ tinebit. Audiamus igitur probationem. «Quo enim, inquit, poterat foedius profanari Chri¬ sti sanguis, quam dum negatur sufficere ad peccatorum remissionem, ad reconciliatio¬ nem, ad satisfactionem, nisi velut arescentis, et exhausti defectus a-liunde suppleatur, et sufficiatur ? » Sed hoc non tam argumentum^ quam mendacium est. Nullus enim Catholi¬ corum scripsit, Christi sanguinem non suffi¬ cere ad peccatorum remissionem, ad recon¬ ciliationem, ad satisfactionem, nisi defectus ejus aliunde suppleatur. Debuisset sane vel unum aliquem allegare, qui ita sentiret. Ne¬ que solum nemo Catholicorum id scripsit, sed neque scribere potuit, cum ipse Clemens VI Pontifex in constitutione de thesauro indul¬ gentiarum, quem proprie Calvinus oppugnat, et omnes theologi affirment Christi sangui¬ nem adeo pretii esse infiniti, ut vel una ejus gutta sufficere potuerit ad omnia totius mun¬ di crimina expianda. Quod autem Calvinum fefellit, id fuit, quod Catholici docent in the¬ sauro indulgentiarum contineri non sola Christi merita, sed etiam sanctorum. Sed non ideo adjungimus meritis Christi merita sanctorum,’ quasi illa non sufficiant, sed ut 62 LIBER II. merita sanctorum, quse illis superfuerunt, non sint otiosa, ut sancti hoc honore gaude¬ ant, ut efficacia meritorum Christi magis elu¬ ceat, quee non solum per se possunt expiare peccata, et reatum peccatorum, sed etiam 'efficere ut merita sanctorum vim habeant ex¬ piandi reatum poena; temporalis. Qua; est etiam ratio, cur Deus voluerit, ut unusquis¬ que nostrum propriis meritis coronam vitee sibi acquirat, juxta illud Apostoli II Tim. ii. Non coronabitur nisi qui legitime certaverit (1) : non ‘quod Christi merita non sufficiant, sed quia id nobis utilius, et Christo gloriosius est. Quemadmodum etiam idem Deus instituit, ut secundse causa; non sint otiosa;, sed cum ipsa prima causa ad res producendas conve¬ niant, quamvis prima causa sine secundis res omnes eeque facile, ac perfecte efficere potuisset. Pergit Calvinus, et ex variis Scripturarum testimoniis probare nititur, Christi sangui¬ nem profanari, si illi sanctorum merita ad¬ jungantur : « Christo, inquit, lex, et prophe¬ tae omnes (teste Petro Act. x.) testimonium perhibent, quod per ipsum accipienda sit re¬ missio peccatorum. Indulgentiae remissionem peccatorum per Petrum et Paulum, et Mar¬ tyres largiuntur. Sanguis Christi emundat nos a peccato (inquit Joannes 1 Joan i.) In¬ dulgentiae sanguinem Martyrum faciunt pec¬ catorum ablutionem. Christus (inquit Paulus II Cor. v.) qui peccatum non noverat, fa¬ ctus pro nobis est peccatum, id est, peccati satisfactio, ut justitia Dei efficeremur in illo. Indulgentiae peccatorum satisfactionem in sanguine Martyrum reponunt. Clamabat Pau¬ lus, et Corinthiis testificabatur I Cor. i. So¬ lum Christum pro ipsis crucifixum, et mor¬ tuum esse. Indulgentiae pronunciant Paulum et alios pro nobis mortuos. » Alibi dicit, cc Christum acquisivisse Ecclesiam suo san¬ guine Actor, xx. Indulgentiae aliud pretium acquisitionis in sanguine Martyrum statuunt. Una oblatione Christus consummavit in per¬ petuum sanctificatos , ait Apostolus Hebr. x. Indulgentiae reclamant, a Martyribus per¬ fici sanctificationem, quae alioqui non suffi¬ ceret. Joannes dicit Apoc. vii. Sanctos omnes lavisse stolas in sanguine Agni. Indulgentiae docent lavare stolas in sanguine Sancto¬ rum. )) Ilaec ille, cui respondemus testimo¬ nia Scripturarum verissima esse, sed perpe¬ ram allegari : loquuntur enim de remissione culpae, ac praesertim lethalis, id est, de justi¬ ficatione impii, et reconciliatione, per quam • ex peccatoribus efficimur justi, quam accipi¬ mus in sacramentis Baptismi,- vel Poeniten¬ tiae, ‘ubi nullum locum habent merita san¬ ctorum. Porro indulgentia; non remittunt culpam, neque lethalem, neque venialem, sed solam poenam, eamque temporariam, cujus reatus inveniri potest in omnibus justificatis, sanctificatis, ablutis, sicut in¬ veniebatur in Davide, cui post confessio¬ nem peccati dictum est a Propheta Nathan II Reg. xii. Dominus transtulit peccatum tuum, verum tamen , quoniam blasphemare fe¬ cisti inimicos nomen Domini , filius , qui natus est tibi , morte morietur (2). Non igitur indul¬ gentiae tribuunt sanctis id, quod Scripturae allegatae tribuunt Christo. Ac ut id planius fiat, excutiam breviter singula testimonia a Calvino adducta. In Actis c. x. loquitur S. Petrus de remissione peccati, qua; habetur per fidem, et Sacramenta, sine qua nemo salvus esse potest. Nam ideo dictum est Cor¬ nelio ab Angelo : Accersi Simonem , qui cog¬ nominatur Petrus , qui loquetur tibi verba , vn quibus salvus eris tu , et universa domus tua (3). Neque obstat, quod Cornelius in eo¬ dem loco dicitur fuisse vir justus et timens Deum, etiam antequam Petrum audiret. Nam (ut scribit S. Augustinus in lib. i. ad Simplicianum qusest. 2.) justus - erat Corne¬ lius justitia quadam inchoata et imperfecta, sed non poterat salvus esse nisi crederet in Christum, et per Baptismum remitterentur ei peccata, et ipse incorporaretur Ecclesia;. Nam ut idem Augustinus loquitur lib. i. de pra;dest. sanet, c. 7 : « Si potuisset Cornelius sine fide Christi salvus esse, non ad eum gedificandum missus fuisset architectus Pe¬ trus i) . De hac igitur remissione loquitur idem Apostolus, cum ait: « Huic omnes Propheta; testimonium perhibent, quod per ipsum ac¬ cipienda sit remissio peccatorum » , de qua remissione falso Calvinus dicit : «Indulgentia; remissionem peccatorum per Petrum, et Paulum, et Martyres largiuntur » ; cum jam ssepe sit dictum, culpas per indulgentias non remitti. In epist. I cap. i. S. Joannes cum dicit : Sanguis ejus emundat nos a peccato (4) , loquitur de remissione culpse, qua; maculam proprie gignit in anima. Macula enim est, qua; ablu¬ tione tollitur, non pcena, quee debitorem, non (I) II Tim. II, 5. - (2) II Reg. XII, 13. - (3) Act. X, 5. - (4) I Joan. I, 7. CAPUT IV. 63 sordidum facit. Itaque falso Calvinus addit : (( Indulgentiae sanguinem Martyrum faciunt peccatorum ablutionem». Non enim ablu¬ tionem culpae, sed solutionem pro debito poenae indulgentiis Catholici tribuunt. In epist. II ad Corinth. cap. v. Apostolus Paulus posteaquam dixit, Christum factum esse peccatum, id est, hostiam pro peccato adjunxit, ut nos efficeremur justitia Dei in illo. Ex quo intelligimus eum loqui de re¬ missione peccati, per quam justificamur et ex impiis efficimur pii, quem effectum nemo unquam Catholicorum indulgentiis attribuit. Quare Calvinus cum scribit, « indulgentiae peccatorum satisfactionem in sanguine Mar¬ tyrum reponunt » , vel loquitur de satisfa¬ ctione pro culpa et poena sempiterna, et falso Catholicis imponit, quod ex eorum sen¬ tentia indulgentiae satisfactionempeccatorum in sanguine Martyrum reponant : vel loqui¬ tur de satisfactione pro poena temporali et falso indulgentias verbis Apostoli Pauli op¬ ponit, cum Apostolus de satisfactione pro culpa intelligendus sit. In epist. 1 ad Corinth. c. i. idem Aposto¬ lus cum testificatur et clamat, solum Christum crucifixum esse pro nobis, loquitur sine ullo dubio de passione Christi, quatenus ea per Baptismum applicata justificat, et reconci¬ liat. Ideo enim duo iila conjungit : « Num- quid Paulus pro vobis crucifixus est? aut in nomine Pauli baptizati estis (1)?» In quos ensu nemo Catholicorum ferret, quod Calvinus dicit : « Indulgentiae pronunciant, Paulum et alios pro nobis mortuos » . In Actis c. xx. cum idem Apostolus scri¬ bit, Christum proprio sanguine Ecclesiam acquisivisse, manifeste loquitur de pretio sanguini:', quo redimimur de captivitate dia¬ boli, et per fidem et Baptismum adjungimur ad Ecclesiam, tunc enim aedificatur, et ac¬ quiritur Ecclesia, cum per fidem et sacra¬ menta homines incorporantur Ecclesise. In quo sensu falso Calvinus dicit : « Indulgen¬ tiee aliud pretium acquisitionis in sanguine Martyrum statuunt » . In epirit. ad Hebr. c. x. cum idem Aposto¬ lus scribit Christum unica oblatione consum¬ masse in perpetuum sanctificatos, significat Christum unica oblatione corporis sui in Cru¬ ce sufficiens pretium obtulisse, quo possint omnes homines redimi ab omni iniquitate, et ita redirhi, ut ipsa redemptio perpetua esse (1) I Cor. 1, 13. possit, cui redemptioni non repugnat, ut homines sic redempti, hoc est justificati, et reconciliati reatum aliquem poenae tempora-, lis habeant, pro quo solvendo indulgentiis opus habeant, sicut enim culpae veniales, sine quibus hsec vita non ducitur, non impe¬ diunt redemptionem, justificationem, et san¬ ctificationem ; ita nec reatus poenae tempo¬ ralis eam impediunt. Proinde falso Calvinus adjungit : « Indulgentiae reclamant, a Mar¬ tyribus perfici sanctificationem, quae alioqui non sufficeret ». Nam Catholici neque dicunt, indulgentiis perfici sanctificationem, et multo minus affirmant, Christi sanctificationem non sufficere. Sed non est hoc primum, quod falso Catholicis Calvinus attribuit. In Apocalypsi cap. vii. cumJoannes dicit, omnes sanctos lavisse stolas in sanguine A- gni, nemo dubitare potest quin loquatur de justificatione a culpa tum originali, tum ac¬ tuali, quae ut supra diximus, proprie macu¬ lam gignit. Quare falso Calvinus adf:; : « Indulgentiee docent, lavare stolas in san¬ guine sanctorum » . Si quidem indulgentiee Catholicse nihil tale docent, neque unquam docuerunt. Videmus igitur agmen argumen¬ torum Calvinianorum tot Scripturarum telis armatum, plus ostentationis, quam solidita¬ tis habuisse. Nam cum totum vel ex falsis, vel ex veris ad rem non facientibus consta¬ ret, cum ad manus ventum est, et cominus signa collata, vera ad rem non facientia pug¬ nare noluerunt, falsa vero facile hostibus terga verterunt.