Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On Justification · Book II: On Inhering Justice
Chapter 10: The arguments from the epistles to the Corinthians are solved
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. VI, De Justificatione, Book II. 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).
From the epistles to the Corinthians Calvin and others draw three arguments. The first argument they take from those words, 1 Corinthians 1: Who of God is made unto us wisdom, and justice, and redemption. To which place they join that of Jeremias 23: And this is the name that they shall call him, The Lord our justice. For so they render it from the Hebrew. From these places they gather that our justice is no other than that which is in Christ, imputed to us. I answer: Christ is rightly called our justice, not because we are just by that justice which is in Christ imputed to us, but for two other causes. First, because Christ is the efficient cause of our justice. For Christ is so called our justice as God is called our strength, Psalm 17; and our patience, Psalm 70; and our salvation, Psalm 26 — which is explained in Psalm 36, when it is said: But the salvation of the just is from the Lord. Finally, Christ is so called our justice as he is called our wisdom, and our redemption, and elsewhere our peace — because, namely, he redeemed us, and made us just and wise, and reconciled us to his Father, making peace as to the things that are on earth and the things that are in heaven. Then, Christ is called our justice because he satisfied the Father for us, and so gives and communicates that satisfaction to us, when he justifies us, that it can be called our satisfaction and justice. For although through the justice inhering in us we are truly named and are just, yet not through it do we satisfy God for our faults and eternal punishment; but that inhering justice, with the remission of the fault and of the everlasting punishment, is the effect of the satisfaction of Christ, which (as the Council of Trent teaches, session 6, chapter 7) is conferred and applied to us in justification. And in this manner it would not be absurd if anyone said that the justice and merits of Christ are imputed to us, since they are given and applied to us as if we ourselves had satisfied God — provided it be not denied that there is in us, moreover, an inhering justice, and that it is a true and absolute justice, to which by the just judgment of God is owed not punishment, but glory. For so St. Bernard speaks in epistle 190 to Innocent: “For if one died for all, then all were dead; that, namely, the satisfaction of one might be imputed to all, as that one bore the sins of all.”
The second argument they take from chapter 5 of the second to the Corinthians: God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, not imputing to them their sins. For here blessed Paul seems to constitute justification in this, that sins are not imputed. I answer: non-imputation, as I said above, draws with it the remission of sin and the infusion of justice. For God therefore does not impute our offences to us, because Christ satisfied for us, and God, appeased by that satisfaction, reconciled us to himself, and of enemies made friends. Wherefore the same Apostle, what he here said, “reconciling, and not imputing offences,” said Colossians 2: He hath quickened you together with Christ, forgiving you all offences, blotting out the handwriting of the decree that was against us. Where you see the quickening, which pertains to internal renovation; the forgiving of offences, which pertains to the remission of sin; and the blotting out of the handwriting, which signifies the utter extinction of the debt. And Romans 5, when the same Apostle had said, We glory in God, through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received reconciliation, he explains a little below what it is to receive reconciliation, and says: Receiving abundance of grace and of the gift and of justice, they shall reign in life through him. Reconciliation, then, is not the sole non-imputation of offences, but the reception of abundant grace and justice and gifts, through which one attains also to the very kingdom and to eternal life. But most clearly the same Apostle explains the effect of reconciliation, Colossians 1, when he says: And now he hath reconciled in the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unspotted, and blameless before him.
The third argument they take from those words of the same epistle and the same chapter: Him who knew no sin he hath made sin for us, that we might be made the justice of God in him. For hence they say it follows that we are just by the very justice of God which is in Christ, as he is called sin — that is, a sinner — through the sins which are in us. For as our sins are imputed to him, so his justice is imputed to us. I answer: Christ is not called sin — that is, a sinner — nor are our sins imputed to him as though he had committed them and could be held iniquitous. But they are imputed to him only as to the debt of satisfying, which he willingly took upon himself. From which he deserves to be called not a sinner, but just; for he who satisfies for another is most just. So, then, his justice too is imputed to us as to the satisfaction which he performed for us; but not on that account can we be held just — that is, clean and unspotted — if truly in us the stains and filth of sins inhere. This false exposition, then, being rejected, this place can be expounded in three ways. In one way, so that the justice of God is the very divine justice which is in Christ. Which justice we are said to be, not in ourselves, but in him, because he is our head, and what belongs to the head belongs also to the members — not as they are members distinct from the head, but as they make one, and are one, with the head itself. On account of which union with the head the Apostle writes, Ephesians 2: He hath raised us up together, and hath made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ. And on account of the same union Christ himself attributes our sufferings to himself; and hence to Saul he said, Acts 9, Why persecutest thou me? and to the Apostle Peter, I go to Rome to be crucified again. And as we are said to be justice in him, not because we are formally just by his justice, but because we are his members, so also contrariwise he is called sin, not because he is formally a sinner, but because he is our head, and willed our sins to be his, that he might satisfy for them. Isaias 53: He hath laid on him the iniquity of us all; and in Psalm 21 he himself says: Far from my salvation are the words of my sins.
The other exposition is that by the justice of God is understood the justice inhering in us, which is called of God because it is given to us by God, as Augustine expounds in the book On the Spirit and the Letter, chapter 18; and is said to be in him — that is, in Christ — because it is given through his merit. And we are said to be justice rather than just, that the antithesis be kept with the word “sin”; for since he had said that Christ was made sin — that is, a victim for sin — he preferred to say that we are justice, rather than just. Nor is it absurd that just men be called justice, since they are called also light, Matthew 5, You are the light of the world; and Ephesians 5, You were heretofore darkness, but now light in the Lord. St. John Chrysostom adds, in the commentary on this place, that we are called justice, and the justice of God, because so great is the justice which God gives us through Christ that no stain is left in the justified. The third exposition is that by the justice of God is understood indeed inhering justice, but it is called the justice of God by a trope, because it is the effect and image of the justice of God. For Christ is called sin by a trope, because he was a victim for sin, and also because he partook of flesh like to the flesh of sin. For St. Augustine proves, in book 2 against Maximinus, chapter 2, expounding this very place of the Apostle, that sin in the Scriptures is often taken for a victim offered in expiation of sin, as when the priests are said to eat the sins of the people; and also for the likeness of the flesh of sin, as Romans 8, Of sin he condemned sin; and Romans 6, For in that he died to sin, he died once. As, then, Christ was made sin for us — that is, took the likeness of the flesh of sin, that he might become a victim for sin — so we are made the justice of God by a like trope, because we receive inhering justice, which is the justice of God — that is, the effect of the justice of God, and likewise the justice of God, that is, a certain likeness of the justice of God. And as Christ partook of the likeness of the flesh of sin not imputatively, but truly, when the Word was made flesh, and was made a victim for sin not imputatively, but truly, so we in justification partake of the effect and likeness of the divine justice not imputatively, but truly, when we receive inhering justice. See Cyril, book 12 of the Thesaurus, chapter 3, who so expounds this place.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT X. Solvuntur argumenta ex epistolis ad Corinthios Ex Epistolis ad Corinth. depromunt Cal¬ vinus et alii argumenta tria. Primum argumentum sumunt ex illis ver¬ bis, I ad Corinth. i. Qui factus et nobis a Deo sapientia et justitia et redemptio. Cui loco adjungunt illud Hier. xxnr. Et hoc est nomen , (piod vocabunt eum, Dominus justitia nostra (1). Sic enim vertunt ex Ilebram. Ex his locis colligunt, nostram justitiam non esse aliam, nisi eam, qiue est in Christo, nobis imputa¬ tam. Respondeo : recte dicitur Christus nostra justitia, non quod justi simus ea justitia, qua) est in Christo nobis imputata, sed duabus aliis de hausis. Primum ; quia Christus causa est efficiens nostra) justitia). Sic enim dicitur Christus justitia nostra, quomodo dicitur Deus fortitudo nostra in Psalm. xvii. et pa¬ tientia nostra in Psalm. lxx. et salus nostra in Psalm. xxvi. quod explicatur in Psalm. xxx vi. cum dicitur : Salus autem justorum a Domino. Denique sic dicitur Christus justitia nostra, quomodo dicitur sapientia nostra, et redemptio nostra ; et alibi pax nostra, quia videlicet nos redemit, et justos ac sapientes fecit, et Patri suo reconciliavit, pacificans quce in terris, et quae in coelis sunt. Deinde, dicitur Christus justitia nostra, quoniam satisfecit Patri pro nobis, et eam satisfactionem ita nobis donat et communi¬ cat, cum nos justificat, ut nostra satisfactio et justitia dici possit. Nam etiamsi per justi¬ tiam nobis inhaerentem vere justi nomine¬ mur et simus ; tamun non per eam satisfaci¬ mus Deo pro culpis nostris, et poena aeterna : sed est illa justitia inhaerens cum remissione culpa), et sempiternae poena), effectus satis¬ factionis Christi, qua) (ut docet Concilium Tridentinum sess. 6 cap. 7.) nobis in justifi¬ catione confertur et applicatur. Et hoc modo non esset absurdum, si quis diceret, nobis imputari Christi justitiam, et merita, cum nobis donentur et applicentur, ac si nos ipsi Deo satisfecissemus, modo non negetur esse in nobis : praeterea justitiam inhaerentem, eamque veram et absolutam esse justitiam, cui justo Dei judicio non debeatur poena, sed gloria. Sic enim loquitur S. Bernardus in epist. 190. ad Innocentium : « Nam si unus, inquit, pro omnibus mortuus est, ergo om¬ nes mortui sunt ; ut videlicet satisfactio unius omnibus imputetur, sicut omnium pec¬ cata unus ille portavit » . Alterum argumentum sumunt cx cap. v. posterioris ad Corinth. Deus erat in Christo mundum reconcilians sibi, non reputans illis delicta ipsorum (2). Videtur enim hoc loco B. Paulus in eo constituere justificationem, quod peccata non imputentur. Respondeo : non imputatio, ut supra dixi, remissionem peccati, et justitia) infusionem secum trahit. Ideo siquidem non reputat no¬ bis Deus delicta, quoniam satisfecit Christus pro nobis, et Deus ea satisfactione placatus, reconciliavit nos sibi, et ex inimicis amicos fecit. Quare idem Apostolus quod hic dixit, reconcilians, et non reputans delicta, dixit ad Colos. II. Convivificavit nos Christo, donans nobis omnia delicta, delens quod adversus nos erat chirographum decreti (3). Ubi vides vivi¬ ficationem, qua) pertinet ad internam reno¬ vationem et donationem delictorum, qua) pertinet ad remissionem peccati, et dele¬ tionem chirographi, qua) significat omnimo¬ dam extinctionem debiti. Et ad Rom. v. cum idem Apostolus dixis¬ set : Gloriamur in Deo, per Dominum nostrum (!) I Cor. I, 30 Hier. XXIII, 6. — (2) II Cor. V, 19. — (5) Coi II, 13. CAPUT X. 233 Jesum Christum, per quem nunc reconciliatio¬ nem accepimus , explicat paulo infra, quid sit accipere reconciliationem, et ait : Abundan¬ tiam gratiae et donationis et justitiae accipien¬ tes , regnabunt in vita peripsum (1). Non igitur reconciliatio est sola non imputatio delicto¬ rum, sed acceptio abundantis gratiae et justi¬ tiae et donorum, per quse ad ipsum quoque regnum et vitam pervenitur aeternam. Sed clarissime explicat idem Apostolus effectum reconciliationis ad Coloss. i. cum ait : Nunc autem reconciliavit in corpore carnis ejus , per mortem exhibere vos sanctos et immaculatos , et irreprehensibiles coram ipso- (2). Tertium argumentum sumunt ex illis ver¬ bis ejusdem epistolae, et ejusdem capitis Eum qui non noverat peccatum, pro nobis pec¬ catum fecit , ut nos efficiamur justitia Dei in ipso. Hinc enim sequi dicunt, ut nos justi simus ipsa justitia Dei, quae est in Christo ; sicut ipse dicitur peccatum, id est, peccator, per peccata, quae sunt in nobis. Ut enim im- putantur illi peccata noslra, ita imputatur nobis justitia illius. Respondeo : non dicitur Christus pecca¬ tum, id est, peccator, neque imphtantur illi peccata nostra, quasi ipse illa fecerit, et ini¬ quus haberi possit. Sed solum imputantur illi, quoad debitum satisfaciendi, quod ille sponte suscepit. Ex quo non peccator, sed justus dici meretur. Qui enim pro alio sa¬ tisfacit, justissimus est. Sic igitur et nobis imputatur justitia ejus, quoad satisfactio¬ nem, quam pro nobisprEestitit : sed nonpro- pterea nos justi, id est, mundi et immaculati haberi possumus, si vere in nobis peccato¬ rum macula) et sordes inhaereant. Hac igitur falsa expositione rejecta, tri¬ bus modis potest hic locus exponi. Uno modo, ut justitia Dei sit justitia ipsa divina, quae est in Christo. Qua) justitia nos esse dicimur, non in nobis, sed in illo, quia ipse est caput nostrum, et quod convenit capiti, convenit etiam membris, non ut sunt menbra distincta a capite, sed ut faciunt unum, et sunt unum cum ipso capite. Ob quam unionemeuin capite ' scribit Apostolus ad Ephes. ii. Conresuscita- vit nos, et consedere fecit in coelestibus in Chri¬ sto (3). Et propter eamdem unionem tribui ipse Christus sibi passiones nostras, et hinc Saulo dixit Actor, ix. Quid rue pet sequeris (4)? et Apostolo Petro : Vado Romam iterum cru¬ cifigi. Et sicut nos dicimur justitia in illo, non quia simus formaliter justi justitia ejus, sed quia sumus membra ejus : sic etiam contra dicitur ipse peccatum, non quia for¬ maliter sit peccator, sed quia caput est no¬ strum, et peccata nostra, sua esse voluit, ut pro eis satisfaceret. Isaiee lui. Posuit in ea iniquitatem omnium nostrum ; et in Psal. xxi. ipse dicit : Longe a salute mea verbo delicto¬ rum meorum (5). Altera expositio est, ut per justitiam Dei intelligatur justitia nobis inhaerens, quae di¬ citur Dei, quia donatur nobis a Deo, ut Au¬ gustinus exponit in ‘libro de Spiritu et littera cap. 18. et dicitur in ipso, id est, in Christo, <juia per ejus meritum donatur. Et dicimur justitia potius, quam justi, ut servetur anti- thesis, cum voce « peccatum », quoniam enim dixerat, Christum factum esse pecca¬ tum, id est, hostiam pro peccato, maluit dicere nos esse justitiam, quam justos. Neque est absurdum, ut homines justi dicantur justitia, cum dicantur etiam lux. Matth. v. Vos Estis lux mundi. Et ad Ephes. ir. Eratis aliquando tenebrae , nunc autem lux in Domino (6). Addit 3. Joan. Chrysostomus in commentario hujus loci, nos dici justitiam, et justitiam Dei, quia tanta est justitia, quam nobis Deus donat per Christum, ut nulla in justificatis macula relinquatur. Tertia expositio est, ut per justitiam Dei intelligatur quidem justitia inhairens, sed di¬ catur justitia Dei per tropum, quia est effe¬ ctus, et imago justitias Dei. Nam Christus di¬ citur peccatum per tropum, quia fuit hostia pro peccato ; et etiam quia participavit car¬ nem similem carni peccati. Probat enim sanctus Augustinus in lib. ii. adversus Maxi¬ minum cap. 2. hunc ipsum locum Apostoli exponens, peccatum in Scripturis saspe ac¬ cipi pro victima oblata in expiationem pec¬ cati, ut cum dicuntur Sacerdotes manducare peccata populi ; nccnon pro similitudine carnis peccati, ut ad Rom, vm. Ue peccato damnavit peccatum. Et ad Rom, vi. Quod enim mortuus est peccato , mortuus est semel (7). Sicut igitur Christus factus est pro nobis peccatum, id est, assumpsit similitudinem carnis peccati, ut fieret victima pro peccato ; ita nos efficimur justitia Dei, per similem tropum, quia justitiam inhaerentem recipi¬ mus, qurn est justitia Dei, id est, effectus (i) Rom. V, 11. - (2) Coi. 1, 22. - (3) Eph. II, 6. — (4) Act. IX, 4. - (5) isai. LUI, G; 1'saJ. XXI, 2. — (6) Matth. V, 14; Epii. V, 8. - (7) Rom. VIII, '5; ibid. VI, 10. 230 UBER II. justitia) Dei, et item justitia Dei, id est, si¬ militudo quaedam justitia) Dei. Et sicut Chri¬ stus non imputative, sed vere participavit similitudinem carnis peccati, cum verbum factum est caro ; et non imputative, sed vere factus est victima pro peccato : ita nos in ju¬ stificatione non imputative, sed vere parti¬ cipamus effectum et similitudinem divinae justitiae, cum justitiam inhaerentem accipi¬ mus. Yide Cyrillum lib. xn. Thesauri, cap. 3. qui hunc locum ita exponit.