Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On Justification · Book IV: On the Justice of Works
Chapter 3: The true distinction of the law and the Gospel is asserted, and thence the necessity of works is proved
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. VI, De Justificatione, Book IV. 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).
We shall now explain the true distinction of the law and the Gospel, that hence too the necessity of good works may be proved. There are two chief distinctions of the law and the Gospel, from which many others follow. The first difference, then, between the law and the Gospel is that which is between an inchoate and a perfect doctrine; for the Gospel is contained in the law as a tree in the seed, as St. Thomas rightly teaches in 1.2, question 107. Whence St. Augustine, in book 16 On the City of God, chapter 26, writes that the Old Testament is a concealment of the New, and the New Testament a revelation of the Old. And St. Gregory, homily 6 on Ezechiel, explaining the mystery of the wheel which was in the wheel, says that the wheel in the wheel is the New Testament in the Old. The Scripture of each Testament contains three things: mysteries, promises, and precepts — that is, things to be believed, hoped, and done, to which faith, hope, and charity correspond. For to these three the sum of the whole heavenly doctrine is recalled, as St. Augustine teaches in the Enchiridion, in the book On the Christian Combat, in the book On Catechizing the Unlearned, and elsewhere. But in all three the evangelical and Apostolic doctrine far surpasses the doctrine of the law and the Prophets.
For as regards the Mysteries of Faith, the doctrine of the Old Testament manifestly teaches the unity of God, but the Trinity of persons and the Incarnation of the Word only obscurely and imperfectly, so as rather to adumbrate than express them; but the doctrine of the New Testament delivers and preaches all these things clearly. And so, to signify this, Moses, when he spoke to the people, veiled his face; but to us Christ himself spoke with unveiled face, announcing all things whatsoever he heard from his Father. Whence the Apostle, 2 Corinthians 3: Moses put a veil upon his face, that the children of Israel might not steadfastly look on his face; but we, with open face beholding the glory of the Lord, are transformed from glory to glory, as by the Spirit of the Lord. As regards the promises, the Law and the Prophets expressly promise temporal goods, but figuratively the kingdom of heaven; Christ and the Apostles manifestly promise the kingdom of heaven and eternal life, and say that temporal goods are to be added, and therefore not to be sought solicitously and anxiously. And since threats too are wont to be joined to promises, the Law and the Prophets threaten temporal evils, Christ and the Apostles everlasting death. If you will hear me (says the Lord through the Prophet, Isaias 1), you shall eat the good things of the land; but if you will not, and provoke me to wrath, the sword shall devour you. But Christ, Matthew 5: Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are the clean of heart, for they shall see God. And below: Whosoever shall say to his brother, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. St. Augustine, book 18 On the City of God, chapter 11: “The people being led out to Mount Sinai, he delivered to them the law divinely received, which is called the Old Testament, because it has earthly promises; and through Jesus Christ there was to be a New Testament, by which the kingdom of heaven should be promised.” And on Psalm 73: “God willed himself to be the author of each Testament, so as both to promise earthly things in the Old Testament, and heavenly in the New.” The same Augustine observes, in book 9 against Faustus, last chapter, that in the Prophets are found not rarely testimonies of the resurrection and eternal life; but the kingdom of heaven is nowhere expressly named, much less promised, save in the Gospel. Wherefore not without reason St. Jerome, in book 1 against the Pelagians, reprehends the Pelagians for saying that in the Old Testament the kingdom of heaven was promised.
There remain laws and commandments, of which some were ceremonial, some judicial, some moral in the Old Testament. But in the New, in place of those Mosaic ceremonies, which were well-nigh infinite, Christ “instituted in the Gospel,” as St. Augustine speaks in epistle 118 to Januarius, “Sacraments most few in number, most easy in observance, most excellent in signification, by which he bound together the society of the new people.” And on Psalm 73: “The Sacraments are changed, made fewer, easier, more wholesome, happier.” Judicial laws in the Gospel Christ did not enact, but left to be enacted by those who, bearing rule in various places, should judge them to be instituted according to the diversity of things, persons, and times. For this is the difference between the Hebrew and the Christian people: that the former contained one nation and one region, and that small enough — on which matter see Jerome in the epistle to Dardanus, on the land of promise; but the latter has embraced the whole world, where there are regions and kingdoms most vast, manners and customs most diverse, temperaments, dispositions, habits of soul and body varying in infinite ways. Hence, then, the Hebrew people could easily be ruled by the same judicial laws; but the Christian people can in no way be governed by the same particular rites and laws. The moral laws, which are perpetual, the law and the Gospel have almost the same, as St. Augustine shows, book 19 against Faustus, chapter 28; but in this the Gospel surpasses the law, that certain graver things, which were not exacted of the Jews on account of their weakness in the law, are exacted of Christians in the Gospel — as is clear of the bill of divorce and of polygamy; and certain things too are read more expressly in the Gospel which were more obscurely had in the law. Wherefore St. Augustine, when in the book against Adimantus, chapter 3, he had written that there is nothing in the evangelical and Apostolic discipline which is wanting in the law and the Prophets, afterward admonished, in book 1 of the Retractations, chapter 22, that the little word “almost” ought to have been added; for the Gospel has not all, but almost all, things that pertain to manners common with the law.
But that it may plainly be understood how in the Gospel the Lord did not take away the moral law, but perfected it, I shall briefly set forth the sum of the Lord’s Sermon on the Mount, which St. Augustine truly wrote, book 1 On the Lord’s Sermon on the Mount, chapter 1, to be perfect with all the precepts by which the life of a man can be formed. At the beginning, then, of his sermon, the Lord, as it were by way of preface, by a plainly divine artifice, at once explains the last end of man and proposes the utility of the virtues and of good works, saying: Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven, and what follows. For since the last end is the beginning and foundation of the whole moral doctrine, therefore it ought to be set forth in the first place; and at the same time it was fitting to add the utility of virtue, that the disciples might be made more attentive. Then, the preface as it were being explained, the Lord comes to delivering the precepts, and first instructs the Teachers, then the hearers. The Teachers he admonishes that they ought to be the salt of the earth and the light of the world — that is, so to surpass the rest in wisdom and charity that they can make others wise and ardent. Which two conditions he repeated more than once, when he forewarned that the prelates of the Church ought to be faithful and prudent. Then he undertakes the instruction of the peoples, and instructs them both as to the substance of the divine precepts, and as to the end; for in both the scribes and Pharisees had introduced depraved opinions. As regards the substance of the precepts, the Lord reproves five corruptions of the Pharisees. First, the scribes and Pharisees depraved the most grave precepts about murder and adultery, teaching that in precepts of this kind the external act alone was forbidden, but not the internal, unless it were betrayed by external signs. In which error was also Josephus, book 12 of the Antiquities, chapter 13, and David Kimchi in the commentary on Psalm 65, verse 17, expounding that, If I have looked at iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear — for he depraves that, “the Lord will not hear,” so as to signify, “the Lord will not impute.” Against corruptions of this kind the Lord declares that the law, “Thou shalt not kill,” restrains not only the hand, but also the tongue and the mind; and that the law, “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” extends even to the concupiscence conceived in the mind itself.
Then, the Pharisees depraved the law of divorce; for what, on account of the weakness of those men, the law had left unpunished, they proposed as a thing absolutely just. But the Lord taught that it is not lawful to put away a wife, save for the cause of fornication, and utterly abrogated the law of the bill of divorce. Third, the Pharisees taught that one must not forswear, yet they judged it no sin to frequent oaths even for a light cause. Contrariwise the Lord bids that one must not swear at all, unless (namely) there be a necessity of swearing. Fourth, the Pharisees corrupted that law of retaliation, “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.” For, not observing that this law was constituted to preserve justice, not to satiate the appetite of vengeance, they taught that it was lawful to seek vengeance. The Lord, then, admonishes that vengeance is not to be sought, nor evil to be rendered for evil; but rather that a good man ought to be prepared, if need be, to him that strikes one cheek, to offer also the other. Fifth, the Pharisees perverted the primary precept of love. For since the law had bidden them slay their enemies, not for the cause of hatred, but from zeal of justice, by which just wars are sometimes waged even by pious Kings, they delivered a general precept that friends were to be loved, enemies held in hatred. The Lord, therefore, most gravely admonishes that enemies are to be loved, good is to be done to those who hate us, prayer is to be made for those who persecute and calumniate us.
These things thus explained, he passes to the manner, and teaches that vainglory is above all to be avoided, and that good works are not to be done with that intention, that they may be seen and praised by men. And since it would have been too prolix to discourse of each kind of good works, he recalled all to three heads: prayer, fasting, and alms; of which the first we exhibit toward God, the second toward ourselves, the third toward our neighbor; and by the one we sacrifice the mind, by the second the body, by the third external goods. Then the Lord adds, and teaches, what are the impediments to be avoided and what the helps to be sought by those who desire to attain to the perfection of justice. Three impediments he demonstrates: too great solicitude in gathering riches, Lay not up to yourselves treasures on earth; superfluous diligence in procuring even necessary things, Be not solicitous for the morrow; rash judgment about the life and deeds of others, Judge not. Three helps also he shows: assiduous prayer, Ask, and it shall be given you; effort and striving to advance and overcome all difficulties, Strive to enter by the narrow gate; the choice of good masters, Beware of false prophets. Lastly he concludes the sermon, again commending the utility of good works, as he had done in the preface: Every one that heareth these my words, and doth them, shall be likened to a wise man that built his house upon a rock, etc. And this concerning the Lord’s Sermon on the Mount. But the Lord perfected the moral law not only by explaining and adding what we have said, but also by adjoining certain counsels most apt for attaining the perfection of charity, which is the end of all the precepts; of which we have disputed enough in the book On Monks. We have, then, the first distinction of the law and the Gospel, from which it is manifestly gathered that the obedience of the law, and good works, are taught not less, but much more, in the Gospel than in the law. And accordingly that the Lutherans without doubt are ignorant of the true distinction of the Gospel and the law.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT III. Asseritur verum discrimen legis et Evangelii, et inde necessitas operum comprobatur. Explicabimus nunc verum discrimen legis et Evangelii, ut hinc etiam necessitas bono¬ rum operum comprobetur. Duo sunt praecipua discrimina legis et Evangelii ex quibus multa alia consequun¬ tur. Primum igitur illud interest inter legem et Evangelium, quod inter doctrinam inchoa¬ tam et perfectam :'continetur enim Evangeli¬ um in lege, ut arbor in semine, ut sanctus Tho- mas recte docet in 1. 2. quaest 107. Unde S. Augustinus in lib. xvi. de civitate Dei, cap. 26. scribit, testamentum vetus esse occulta- tationem novi, et testamentum novum esse revelationem veteris. Et S. Gregorius homil? 6. in Ezechielem, explicans mysterium rotae, quae erat in rota, dicit rotam in rota esse testamentum novum in testamento vetere. Tria continet Scriptura utriusque testa¬ menti, mysteria, promissiones et pra;cepta, idest, res credendas, sperandas et faciendas, quibus fides, spes, charitasque respondent. Nam ad haec tria revocatur summa totius doctrinae coelestis, ut S. Augustinus docet in Enchiridio, in lib. de agone Christiano, in lib. de catechizandis rudibus, et alibi. Sed in omnibus tribus longe praestat doctrina evan¬ gelica et Apostolica doctrinae legis et Pro¬ phetarum. 301 Nam quod attinet ad Mysteria Fidei, do¬ ctrina veteris testamenti unitatem Dei mani¬ feste docet, Trinitatem personarum, et In¬ carnationem verbi non nisi obscure et im¬ perfecte, ut ea potius adumbret, quam ex¬ primat : doctrina vero testamenti novi ha;c omnia perspicue tradit et praedicat. Itaque ad hoc significandum, Moses cum loqueretur ad [populum, faciem velabat, nobis autem Christus ipse revelata facie locutus est, an- nuncians omnia, qua;cumque audivit a Pa¬ tre suo. Unde Apostolus II ad Corinth. m. Moyses, inquit, ponebat velamen super fa¬ ciem suam , ut non intenderent filii Israel in fa¬ ciem ejus : nos autem revelata facie, gloriam Domini speculantes, transformamur a clari¬ tate in claritatem, tamquam a Domini spi¬ ritu (1). Quod attinet ad promissa, Lex et Prophe¬ ta; pollicentur expresse bona temporalia, fi¬ gurate autem autem regnum coelorum, Christus et Apostoli manifeste regnum coelo¬ rum, et vitam aeternam pollicentur, bona temporalia adjicienda esse dicunt, et ideo non esse sollicite et anxie requirenda. Et quoniam promissionibus adjungi solent etiam minae, Lex et Propheta; comminantur tempo¬ ralia mala, Christus et Apostoli mortem sem- piteimam. Si audieritis me (inquit Dominus per Prophetam, Isaiae i.) bona terree come¬ detis; quod si nolueritis, et me ad iracundiam provocaveritis, gladius devorabit vos. Christus autem Matth. v. Beati pauperes spiritu, quo¬ niam ipsorum est regnum coelorum. Beati mundo corde, quoniam ipsi Deum videbunt. Et infra : Qui dixerit fratri suo fatue, reus erit gehennoe ignis (2). S. Augustinus lib. xvm. de civitate Dei, cap. It «Educto, inquit, populo in monte Syna, divinitus acceptam tradidit legem, quod vetus dicitur testamentum, quia promissiones terrenas habet : et per Jesum Christum luturum fuerat testamentum no¬ vum, quo regnum coelorum promitteretur ». Et in Psalm. ixxm. « Deus se utriusque te¬ stamenti esse voluit auctorum, ut et terrena promitteret in veteri testamento, et coelestia in novo testamento ». Observat idem Au¬ gustinus in lib. ix. contra Faustum, cap. ult. in Prophetis inveniri non raro testimonia de resurrectione et vita eeterna; sed regnum coelorum nusquam expresse nominatum, ne¬ dum promissum, nisi in Evangelio. Quare (1) 11 Cor. III, L — (2) Isai. I, 10; Mattii. Y, o. 302 LIBER IV. non immerito S. Hieronimus in lib. 1. ad versus Pelagianos, reprehendit Pelagianos, quod dicerent in testamento veteri regnum coelorum esse promissum. Restant leges et mandata, quorum alia cse- remonialia, alia judicialia, alia moralia erant in veteri testamento. In novo autem proCat- remoniis illis Mosaicis, quae propemodum infinitae erant « instituit in Evangelio» Chri¬ stus, ut sanctus Augustinus loquitur in epist. 118. ad Januarium, « Sacramenta numero paucissima, observatione facillima, significa¬ tione prsestantissima, quibus societatem no¬ vi populi colligavit». Et in Psalm lxxiit. Mutata, inquit, sunt Sacramenta, facta sunt pauciora, faciliora, salubriora, fudiciora». Judiciales leges in Evangelio, Christus non tulit, sed ferendas reliquit iis, qui variis in locis rempublicam gerentes pro rerum, per¬ sonarum et temporum diversitate instituen¬ das esse judicaverint. Hoc enim interest in¬ ter populum Hebrseum et Christianum, quod ille unam gentem et unam regionem, eam- que satis exiguam continebat. De qua re vi¬ de Hieronymum in epist. ad Dardanum, de terra promissionis, iste autem orbem terree complexus est, ubi regiones sunt et regna vastissima, mores et consuetudines diversis- simee, temperamenta, ingenia, habitus ani¬ morum et corporum infinitis modis vari¬ antes. Hinc igitur facile poterat Hebraeus po- pulus'iisdem judiciis regi, non potest autem populus Christianus ulla ratione iisdem par¬ ticularibus ritibus et legibus gubernari. Morales Jleges, quai perpetuae sunt, eas¬ dem fere habent lex et Evangelium , ut ostendit S. Augustinus lib xix, contra Fau¬ stum, cap. 28. sed in hoc prsestat Evange¬ lium legi, quod qusedam graviora, quae a Judaeis propter infirmitatem ipsorum in lege non exigebantur, a Christianis in Evangelio exiguntur ut patet de libello repudii et po- lygamia: quaedam etiam expressius leguntur in Evangelio, quae obscurius habebantur in lege. Quare S. Augustinus, cum in lib. con¬ tra Adimantum, cap. 3. scripsisset, nihil es¬ se in Evangelica Et Apostolica disciplina, quod in lege et Prophetis desideretur : ad¬ monuit postea in lib. 1. retract. cap. 22. addendam fuisse voculam « fere » ; non enim, omnia, sed fere omnia, quae ad mores pertinent, habet Evangelium cum lege com¬ munia. Sed ut plane intelligatur, quemadmodum in Evangelio Dominus legem moralem non sustulerit, sed perfecerit, exponam breviter summam sermonis Domini in monte, quem vere scripsit S. Augustinus lib. 1. desermo- ne Domini in monte, cap. I. omnibus prae¬ ceptis, quibus vita hominis formari potest, esse perfectum. Initio igitur sermonis sui, Dominus, quasi loco prooemii, divino prorsus artificio, simul explicat finem ultimum hominis et virtutum, atque operum bonorum utilitatem proponit, dicens: Beati pauperes spiritu , quoniam ip¬ sorum est regnum coelorum. Et quae sequuntur. Quoniam enim ultimus finis, principium et fundamentum est totius doctrinae moralis, ideo primo loco exponi debuit, simul autem adjungi par fuit utilitatem virtutis ut disci¬ puli attentiores efficerentur. Deinde, quasi prooemio explicato, accedit Dominus ad praecepta tradenda, et primum instruit Doctores, deinde auditores. Doctores admonet, eos salem terrae et lucem mundi esse debere, id est, sapientia et charitate ita caeteris praestare, ut alios sapientes et arden¬ tes efficere possint. Quas duas conditiones non semel repetivit, cum praepositos Ec¬ clesiae fideles, et prudentes esse debere prae¬ monuit. Aggreditur deinde instructionem populo¬ rum eosque instruit, tum quoad substantiam praeceptorum divinorum, tum quoad finem ; nam in utroque scribae et pharisaei pravas opiniones induxerant. Quod attinet ad substantiam praeceptorum reprobat Dominus quinque Pharisaeorum corruptelas. Primum, depravabant scribae et pharisaei praecepta gravissima de homicidio et adulterio, docentes in ejusmodi praeceptis, actum externum solum esse prohibitum, non autem internum, nisi signis exterioribus proderetur. In quo errore fuit etiam Jose- phus lib. xn. antiquitatum, cap. 13. Et Da-, vid Kimhi in comment. Psalm. lxy. vei's. 17. exponens illud : Iniquitatem siadspexi in cor¬ de meo, non audiet Dominus : depravat enim illud, non audiet Dominus ; ut significet, non imputabit Dominus. Adversus ejusmodi cor¬ ruptelas, declarat Dominus legem, non occi¬ des, non solum manum, sed etiam linguam et animum cohibere ; et legem, non moecha¬ beris, extendi usque ad concupiscentiam in ipsa mente conceptam. (l)Psal. LXV, 18. CAPUT IV. 303 Deinde, Pharissei depravabant legem de repudio; quod enim ob infirmitatem eorum hominum lex impunitum dimiserat, ipsi ut rem absolute justam proponebant. Dominus autem docuit, non licere uxorem dimittere, nisi causa fornicationis, et legem de libello repudii penitus abrogavit. Tertio, Pbarisaei docebant, non esse peje¬ randum, tamen frequentare juramenta, etiam levi de causa nullum peccatum esse duce¬ bant. Contra Dominus jubet, non esse juran¬ dum omnino, nisi (videlicet) subsit jurandi necessitas. Quarto, corrumpebant phariseei legem il¬ lam talionis, oculum pro oculo, dentem pro dente. Nam cum non animadverterent, eam legem constitutam fuisse ad justitiam con¬ servandam, non ad appetitum vindictse sa¬ turandum, docebant, licitum esse vindictam appetere. Dominus igitur monet, non esse appetendam vindictam, nec malum pro malo reddendum ; sed potius paratum esse debere hominem probum si opus sit, perciftienti maxillam unam, praebere etiam alteram. Quinto, pervertebant pharisaei primarium dilectionis praeceptum. Quoniam enim lex jusserat, ut hostes suos occiderent, non odii causa sed zelo justitiae , qua justa bella interdum etiam a piis Regibus indicuntur, illi generale praeceptum tradebant diligen¬ dos esse amicos, odio habendos inimicos. Dominus ergo gravissime admonet, diligen¬ dos esse inimicos, benefaciendum his, qui nos oderunt, orandum pro persequentibus et calumniantibus nos. His ita explicatis transit ad modum, ac docet, cavendam esse in primis inanem glo¬ riam, et non esse facienda opera bona ea intentione, ut videantur et laudentur ab homi¬ nibus. Et quoniam nimis prolixum fuisset, de singulis operum bonorum generibus dis¬ serere ; revocavit omnia ad tria capita, ora¬ tionem, jejunium et eleemosynam, quorum * primum erga Deum, alterum erga nos ipsos, tertium erga proximum exhibemus ; et uno ■mentem, altero corpus, tertio bona externa sacrificamus. Addit postea Dominus, ac docet, quse sint impedimenta cavenda et quse adjumenta quaerenda iis, qui cupiunt ad perfectionem justitiae pervenire. Impedimenta tria de¬ monstrat, nimiam sollicitudinem in opibus congregandis : Nolite thesaurizare vobis the¬ sauros in terra ; supervacaneam diligentiam in rebus etiam necessariis procurandis. No¬ lite solliciti esse in crastinum. Temerarium judicium de vita et factis alienis, Nolite judi¬ care, Adjumenta etiam tria ostendit, oratio¬ nem assiduam, petite et dabitur vobis ; cona¬ tum et contentionem proficiendi et supe¬ randi omnes difficultates ; Contendite intrare per angustam portam ; electionem bonorum magistrorum : Attendite vobis a falsis Pro¬ phetis Postremo concludit sermonem iterum commendans utilitatem operum bonorum, ut in prooemio fecerat : Omnis qui audit ver¬ ba mea haec , et facit ea , similis est viro sa¬ pienti. , qui aedificavit domum suam supra pe¬ tram etc. Atque haec de sermone Domini in monte. Perfecit autem Dominus legem moralem, non solum explicando et addendo quae dixi¬ mus, sed etiam adjiciendo consilia quaedam ad perfectionem charitatis, quai finis est omnium praeceptorum, adipiscendam aptis¬ sima ; de quibus satis multa disputavimus in lib. de Monachis. Habemus igitur primum discrimen legis et Evangelii, ex quo mani¬ feste colligitur obedientiam legis, atque o- pera bona non minus, sed multo magis in Evangelio, quam in lege doceri. Proide Lu- theranos sine dubitatione verum Evangelii ac legis ignorare discrimen.