Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On Justification · Book V: On the Merits of Works
Chapter 5: Objections from the Scriptures against the merits of good works are solved
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. VI, De Justificatione, 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).
The arguments of the adversaries have in great part been solved in the last book. For all those things which are brought forward to prove that all the works of the just are sins are wont to be brought also to prove that there are no true merits of eternal salvation. We shall solve, then, in this place only those objections which properly seem to fight against merits. First, from the divine letters they object that of Psalm 102: Who crowneth thee with mercy and compassion. Likewise, Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy. And James 2: Judgment without mercy to him that hath not done mercy. For these and other like places testify that the very crown of glory and heavenly beatitude is to be given to holy men from mercy, not from justice, and thereby is not properly rendered to merits, but given freely. I answer: St. Augustine diligently weighs these places, both in epistle 105 and in the book On Rebuke and Grace, chapter 13. And he indicates two expositions. One is that beatitude is attributed to mercy, not because it is not a true reward of merit, but because the merits themselves are given from mercy. For a man cannot do meritorious works unless first justified; but he is justified not from works, but from grace and mercy. Wherefore Augustine is wont so to distinguish as to say that to justice itself eternal life is a reward, not grace; but to the man himself it is grace, not a reward, since to a man justice is grace. The same explanation St. Gregory follows on the seventh penitential Psalm, treating that, “Make me hear thy mercy in the morning.” The other exposition is that in the very crowning, which is the reward of merit, mercy also is necessary, to remit the venial sins without which none live, and few end this life; but Augustine adds in the same place that this very mercy is owed to the good merits of the saints, and in the judgment is not so much given as rendered, so that it can be called a just mercy, since it is rendered by a just judgment. But even if that mercy were not rendered to merits, but were pure mercy, yet it would not hinder the notion of merit in the good works of just men. For mercy accompanies the crown of glory, but is not itself the crown of glory. For the crown regards good merits, mercy regards the venial sins which are to be blotted out by remission. For as on the part of man there are two things, good merits and venial sins, of which the one destroys not the other, so on the part of God there are two things, the crown of glory as the reward of merit, and mercy as the medicine of sin; and of these two also the one hinders not the other. For if that remission were in no way owed, but altogether gratuitous, God could indeed not remit those venial sins, but yet could not punish them save with a temporary punishment, since those sins do not by a just judgment merit a greater punishment; but that punishment being paid in the fire of purgatory, the good merits would by a just judgment receive the crown of justice, nothing now hindering.
Second, there can be objected that of Isaias 55: Come, buy without money, and without any exchange wine and milk. And that of Daniel 9: We do not present our prayers before thy face in our justifications, but in thy great mercies. I answer: these places make nothing to the matter, since wine and milk in that place signify not everlasting glory, but the grace of this time. But we confess that the grace of God is not acquired by merits, but given freely, though not without work and labor of ours. For “to come and to buy” designates our labor; “without money, and without any exchange” demonstrate that the reconciliation is not owed, but plainly gratuitous. Further, that wine and milk pertain to the grace of the present time St. Jerome teaches in the commentary, where he also says that in sign of this thing the Christians were wont to give the reborn in Christ wine and milk to taste. Daniel too in that place asks not a crown, but liberation from the captivity into which the people of God had come on account of their sins.
Third, they object that of Luke 17: When you shall have done all these things, say, We are unprofitable servants; we have done that which we ought to do. I answer: the Fathers expound this place in many ways, and all are excellent explanations, nor does any fight against the merits of good works. First (as St. Ambrose expounds, book 8 on Luke), the Lord bids that we acknowledge what we are of ourselves: “Grace is to be acknowledged, but nature not to be ignored,” etc. And so of ourselves we are unprofitable servants, plainly inept to fulfil what the Lord commands; yet through his grace we are made profitable, according to that of 2 Timothy 2: He that shall cleanse himself from these shall be a vessel unto honor, sanctified and profitable to the Lord, prepared unto every good work. Second (as Bede expounds), we are bidden to acknowledge that we bring no profit to God, but that whatever good we do is profitable to us, not to God, who needs not our goods. Wherefore with the highest humility we ought to serve God, and give thanks that he willed to accept our homage. Third (as St. Augustine expounds, sermon 3 on the words of the Lord), we can be called unprofitable servants when we have kept all the divine commandments, since we do nothing beyond what we owe, and could ask nothing thence of just reward, unless God had willed to enter into a liberal covenant with us. For by our condition we are the bondmen of God, and if he will, he can, without any reward, bind us to all works whatsoever shall please him. This condition of ours, then, for preserving humility, Christ wills us to acknowledge. Although, from the gratuitous covenant which he deigned to make with us, we can say with the Apostle: There is laid up for me a crown of justice, which the just judge will render to me in that day. For the Lord himself says: Didst thou not agree with me for a penny? Take what is thine, and go. “O the great goodness of God,” says Augustine, “who, though we ought to render homage by our condition, as servants to a lord, promises us the rewards of friendship, that from us he may wring the homage of due service.” Fourth (as St. John Chrysostom expounds, in the homily on that, “The heart of Ozias was lifted up”), the Lord says not, “When you shall have done all these things, you are unprofitable servants,” but says, “Say, We are unprofitable servants” — where he wills us, after good deeds, to think humbly of ourselves, lest pride corrupt the good works which we have done. But when we shall say, “I am an unprofitable servant,” he will say: “Well done, good and faithful servant; because thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will place thee over many things; enter into the joy of thy Lord.” For that those who work well are not absolutely unprofitable is clear from this very parable of the talents, Matthew 25. For Christ calls him alone an unprofitable servant who hid the talent, and whom he bids to be cast into the exterior darkness. But the others, who had multiplied the talents, he praises as profitable servants, and rewards.
Fourth, they object that of the Apostle, Romans 6: The wages of sin is death; but the grace of God, life everlasting. For hence merits seem to be openly excluded, both because eternal life is not called the wages of good works, as eternal death is called the wages of sin, and because it is called simply grace; for, as the same Apostle says, Romans 4, To him that worketh, the reward is not imputed according to grace, but according to debt. I answer: this argument St. Augustine diligently solves in epistle 105, in the Enchiridion, chapter 107, and chiefly in the book On Grace and Free Choice, chapters 8 and 9. And he says two things. First, that the Apostle could rightly have said, “the wage of justice, life everlasting,” as he said, “the wages of sin, death.” Which confession of St. Augustine utterly cuts the throat of the adversaries’ cause. Second, that it was not said, “the wage of justice, life everlasting,” as “the wages of sin, death,” lest anyone should think that we have justice of ourselves as we have sins of ourselves. And so eternal life is called grace, not because it is not the reward of merit, but because we have the merits themselves from grace. But in those words, Romans 4, To him that worketh, etc., the Apostle speaks of works which those thought could be done without the grace of God, by the sole powers of free choice, whom in that place he refutes. Fifth, they object that of Romans 8: The sufferings of this time are not worthy, etc. But this has already been solved, chapter 3, in the sixth argument for merits. Sixth, they object that of Philippians 3: All these things which were gain to me, I have counted loss for Christ; and I count them but as dung, that I may gain Christ, and may be found in him, not having my own justice, which is of the law, but that which is of the faith of Jesus Christ. Hither can be added those: By grace you are saved through faith, not of works, Ephesians 2; and, Not by the works of justice which we have done, but according to his great mercy he saved us, Titus 3. I answer: first, all these places are brought in vain against the merits of eternal salvation, since the Apostle speaks of inchoate salvation, which is had in this life through the grace of justification and regeneration, not of perfect salvation, which is laid up for us in heaven. But we do not contend that inchoate salvation — that is, justification — is had through merits, but most gladly confess that it is given freely. Then, the Apostle speaks of the justice and works which precede the faith and grace of God; for he therefore opposes it to faith and grace when he says, That I may be found in him, not having my own justice, which is of the law, but that which is of the faith of Christ. And, By grace you are saved through faith, not of works, etc. But this justice and these works we too despise, and grant not to be merits of eternal life. Finally, the adversaries, who most impudently refer these places, and chiefly the first from Philippians 3, to the good works which are done from the faith and grace of God by holy and just men, ought to produce even one out of all antiquity who so expounded those places. Certainly St. Augustine, in book 2 On the Merits and Remission of Sins, chapter 13, says that the Apostle calls losses and dung the good works which he had done in Judaism, since they could seem such in comparison with the most eminent justice which is had through the faith of Christ in the Catholic Church — where he not only will not have the justice of Christians called losses or dung, but names it the most eminent justice; nay, not even the justice which was in Judaism does he condemn absolutely in that place, but only in comparison with Christian justice. But the same Augustine, treating that place more diligently in book 3 to Boniface, in the book On Grace and Free Choice, and in sermon 15 on the words of the Apostle, condemns indeed absolutely that justice which the Apostle calls losses and dung; but he therefore condemns it because he teaches it to be the justice of the proud, who by their own powers alone, without the faith and grace of Christ, think that they can fulfil justice. For justice from faith and grace Augustine everywhere praises, and teaches to be a merit of eternal life. But as to what Chemnitz notes, that the Apostle here said “I count as dung,” as though he would condemn of impurity even that justice which he did from the faith of Christ, when he was an Apostle — it is childish; for that “I count” regards not present works, but the present judgment about past works done in Judaism. Seventh, they object that of Romans 3: Where is then thy boasting? It is excluded. By what law? Of works? No, but by the law of faith. But if faith excludes all boasting which is born of works, certainly it excludes all merits. For if one had true merits, he could rightly glory of them. I answer: faith excludes the boasting of those who glory in themselves, as though they could do justice by their own powers, and have of themselves whatever good they have; but it does not exclude the boasting of those who glory in the Lord — that is, who trust that they can have justice and merits, God helping. Otherwise the Apostle would not say, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord. And so St. Bernard, sermon 13 on the Canticles: “This boasting is not only not forbidden to us, but even persuaded, when it is said, You seek glory one from another, and the glory which is from God alone you will not.”
Eighth, they object that a great injury is done to Christ if anything be attributed to our merits, as though the merits of Christ did not suffice. I answer: this argument, by how much it is more rhetorically, or rather tragically, amplified by the adversaries, by so much, when it is discussed, is found the emptier. For the merits of the just are not opposed to the merits of Christ, but are born of them; and whatever of praise the merits of the just themselves have, all this redounds to the praise of the merits of Christ. For he is the vine, we the branches; and as a branch cannot bear fruit unless it abide in the vine, so we too can do nothing without Christ. And as no one ever so doted as to say that anything is taken from the glory of the vine if its branches bring forth much fruit, so no one, unless plainly foolish, can say that anything is taken from the glory of Christ if his servants, through his grace, through his spirit, through the faith and charity inspired by him, do good works which are so truly just that to them is owed by the just judge a crown of justice. But, they say, if the merits of men are required, then the merits of Christ did not suffice. It is not so. For the merits of men are required not on account of the insufficiency of the merits of Christ, but on account of their greatest efficacy. For the works of Christ merited with God not only that we should attain salvation, but also that we should attain it through our own merits; or (which is the same) they merited for us not only eternal salvation, but also the power of meriting. As also, that God uses the sun to illumine the world, fire to heat, air and rains to refresh, is not caused by any weakness of God, as though he could not by himself, without sun, fire, air, illumine, heat, refresh the world; but by his omnipotence, by which he could not only do these things, but also attribute to created things the power of doing. But at least, they say, the glory is divided between God and man, if we attain salvation not by his merits alone, but also by ours. Nor is this true. For our merits are gifts of Christ; and although in a good work which we, God helping, do, there is nothing ours which is not God’s, nor anything God’s which is not ours — but God does the whole, and man does the whole — yet the reason why that work is worthy of eternal life depends wholly on grace. Finally, we ourselves are no less bound to Christ, nor do we refer our whole and entire salvation to him as accepted less, when we acquire it by our merits, than if we received it without any merits of ours; nay, much more now do we confess ourselves debtors to him, seeing we are not only saved through his grace, but also, through the same, saved in a most noble and most honorable manner.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT Y. Solvuntur objectiones ex Scripturis , contra merita operum bonorum. \- Argumenta adversariorum magna ex par¬ te soluta sunt in libro superiore extremo. Si¬ quidem illa omnia, quae adferuntur ad pro¬ bandum, omnia justorum opera esse pecca¬ ta, adferri solent etiam ad probandum, nul¬ la esse vera merita salutis aeternae. Solve¬ mus igitur hoc loco eas tantum objectiones, quae proprie contra merita pugnare viden¬ tur. Primum ex divinis litteris objiciunt illud Psalmi centesimi secundi : Qui coronat te in misericordia , et miserationibus. Item; Beati misericordes , quoniam ipsi misericordiam con- sequentur. EtJacob. ii. Judicium sine miseri¬ cordia ei, qui non fecit misericordiam (1). Haec enim, et alia similia loca testantur, ipsam etiam coronam gloriae, et beatitudinem coe¬ lestem dandam esse sanctis hominibus ex misericordia, non ex justitia, ac per hoc non reddi proprie meritis, sed vgratis dari. Respondeo : S. Augustinus haec loca dili¬ genter expendit tum in epist. 105. tum in libro de corfept. et gratia, cap. 13. Duas autem indicat expositiones. Una est, quod beatitudo tribuatur misericordiae, non quia non sit vera merces meriti, sed quia merita ipsa ex misericordia data sunt. Non enim potest opera meritoria facere homo, nisi prius justificatus. Justificatur autem non ex operibus, sed ex gratia et misericordia. Qua¬ re solet etiam Augustinus ita distinguere, ut dicat, ipsi justitiae vitam aeternam esse mer- cedem, non gratiam, ipsi autem homini esse gratiam, non mercedem, quoniam homini justitia gratia est. Eamdem explicationem se¬ quitur sanctus Gregorius in Psalm. vii. poc¬ li) Psal. CII, 4: Math. V, 7; Jacob. II. 13. IJBEP» V. nitentialem, tractans illud : « Auditam fac mihi mane misericordiam tuam ». Altera expositio est, quod in ipsa corona¬ tione, quae merces est meriti, sit etiam mise¬ ricordia necessaria, quas peccata venialia remittat, sine quibus nulli vivunt, et. pauci vitam hanc finiunt ; efeterum addit ibidem Augustinus, hanc ipsam misericordiam debi¬ tam esse bonis meritis Sanctorum, et in judi¬ cio non tam donari, quam reddi, ut dici pos¬ sit justa misericordia, quoniam justo judicio redditur. Sed etiamsi ista misericordia non reddere¬ tur meritis, sed pura misericordia esset, non tamen impediret rationem meriti in bonis operibus hominum justorum. Nam comitatur misericordia coronam gloriae, sed non est ipsa corona gloriae. Corona enim respicit bo¬ na merita, misericordia respicit peccata ve¬ nialia, quae remissione delenda sunt. Sicut enim ex parte hominis duo sunt, bona me¬ rita, et peccata venialia, quorum unum non destruit alterum ; ita ex parte Dei duo sunt, corona gloria; tamquam merces meriti, et misericordia tamquam medicina peccati, et horum etiam duorum unum non impedit aliud. Nam si remissio illa nullo modo debita esset , sed omnino gratuita ; posset quidem Deus non remittere peccata illa ve¬ nialia , sed tamen nec punire posset , nisi temporaria poena, cum illa peccata majorem poenam justo judicio non mereantur. Soluta vero in igne purgatorio illa poena, bona merita justo judicio coronam justitia; nulla rc jam impediente perciperent. Secundo objici potest illud Isai. ly. Veni (e, emite absque argento, et absque ulla commuta¬ tione vinum et lac. Et illud Danielis cap. ix. Non in justificationibus nostris prosternimus preces nostras , sed in miserationibus tuis magnis (1). Respondeo : Haec loca ad rem non faciunt ; siquidem vinum et lac non gloriam sempiter¬ nam, sed gratiam temporis hujus eo loco sig¬ nificant. Fatemur autem gratiam Dei non acquiri per merita, sed gratis dari, quam¬ vis non absque opere et labore nostro. Nam venire et emere , laborem nostrum desig¬ nat, absque argento, ct absque ulla com¬ mutatione, reconciliationem, non debitam, sed gratuitam plane esse demonstrant. Por¬ ro unum et lac ad gratiam praisentis tem¬ poris pertinere docet sanctus Hieronymus in commentario, ubi etiam dicit, in hujus rei signum solitos esse Christianos renatis in Christo prabere gustandum vinum et lac; Daniel quoque non coronam petit eo loco, sed liberationem a captivitate, in quam populus Dei, propter peccata devenerat. Tertio objiciunt illud Lue. xvit. Cum fe¬ ceritis /uve omnia, dicite, servi inutiles sumus, quod debuimus facere, fecimus (2). Respondeo, multis modis hunc locum Pa¬ tres exponunt, et sunt omnes egregia; expli¬ cationes, nec ulla contra merita bonorum operum pugnat. Primum (ut exponit sanctus Ambrosius lib. vm. in Lucam) jubet Dominus, ut agno¬ scamus id, quod sumus cx nobis : a Agno¬ scenda, inquit, gratia, sed non ignoranda na¬ tura, ctc. » Ilaque ex nobis servi inutiles su¬ mus, inepti prorsus ad ea implenda, qtuc Dominus praecipit : tamen per ejus gratiam utiles efficimur, juxta illud II ad Timotb.it. Qui emundaverit se ab his, erit vas in honorem sancti ficatum [et utile Domino ad omne opus bonum paratum (3). Secundo ut exponit Beda, jubemur agno¬ scere, nihil nos Deo utilitatis adferre, sed quidquid boni facimus, id nobis utile es¬ se, non Deo, qui bonorum nostrorum non eget. Quare summa cum humilitate Deo ser¬ vire debemus, et gratias agere, quod obse¬ quium nostrum acceptare voluerit. Tertio ut exponit sanctus Augustinus serm. 3. de verbis Domini, servi inutiles dici pos¬ sumus, cum omnia divina mandata servavi¬ mus, quoniam nihil facimus ultra id, quod de¬ bemus, et nihil inde justae mercedis petere possemus, nisi Deus liberali pacto nobiscum convenire voluisset. Nam cx conditione man¬ cipia Dei sumus, et si velit, potest nos abs¬ que ullo prannio ad omnia opera, qutecum- que illi placuerint, obligaie. Ilonc igitur conditionem nostram ad humilitatem conser¬ vandam, vult nos Christus agnoscere. Quam¬ vis cx gratuito pacto, quod nobiscum lacere dignatus est, possumus cum Apostolo dicere •' Reposita est mihi corona justitiv, quam 'reddet mihi in illa die justus judex. Nam et Dominus ipse dicit : Nonne ex denario convenisti me- cum ? tolle quod tuum est, et vade. « 0 magna (inquit Augustinus) bonitas Dei, cui cum pro conditione reddere debeamus obsequium, utpote servi Domino, amicitiarum nobis pra- mia repromittit, ut a nobis obsequia debiUe servitutis extorqueat. » (h Isai, LY. !; Dan. 1\, -|8. - (2) Lue. Wll, 10. - (3) l| Tini. II, ?!, CAPUT V. 333 Quarto, ut exponit sanctus Joannes Chry- sostomus homilia in illud : « Elatum est cor Ozia ». non dicit Dominus, cum feceritis lnuc omnia, servi inutiles estis ; sed ait : dicite, quia servi inutiles sumus, ubi vult nos dc nobis post benefacta humiliter sentire, ne superbia corrumpat opera bona, qua fe¬ cimus. Sed cum nos dicemus, servus inuti¬ lis sum, dicet ille :Euge serve bone, et fidelis, quia in pauca fuisti fidelis, supra multa te constituam, intra in gaudium Domini tui. Absolute enim non esse inutiles eos, qui bene operantur, perspicum est ex hac ipsa para¬ bola de talentis, Matth. xxv. Nam servum inu¬ tilem vocat Christus eum solum, qui talentum abscondit, et quem projici jubet in tenebras exteriores. Alios autem, qui talenta multipli¬ caverant, ut servos utiles laudat, et remu¬ nerat. Quarto objiciunt illud Apostoli ad Homan. vi. Stipendium peccati mors, gratia Dei vita aeterna (1). Hinc enim videntur aperte exclu¬ di merita, tum quia vita aterna non dicitur stipendium bonorum operum, sicut dicitur mors ater na stipendium peccati, tum quia simpliciter dicitur gratia, nam ut idem Apo¬ stolus ait ad Rornan. iv. Et qui operatur , merces non imputatur secundum gratiam, sed secundum debitum (2). Respondeo : IIoc argumentum diligenter solvit sanctus Augustinus in epist. 105. in Enchirid. cap. 107. et pracipuc in libro de gratia et libero arbitrio, cap. 8. et 9. Duo autem dicit, primo, potuisse Apostolum recte dicere, stipendium justitia vita ater- na, sicut dixit, stipendium peccati mors. Quae sancti Augustini confessio causam ad¬ versariorum penitus jugulat. Secundo, non esse dictum, stipendium justitiae vita aeterna, sicut stipendium peccati mors, ne quis exi¬ stimaret, ita nos ex nobis habere justitiam, sicut ex nobis habemus peccata. Itaque gra¬ tia dicitur vita aeterna, non quia non est merces meriti, sed quia ipsa merita habe¬ mus ex gratia. In illis autem verbis ad ltom. iv. Ei qui operatur , e/c., loquitur Apostolus de operibus, quae sine gratia Dei, solis viri¬ lius liberi arbitrii fieri posse credebant ii, quos eo loco refellit. Quinto objiciunt illud adRoman. vni. Non sunt condignae passiones hujus temporis, etc. (3). Sed hoc jam solutum est cap. 3. in argum. fi. pro meritis. (!) Rom. VI, 23. — (?) Rom. IV, 4. - (3)Rom. Sexto, objiciunt illud ad Philippen. iii. Hscc omnia , quae mihi erant lucra , propter Christum detrimentum feci, et arbitror ut stercora , ut Christum lucrifaciam ; et ut inve¬ niar in illo, non habens meam justitiam, qiue ex lege est , sed illam , quae ex fide est Jesu Christi. Huc etiam addi possunt illa: Gratia salvati estis per fidem non ex operibus, ad Ephes. ii. Et : Non ex operibus justitiae, qua; fecimus nos, sed secundum suam magnam mi¬ sericordiam salvos nos fecit , adTit. iii (4). Respondeo : Primum, hac omnia loca fru¬ stra ad feruntur contra merita salutis aterna, cum Apostolus loquatur de salute inchoata, qua habetur in hac vita, per gratiam justifi¬ cationis, et regenerationis, non de salute per¬ fecta, qua reposita est nobis in coelis. Nos autem non contendimus, salutem inchoa¬ tam, id est, justificationem haberi per jnc- rita, sed gratis eam donari gratissime con¬ fitemur. Deinde loquitur Apostolus de justitia et operibus, qua fidem et gratiam Dei prace- dunt, nam ideo fidei et gratia illam opponit, cum ait : Ut inveniar in illo non habens me¬ am justitiam, quae ex lege est, sed illam, quae ex fide est Christi. Et : Gratia estis salvati per fidem, non ex operibus, etc. Istam autem justitiam, et opera nos quoque despicimus, ct merita vita aterna non esso concedi¬ mus. Denique adversarii, qui hac loca, ac pra- cipuc primum locum ex cap. iii. ad Philipp. impudentissime referunt ad opera bona, qua ex fide et gratia Dei a sanctis et justis homi¬ nibus fiunt, deberent vel unum ex tota ve¬ tustate producere, qui ea loca ita exposuis¬ set. Certe sanctus Augustinus inlib. ii. de pec. merit. Et remiss. cap. 13. dicit, Apostolum vocare detrimenta et stercora, opera bona, qua fecerat in Judaismo, quoniam talia vide¬ ri poterant in comparatione eminentissima justitia, qua habetur per fidem Christi, in Ecclesia Catholica. Ubi justitiam Christiano¬ rum non solum non vult appellari detrimen¬ ta vel stercora, sed eminentissimam justi¬ tiam. nominat, iramo nec justitiam, qua erat in judaismo, absolute damnat eo loco, sed tantum in comparatione Christiana justitia. Idem vero Augustinus eum locum diligen¬ tius tractans in lib.m.adBonifacium, in libro de gratia et libero arbitrio, et in serm. 15. VIII, 18. - (4) PliiJ. UT, 7 ; Epii, II, fi; Tit. 111. 5. LIBER V. de verbis Apostoli, damnat quidem abso¬ lute justitiam illam, quam Apostolus vocat detrimenta et stercora, sed ideo damnat quia docet illam esse justitiam superborum, qui suis solis viribus existimant sine fide et gratia Christi se posse implere justitiam. Justitiam enim ex fide et gratia, ubique Au¬ gustinus laudat, et meritum vitae aeternae esse docet. Quod vero Kemnitius notat, Apostolum in praesenti dixisse, « Arbitror ut stercora», quasi damnare voluerit impuritatis eam etiam justitiam, quam ex fide Christi, cum es¬ set Apostolus, faciebat : puerile est, nam il¬ lud «(Arbitror)» non respicit opera presen- tia, sed presens judicium de operibus praete¬ ritis, atque in judaismo factis. ' Septimo, objiciunt illud ad Roman. iii. Exclusa est gloriatio tua, per quam legem ? factorum ? non, sed per legem fidei (1). At si fi¬ des excludit omnem gloriationem, quae ex operibus nascitur ; certe excludit omnia me¬ rita. Si quis enim vera merita haberet, de il¬ lis jure gloriari posset. Respondeo, fides excludit gloriationem eo¬ rum, qui in se gloriantur, quasi suis viribus jus¬ titiam facere possint, et a selhabeant, si quid boni habent: non autem excludit gloriatio¬ nem eorum, qui in Domino gloriantur, id est, qui justitiam et merita, Deo juvante, habere se posse confidunt. Alioqui non diceret Apo¬ stolus : Qui gloriatur, in Domino glorietur. Itaque sanctus Bernardusserm. 13. in Cant. « Haec nobis, inquit, gloriatio non solum non prohibetur, sed etiam suadetur, cum dicitur gloriam ab invicem quaeritis, et glo¬ riam, quae a solo Deo est, non vultis ». Octavo objiciunt, fieri Christo magnam in¬ juriam, si meritis nostris aliquid tribuatur, quasi non sufficiant Christi merita. Respondeo : Hoc argumentum, quanto ab adversariis magis rhetorice, vel potius tra¬ gice amplificatur, tantum, cum discutitur, inanius invenitur. Siquidem merita justorum non opponuntur meritis Christi, sed ab illis nascuntur, et quidquid ipsa justorum merita laudis habent, id totum redundat in laudem meritorum Christi. Ipse enim vitis, non pal¬ mites, et sicut palmes non potest ferre fru¬ ctum, nisi manserit in vite, sic et nos nihil possumus sine Christo facere. Et sicut nemo unquam ita desipuit, ut diceret detrahi de gloria vitis, si palmites ipsius multum fru¬ ctum adferant. Ra nemo, nisi plane stultus, dicere potest detrahi de gloria Christi, si servi ejus, per gratiam ejus, per spiritum ejus, per fidem, et charitatem ab ipso inspi¬ ratam, bona opera faciant, quse ita vere sint justa, ut eis debeatur a justo judice corona justitiae. At, inquiunt, si requiruntur merita homi¬ num, non igitur sufficiebant merita Christi. Non ita est. Nam merita hominum non re¬ quiruntur propter insufficientiam meritorum Christi, sed propter maximam eorum effica¬ ciam. Meruerunt enim Christi opera apud Deum, non solum ut salutem consequere¬ mur, sed etiam ut eam per merita propria consequeremur. Sive (quod est idem) non solum aeternam salutem, sed etiam virtutem merendi nobis meruerunt. Sicut etiam quod Deus sole utatur ad mundum illustrandum, igne ad calefaciendum, aura et pluviis ad refrigerandum, non est in causa imbecillitas Dei, quasi non posset ipse per se, absque sole, igne, aura mundum illustrare, calefa¬ cere, refrigerare : sed omnipotentia ejus, qua potuit non solum ista facere, sed etiam rebus creatis vim faciendi tribuere. At saltem, inquiunt, dividitur gloria inter Deum et hominem, si non solis ejus meritis, sed etiam nostris salutem assequimur. Neque id verum est. Nam merita nostra, dona sunt Christi, et quamvis in opere bono, quod nos, Deo juvante, facimus, nihil sit nostrum, quod non sit Dei, neque aliquid sit Dei, quod non sit nostrum, sed totum faciat Deus, et totum faciat homo : tamen ratio, cur id opus sit dignum vita aeterna, tota pendet a gratia. Denique, nos ipsi non minus Christo su¬ mus obstricti, nec minus salutem nosHam totam, atque integram illi acceptam referi¬ mus, cum illam meritis nostris acquirimus, quam si absque ullis meritis nostris illam ac¬ ciperemus : iramo multo magis nunc illi nos debitores esse fatemur, quandoquidem non solum per ejus gratiam salvamur, sed etiam per eamdem nobilissimo modo, honorificen- tissimoque salvamur. (1) Rom. III, 27. CAPUT VI.