Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Members of the Church · On the Laity or Secular Persons (Book III)
Chapter 8: That Principate or Dominion Can Exist Among the Impious
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. III, De Laicis sive Saecularibus (De Membris Ecclesiae, Book III), On the Laity or Secular Persons (On the Members of the Church, Book III). 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).
What we proposed in the second place — namely, that a principate can exist among the impious — we will be able to prove easily. And first there occurs the error of Armachanus, who (Book X of the Armenian Questions, chapter 4) teaches that the chief title of dominions is the grace of God, or justice and charity; that all other titles are founded on this; and that those who lack the justice and grace of God have no true dominion. The same error at the same time John Wycliffe taught, whom Thomas Waldensis excellently refutes (Book II of the Doctrinal of the Faith, chapter 81 and following, to the end of the book); and afterward John Hus asserted the same error, as is plain from the Council of Constance (session 15).
Their arguments were three. The first, from the Scripture of Hosea 8: “They have reigned, but not by me; they have been princes, and I knew not; of their silver and their gold they have made themselves idols, that they might perish.” Where the Lord disapproves the dominions of wicked kings, and says that He did not give them to them, and gives the cause, because they made themselves idols. The second argument, from that of Ecclesiasticus 10: “A kingdom is transferred from nation to nation because of injustices.” The third argument, from reason: because there is no dominion but from God, and God would in no way confer dominions on the wicked, both because they are His enemies, and also because He would seem to approve the abuse; for all the impious abuse their power.
This error is easily refuted. First, by the Scriptures. Wisdom 6: “Power is given you by the Lord, and, being ministers of His kingdom, you have not judged rightly,” and so on. Isaiah 45: “Thus saith the Lord to my anointed Cyrus,” and so on. Jeremiah 27: “I have given,” saith the Lord, “all these lands into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon,” and so on. And Daniel 2: “Thou art King of kings, and the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom,” and so on. And Romans 13 and 1 Peter 2: the Apostles Peter and Paul teach that the power of kings is from God, and that they are to be obeyed — when yet there were then no kings but infidels.
Secondly, from the Council of Constance (sessions 8 and 15), where the Church condemned this error.
Thirdly, from Augustine, who (Book V On the City of God, chapter 21) says: “Since these things are so, let us not attribute the power of giving kingdom and empire to any but the true God, who gives felicity in the kingdom of heaven only to the pious, but earthly kingdom both to the pious and to the impious, as it pleases Him, to whom nothing pleases unjustly.” And below: “He who gave to Marius, He also to Caesar; He who to Augustus, He also to Nero; He who to Vespasian, father or son, most agreeable emperors, He also to Domitian most cruel; and, that it be not necessary to go through them one by one, He who to Constantine the Christian, He also to the Apostate Julian.”
Fourthly, by reason. For the foundation of dominion is not grace, but nature; for man, because he is made to the image of God, and accordingly is endowed with mind and reason, therefore has dominion over inferior things, as can be deduced from Genesis 1; but nature remains in infidels, though they lack grace; therefore they too can have true dominions. Besides, since grace and justice are most hidden, and no one knows of himself or of another whether he is truly just, if grace were the title of dominions, it would follow that no dominion is certain; from which would arise an incredible confusion and disturbance among men. Nor do their arguments conclude anything.
To the first I say that by those words bad kings are not disapproved by God, but it is disapproved that the Jews wished to have a king when God was their king; for, as Blessed Jerome expounds, in this chapter 8 Hosea sets out the causes for which the people of Israel was to be handed over into captivity, and says one is that they wished to have a king, another that they made themselves idols. And that they sinned greatly in wishing to have a king is plain from 1 Kings 12, where, after Saul was chosen king, Samuel says thus to the people: “Stand and see this great thing which the Lord will do in your sight. Is it not wheat-harvest today? I will call upon the Lord, and He will send thunder and rain; and you shall know and see that you have done a great evil to yourselves in the sight of the Lord, in asking for yourselves a king.”
To the second I say that kingdoms are transferred from nation to nation on account of injustice, because God, on account of the sins of kings, often gives victory to their enemies; but not that, by the very fact that they sin, they have lost the right of the kingdom.
To the third I say that God’s benignity befits Him to do good even to His enemies, as we read in the Gospel (Matthew 5): “He maketh His sun to rise upon the good and the bad, and raineth upon the just and the unjust.” Nor does He on that account approve the abuse. For He does not give kingdoms to the impious that they may abuse them, but either that, invited by His beneficence, they may be converted from their sins — as Blessed Jerome expounded on that of Isaiah 45: “Thus saith the Lord to my anointed Cyrus: I will go before thee, and will humble the great ones of the earth; I will break the gates of brass, and burst the bars of iron, and give thee hidden treasures and the concealed things of secret places, that thou mayest know that I am the Lord,” and so on — or that He may reward certain good deeds of theirs, as Blessed Augustine teaches (Book V On the City of God, chapter 15); or, finally, because sometimes the sins of the peoples deserve this, as the same Augustine teaches (Book V On the City of God, chapter 19), from that of Job 34: “Who maketh a hypocrite to reign for the sins of the people.” The same Augustine, however (Book XIX On the City of God, chapter 21), says that among infidels there can be no justice, nor rights, nor a true people or commonwealth, and so on; but he calls true justice and true rights those which lead to eternal life. See Book V Against Julian, chapter 3.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT VIII. Principatum sive dominium in impiis esse posse. Quod secundo loco proposuimus, videlicet principatum in impiis esse posse, facile pro¬ bare poterimus. Ac primum occurrit error Armacani, qui lib. X. quaestionum Armeni- carum, cap. 4. docet, titulum praecipuum dominiorum esse gratiam Dei, sive justitiam et charitatem : alios autem titulos omnes in hoc fundari, et qui justitia et gratia Dei ca¬ rent, nullum habere verum dominium. Eum- dem errorem eodem tempore docuit Joannes Wiclef, quem refellit optime Thomas Wal- densislib. II. doctrinalis fidei, cap. 81. et seq. usque in finem libri, et postmodum errorem eumdem asseruit Joannes Huss, ut patet ex Concilio Constantiensi, sess. XV. Argumenta eorum erant tria. Primum ex Scriptura Oseae VIII : Ipsi regnaverunt , et non ex me, Principes exstiterunt , et non cognovi, argentum suum et aurum suum fecerunt sibi idola, ut interirent (2). Ubi Dominus improbat dominia improborum Regum, etdicit, se non dedisse ea illis, et causam reddit, quia idola sibi fecerunt. Secundum argumentum ex illo Eccles. X : Regnum a Gente in Gentem transfertur propter injustitias (3). Argumen¬ tum tertium, ex ratione, quia non est Domi¬ nium, nisi a Deo, Deus autem nullo modo conferret dominia improbis, tum quia hostes ejus sunt; tum etiam, quia videretur appro¬ bare abusum ; abutuntur enim omnes impii sua potestate. Hic error facile refellitur. Primo, Scriptu¬ ris Sapient. VI : A Domino data est potestas vobis, et cum essetis ministri regni illius, non recte judicastis etc. Isaiae XLV : Hcec dicit Dominus Christo meo Cyro etc. Hieremise XXVII : Ego dedi, inquit Dominus, omnes terras istas in manu Nabuchodonosor Regis Babylonis etc. Et Daniel. II : Tues Rex Regum, et Deus coeli dedit regnum tibi etc (4). Et Roman. XIII, et I. Pet. II, Apostoli Petrus et Paulusdocent, Regum potestatem esse a Deo, et illis obediendum, cum tamen nulli tunc essent Reges, nisi infideles. Secundo, ex Concilio Constantiensi, sess. VIII. et XV. ubi hunc errorem Ecclesia damnavit. Tertio, ex Augustino, qui lib. V. de civit. Dei, cap. 21 : « Quse cum ita sint, inquit, non tribuamus dandi regni atque imperii potestatem, nisi Deo vero, qui dat felicita¬ tem in regno coelorum solis piis, regnum vero terrenum et piis et impiis, sicut ei pla¬ cet, cui nihil injuste placet. »Et infra : « Qui dedit, inquit, Mario, ipse et Ceesari, qui Au¬ gusto, ipse et Neroni, qui Vespasiano vel patri, vel filio, suavissimis Imperatoribus, ipse et Domitiano crudelissimo, et ne per singulos ire necesse sit, qui Constantino Christiano, ipse et Apostatae Juliano. » Quarto, ratione : Nam dominii fundamen¬ tum non est gratia, sed natura: homo enim quia factus est ad imaginem Dei, proinde mente ac ratione praeditus est, ideo domina¬ tur rebus inferioribus, ut ex I. cap. Genes, deduci potest : at natura in infidelibus ma¬ net, licet gratia careant, igitur et dominia vera habere possunt. Ad haec, cum gratia et (1) Luc. XXII, 25. — (2) Osese VIII, 4. — (3) EccL X, 8.- — (4) Sap. VI. 4; Isai, XLV, 1 ; Jerem. XXVII, 6; Dan. II, 37, CAPUT IX. 15 justitia sit occultissima, et nemo sciat de se, vel de alio, an sit vere justus, si gratia es¬ set titulus dominiorum, sequeretur, nullum dominium esse certum. Ex quo nasceretur incredibilis confusio et perturbatio inter ho¬ mines. Neque argumenta eorum aliquid concludunt. Ad primum dico, illis verbis non impro¬ bari a Deo Reges malos, sed improbari, quod Judaei voluerint habere Regem, cum Deus es¬ set Rex eorum; nam, ut exponit B. Hierony¬ mus, in hoc cap. VIII. explicat Osee causas, propter quas populus Israel tradendus erat in captivitatem, et unam dicit esse, quia vo¬ luerunt habere Regem; alteram, quod fece¬ runt sibi idola. Quod autem valde peccave¬ rint, volentes Regem habere, perspicuum est ex lib. I. Reg. cap. XII. ubi post electum Saulem in Regem, Samuel sic ait ad popu¬ lum : State et videte rem istam grandem , quam facturus est Dominus in conspectu vestro. Num- quidnon messis tritici est hodie’} Invocabo Do¬ minum. , et dabit voces et pluvias; et scietis, et videbitis, quia grande malum feceritis vobis in conspectu Domini, petentes super vos Re¬ gem (1). Ad secundum dico, transferri regna de Gente in Gentem propter injustitiam, quia Deus propter peccata Regum saepe donat victoriam hostibus eorum, sed non propte- rea eo ipso, quod peccant, jus regni amise¬ runt. Ad tertium dico, Dei benignitatem decere, ut etiam hostibus suis benefaciat, ut legimus in Evangelio Matth. V : Solem suum oriri facit super bonos et malos , et pluit super justos et injustos (2). Neque propterea approbat abusum. Non enim donat regna impiis, ut eis abutantur, sed vel ut beneficentia ejus invitati convertantur a peccatis suis, ut B. Hieronymus exposuit in illud Isai. XLV : Haec dicit Dominus Christo meo Cyro : Ego ante te ibo, et gloriosos terree humiliabo , portas cereas conteram, et vectes ferreos confringam, et dabo tibi thesauros absconditos, et arcana secretorum, ut scias, quia ego Dominus etc. (3) vel ut remuneret quaedam benefacta eorum utB. Augustinus docet lib. V. de civit. Dei, cap. 15. vel denique, qui interdum hoc me¬ rentur 'peccata populorum, ut idem August. docet lib. V. de civit. Dei, cap. 19. ex illo Job. XXXI Y : Qui regnare facit hominem hy¬ pocritam propter peccata populi (4). Idem tamen Augustin. lib. XIX. de civit. Dei, cap. 21. dicit, apud infideles non posse esse jus¬ titiam, nec jura, nec verum populum, aut Rempubl. etc. sed vocat veram justitiam, et vera jura, quae ducunt ad vitam aeternam. Vide lib. V. in Julian. cap. 3.