Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Members of the Church · On the Laity or Secular Persons (Book III)
Chapter 19: That Catholics Cannot Be Reconciled with Heretics
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).
The third error is that of George Cassander, in his book On the Office of a Pious Man, where he teaches that princes ought to find a way of peace between Catholics, Lutherans, Calvinists, and so on; but meanwhile, until they find it, ought to permit each one his own faith, provided all receive the Scripture and the Apostles’ Creed. For thus all are true members of the Church, although they dissent in particular dogmas. Similar things the “peacemakers” taught of old, at the instance of the Emperor Zeno, on which see Evagrius (Book III, chapters 14 and 30). Likewise Apelles, who in Eusebius (Book V of the history, chapter 13) said that the reasoning of faith is not to be discussed, but that it is enough to believe in the Crucified. This is a manifest error, and against it, of the Catholic doctors, John of Louvain has written, and of the heretics, John Calvin.
Now this opinion can easily be refuted. For first, Catholics, Lutherans, and Calvinists cannot be reconciled in that way; for in the very Creed we do not agree. For example, in the article “He descended into hell,” we understand most diverse things; for we believe that the soul of Christ, separated from the body, according to its substance descended to the limbo of the Fathers; but of the heretics, some will have Christ’s descent into hell to be nothing else than that He was buried; others, that He suffered the pains of hell. Similarly the article “I believe in the holy Church” we understand in diverse ways. And that too, “the communion of Saints”; for concerning the individual Sacraments there are controversies. Finally, about that, “the forgiveness of sins,” we most greatly dissent.
Cassander will say: it is enough that all confess the Creed to be true, and receive it.
On the contrary: first, the Creed is one, and faith is not in the words but in the sense; therefore we do not have the same Creed if we differ in its explanation. Besides, if it sufficed to receive the words of the Creed, almost none of the ancient heretics would have been justly condemned. For the Arians, Novatians, Nestorians, and almost all the others received the words of the Apostles’ Creed; but because there was dissension in the sense, therefore they were condemned and cast out of the Catholic Church.
Secondly, Cassander’s foundation is false; for Lutherans and Calvinists cannot be called true members of the Church, even if they agreed with us in the Creed; for besides that faith there is required subjection to the lawful head of the Church constituted by Christ, and communion with the other members. For the Church is one visible body, and accordingly has a visible head and members; nor can that be called a member which is separated from the head and the rest of the body. Certainly Aerius agreed with the Catholics in the Creed even as to sense, yet because he would not be subject to the bishop and communicate with the other members, he is placed by Epiphanius and Augustine in the Catalogue of Heretics; and Cyprian (Book IV, letter 2) says that Novatian was outside the Church, because he would not be subject to the Pontiff Cornelius, even though he had introduced no other heresy.
Thirdly, Cassander disputes as though between Catholics, Lutherans, and Calvinists there were only dissensions about human rites and ceremonies; but there are many dogmas of the greatest moment in which we dissent, and which are not had expressly in the Creed, and on account of which no peace can be hoped between Catholics and Lutherans. For, for example, we say that the Mass is the most divine worship of God; they say it is a horrible idolatry. Similarly to invoke the Saints is to us piety, to them impiety, and so on.
Fourthly, the holy Fathers taught us to keep inviolate not only the Creed of faith, but also all the other dogmas of faith, though they seem minute, and in no way to suffer them to be changed on account of heretics. In Galatians 2 Paul says that he would not yield even for an hour to the false brethren. And when of old the Arians asked of the Catholics that they at least omit one word, which is not had in the Scripture nor in the Apostles’ Creed, or change one letter — that is, that they should not say homoousion but homoiousion — and, if this were done, promised peace, the Catholics refused, and wrote to the Emperor that it was wicked to change anything of things already defined, and that if any of the just sanctions were changed, peace would not on that account follow; for there could be no peace among those who knew not the laws of peace. See Theodoret (Book II of the history, chapters 18 and 19), or the Tripartite (Book V, chapters 21 and 33). And that this was true was made plain in the Council of Ariminum; for when the simpler Catholics, deceived by the Arians, had decreed that the word homoousion was to be removed, at once the Arians proclaimed through the whole world that they had won; and, not content to have taken away the word homoousion and substituted for it homoiousion, a little after they transformed the very homoiousion into heteroousion, that is, of unlike substance, as Theodoret relates (Book II of the history, chapter 21).
Hence Basil, to the prefect of the Emperor Valens asking him to yield to the times and not suffer so many Churches to be troubled on account of a small subtlety of dogmas, answered: “Those who are nourished on the divine words do not suffer even one syllable of the divine dogmas to be corrupted, but for these, if it come to that, embrace even all forms of death.” See Theodoret (Book IV, chapter 17, of the Ecclesiastical History). With the same constancy were endowed Eustathius and Sylvanus, to whom, when the Emperor threatened exile unless they abrogated the word homoousion, answered: “Thou hast power to punish, but we do not destroy the statutes of the Fathers.” See the Tripartite History (Book V, chapter 24).
Finally Gelasius (in the letter to Euphemianus), to a heretic asking that the Pope condescend to them — that is, remit something of the Catholic religion for the sake of peace — elegantly mocked his petition. “But when,” he says, “thou sayest that we ought to condescend to you, meanwhile thou showest that you already descend, or have descended. Whence, I ask, or whither is this descent? Namely, from some higher place, cast down to the lower — you see, know, and do not deny that you have fallen from Catholic and apostolic communion to heretical and condemned; but, remaining even in a higher seat, you wish us to be impelled, you invite us to condescend with you to the lowest from the highest; we ask you to ascend with us to the highest from the lowest.”
Fifthly, it cannot be free to believe in any one dogma without, by the same reasoning, its having to be free in all, even in those contained in the Apostles’ Creed; for there is one undoubted and certain rule of faith in all things that are believed, namely the word of God explained by the Church. If therefore I believe the Church delivering to me the Apostles’ Creed — which I do not know from elsewhere to be the Apostles’, except because the Church says so — by the same reasoning I ought to believe that the Saints are to be invoked, because the same Church says this; or if I can not believe this, by the same reasoning I can not believe that that Creed is the Apostles’.
Sixthly, this opinion of Cassander is new, and first devised by himself, as he confesses at the beginning; it ought therefore to be held suspect. For, as Vincent of Lérins beautifully teaches (in his little work against profane novelties), what is new cannot be free from suspicion, since the true faith is one and most ancient.
Seventhly, this opinion makes the true Church wholly hidden and invisible; nay, composed of flatterers and dissemblers only. For Cassander says that two things are required for the true Church, faith in Christ and peace with men; and thence deduces that those who hostilely persecute Catholics and Lutherans are not of the Church, but only those who have peace with all. Therefore those who are of the Church can only be hidden, and such as feign with Catholics that they are enemies of the Lutherans, and with Lutherans that they are enemies of the Catholics. For Catholics do not suffer in their flock any who show by any external sign that they favor the Lutherans; among the Lutherans too, although in the same provinces all sects are permitted, yet no sect suffers in its flock the friends of other sects, as is well known. Therefore these pious and peaceable men are necessarily all feigned and dissembling, professing one thing with the mouth and hiding another in the heart, and like Herod, who with the heathen was a heathen, with the Jews a Jew; for he both erected temples to Caesar and at the same time to the true God, as Josephus relates (Book XV of the Antiquities, chapters 13 and 14).
Add that Cassander confesses these his colleagues to be few and hidden; but from this it appears that they cannot constitute the Church; for the Church is so manifest and visible that by the Lord (Matthew 5) it is called a city set upon a mountain. Finally, the true Church cannot be without pastors (Ephesians 4); but these hidden men have no pastors, nor can have, while they thus remain hidden; accordingly they have no Church.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XIX. Non posse conciliari Catholicos cum haere¬ ticis. Tertius error est Georgii Cassandri in li¬ bro de officio pii viri, ubi docet, debere Principes invenire rationem pacis inter Ca¬ tholicos, Lutheranos, Calvinistas etc. Sed interim dum non inveniunt, debere permit¬ tere unicuique suam fidem, modo omnes recipiant Scripturam et Symbolum Aposto- licum. Sic enim omnes sunt vera Ecclesiae membra, licet in particularibus dogmatibus dissentiant. Similia docuerunt olim pacifi¬ cantes, auctore Zenone Imperatore, de qua re vide Evagrium, lib. III. cap. 14. et 30. Item Apelles, qui apud Eusebium lib. V, hist. cap. 13. dicebat, non esse discutiendam rationem fidei, sed sat esse credere in cruci¬ fixum. Hic est manifestus error, et contra eum scripsit ex Catholicis Doctoribus Joan- nes a Lovanio, ex haereticis Joannes Calvi¬ nus. Potest autem facile refelli haec sententia ; primum enim, non possunt Catholici, Lu- therani, et Calvinistee eo modo conciliari; nam in ipso Symbolo non convenimus, exempli gratia, per articulum : Descendit ad inferos, diversissima intelligimus ; nos enim credimus, Christi animam a corpore separa¬ tam, secundum substantiam suam descen¬ disse ad limbum Patrum ; haereticorum alii volunt descendisse Christum ad inferos, ni¬ hil esse aliud, quam sepultum fuisse; alii passum dolores inferni. Similiter articulum : Credo sanctam Ecclesiam ; diversis modis in¬ telligimus. Et illud etiam : Sanctorum com¬ munionem; nam de singulis Sacramentis sunt controversiae. Denique de illo : Remissionem peccatorum, maxime dissentimus. Dicet Cassander , sat est, quod omnes fa¬ temur, Symbolum esse verum, et illud re¬ cipimus. Contra; prima, Symbolum unum est, et non in verbis, sed in sensu est fides, non er¬ go habemus idem Symbolum, si in explica- 36 LIBER III. tione dissidemus. Praeterea si sufficeret ver¬ ba Symboli recipere, nulli fere veterum hae¬ reticorum jure damnati fuissent. Nam Aria- ni, Novatiani, Nestoriani, et alii fere omnes verba Symboli Apostolici recipiebant , sed quia in sensu dissensio erat, ideo damnati, et ab Ec<?lesia Catholica ejecti fuerunt. Secundo, fundamentum Cassandri est fal¬ sum ; non enim possuntvera membra Eccle¬ siae vocari Lutherani et Calvinistae , etiamsi in Symbolo nobiscum convenirent; nam praeter illam fidem requiritur subjectio ad legitimum caput Ecclesiae a Christo constitu¬ tum , et communicatio cum aliis membris ; Ecclesia enim est unum corpus visibile, et proinde caput et membra habet visibilia, nec potest dici membrum , quod a capite et corpore reliquo separatum est. Certe Aerius, etiam quoad sensum in Symbolo convenie¬ bat cum Catholicis, tamen quia nolebat sub- esse Episcopo, et caeteris membris commu¬ nicare, ab Epiphanio et Augustino in Cata¬ logo haereticorum ponitur, et Cyprianus lib. IV, epist. 2. dicit, Novatianum esse extra Ec¬ clesiam , quia non volebat subjici Pontifici Cornelio, etiamsi nullam aliam haeresim in¬ troduxisset. Tertio, Cassander ita disputat, quasi inter Catholicos, Lutberanos, et Calvinistas solum dissensiones sint de ritibus et caeremoniis humanis; at multa dogmata sunt maximi momenti , in quibus dissentimus, quaeque non habentur expresse in Symbolo, et prop¬ ter quae nulla pax sperari potest inter Catho¬ licos, et Lutheranos. Nam verbi gratia, nos dicimus , Missam esse divinissimum cultum Dei; illi dicuntesse horrendam idololatriam: similiter invocare Sanctos nobis est pietas, illis impietas etc. Quarto , sancti Patres docuerunt nos , ut non solum fidei Symbolum , sed etiam om¬ nia alia dogmata fidei, licet minuta videan¬ tur, inviolata servemus , nec propter haere¬ ticos ullo modo immutari patiamur , Galat. II. Paulus dicit, se nec ad horam cedere vo¬ luisse falsis fratribus. Et cum olim Ariani peterent a Catholicis, ut saltem unam vocem omitterent , quae non habetur in Scriptura, nec in Symbolo Apostolorum, vel unam lit¬ teram immutarent, id est, non dicerent ogo- o jatov, sed ouotoOffiov, et si hoc fieret , pacem pollicerentur : Catholici noluerunt, et Impe¬ ratori scripserunt , nefarium esse de rebus jam definitis aliquid immutare; et si quid justarum sanctionum fuerit immutatum, non propterea pacem futuram ; nec enim apud eos pacem esse posse , qui pacis jura nesci¬ rent. Vide Theodoretum lib. II hist. c. 18 et 19. vel Trip.lib. Y,cap. 21 et 33. et hoc ve¬ rum esse patuit in Concilio Ariminensi ; nam cum simplicioresCatholici ab Arianis decep¬ ti, nomen ofioo ilmov, tollendum esse decrevis¬ sent, mox Ariani toto orbe terrarum praedi¬ caverunt, se vicisse; et non contenti sustu¬ lisse vocem opoouo-tov, et pro ea substituisse opoiovatov, paulo post ipsum ouoioufftov, in i re- povaiov, id est, dissimilis substantiae, trans¬ formarunt, ut Theodoretus refert, lib. II hist. cap 21. Hinc Basilius roganti Praefecto Valentis Imperatoris, ut tempori pareret, et non tot Ecclesias, propter parvam dogmatum subti¬ litatem, vexari pateretur, respondit : « Qui divinis innutriti sunt eloquiis , corrumpere de divinis dogmatibus, ne unam quidem syl¬ labam patiuntur , sed pro his, si contingat, omnes etiam mortis species amplectuntur. » Yide Theodoretum lib. IV, cap. 17. Histo¬ riae Ecclesiasticae. Eadem constantia praediti fuerunt Eustathius et Sylvanus, quibus cum Imperator exilium minaretur , nisi vocem baoobinov, abrogarent, responderunt, potesta¬ tem habes puniendi, non tamen nos Patrum statuta destruimus. Vide hist. Tripar. lib. V, cap. 24. Denique Gelasius in epistola ad Euphe- mianum, petenti haeretico, ut Papa eis con¬ descenderet, id est, aliquid remitteret de re¬ ligione Catholica , pacis gratia , eleganter ejus petitionem irrisit. «Cum autem, inquit, dicis, condescendere nos debere vobiscum : interiin jam vos descendere, aut descendisse monstratis. Unde quaeso, vel quo ista des¬ censio est? Utique ex superiore quodam lo¬ co ad inferiora quaeque depositos, a Catholi¬ ca , Apostolicaque communione ad haereti¬ cam, damnatamque prolapsos videtis, cog¬ noscitis, non negatis : sed etiam in superiore manentes sede, vultis impelli, condescende¬ re nos vobiscum invitatis ad imade summis; nos coascendere vos nobiscum rogamus ad summa de imis. » Quinto , non potest liberum esse credere in uno quolibet dogmate, quin eadem ratione liberum esse debeat in omnibus , etiam in iis, quaj in Symbolo Apostolico continentur; nam una est regula fidei indubitata, et certa in omnibus quae creduntur, nimirum verbum Dei per Ecclesiam explicatum. Si ergo cre¬ do Ecclesiae tradenti mihi Symbolum Apos- CAPUT XX. 37 tolorum, quod non scio aliunde esse Aposto¬ lorum, nisi quia Ecclesia dicit; eadem ratio¬ ne credere debeo Sanctos invocandos, quia eadem Ecclesia hoc dicit; vel si hoc possim non credere, eadem ratione possum non cre¬ dere, Symbolum illud esse Apostolorum. Sexto, opinio ista Cassandri nova est , et ab ipso primum excogitata, ut ipse initio fa¬ tetur, suspecta igitur haberi debet Ut enim pulchre docet Vincentius Lirinensis in suo opusculo contra profanas novitates , suspi¬ cione carere non potest, quod novum est ; cum vera fides una sit, et antiquissima. Septimo, ista opinio facit veram Eccle¬ siam omnino occultam et invisibilem; imo ex solis adulatoribus et simulatoribus con¬ flatam; nam Cassander dicit, ad veram Ec¬ clesiam requiri duo , fidem in Christum, et pacem cum hominibus, et inde deducit eos, qui hostiliter insectantur Catholicos , et Lu- theranos, non esse de Ecclesia , sed eos so¬ lum, qui cum omnibus pacem habent : ergo illi, qui sunt de Ecclesia, non possunt esse nisi occulti , et qui cum Catholicis simulant se hostes Lutheranorum, et cum Lutheranis hostes Catholicorum; nam Catholici non pa¬ tiuntur in suo grege ullos, qui ostendant ul¬ lo signo externo , se favere Lutheranis : in¬ ter Lutheranos quoque, etsi permittuntur in iisdem provinciis omnes secta?, tamen nulla secta in suo grege patitur amicos aliarum sectarum, ut notum est : ergo isti pii, et pa¬ cifici viri necessario sunt omnes ficti et si¬ mulati , aliud ore profitentes, aliud in cor¬ de celantes, et similes Herodi, qui cum Eth¬ nicis erat Ethnicus , cum Judaeis Judaeus; nam et Caesari templa erexit , et simul Deo vero, utJosephus refert lib. XV Antiquit. cap. 13 et 14. Adde, quod fatetur Cassander, suos istos collegas esse paucos et occultos , sed hinc apparet, eos non posse Ecclesiam constitue¬ re; nam Ecclesia est manifesta et visibilis adeo, ut a Domino, Matth. V. dicatur civi¬ tas supra montem posita. Denique, ver^Ec- clesia sine Pastoribus esse non potest , ad Ephesios IV. isti autem homines occulti nul¬ los pastores habent , nec habere possunt, dum ita manent occulti ; proinde nullam Ec¬ clesiam habent.