Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Members of the Church · On Monks (Book II)
Chapter 4: On the Confirmation of the Religious Orders
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. II, De Monachis (De Membris Ecclesiae, Book II), On Monks (On the Members of the Church, 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).
There arises in this place a certain brief doubt, whether the institution of religious orders is free, or whether it needs the confirmation of the Supreme Pontiff; but the solution is easy. For two things are found in every religious order: the very essence of the religious life, which is placed in the three vows; and the determination of that essence to a fixed manner of living. And indeed the essence of religious life has its foundation in the Gospel, as we shall demonstrate a little later; and therefore on this side the religious orders do not need the approval of the Pontiffs. But that various manner in which the three vows can be undertaken does not shine forth so clearly in the Gospel, and depends not a little on human prudence and direction. Wherefore it can need the confirmation of the Pontiff, and now in fact, on account of the positive law prohibiting new religious orders, it altogether needs it. And so Anthony, Basil, Augustine, Benedict were authors of religious orders, and are not read to have sought any approval from the Pontiff, because there did not yet exist an ecclesiastical law commanding it. But this was the occasion of establishing the new law.
About the year of the Lord 1170, the Poor Men of Lyons instituted a certain religious order, but with many superstitions and heresies mixed in. On which account they were condemned of heresy by Lucius III, successor of Alexander III, and their sect reproved, as the Abbot of Ursperg writes in the Chronicle, in the year 1212. But they afterward — that is, in the time of Innocent III — approaching the Apostolic See, long insisted, as the same author says, that they might be reconciled and their religious order confirmed; yet they did not obtain it.
Thence, then, it came about that Blessed Francis and Blessed Dominic, wishing likewise to institute new orders, and fearing lest there befall them what they saw had befallen the Waldensians, were unwilling to trust their own judgment, but sought confirmation from the Pontiff, and obtained it. And a little after, in the general Lateran Council, Innocent III, considering the danger which threatened the Church if it were lawful for each one to devise a new religious order, forbade that thenceforth any new order be instituted — namely, without the approval of the Apostolic See — as we have in the last chapter, De Religiosis Domibus. Which decree Gregory X renewed in the Council of Lyons, as we have in the single chapter, De Religiosis Domibus, in the Sixth. And hence that began to be necessary which before was free.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPDT IV. De confirmatione Religionum. Oritur hoc loco brevis quaedam dubitatio, an religionum institutio libera sit , an vero egeat summi Pontificis confirmatione , sed facilis est solutio. Duo siquidem in omni re¬ ligione inveniuntur; essentia ipsa religionis, quse in tribus votis sita est : et determinatio illius essentiae ad certum modum vivendi. Et quidem essentia religionum in Evangelio fundamentum habet, ut paulo post demons¬ traturi sumus : proinde ex hac parte non egent religiones Pontificum approbatione. Modus autem ille varius, quo tria vota sus¬ cipi possunt, non ita perspicue in Evangelio elucet, et non parum ex prudentia, et direc¬ tione humana pendet. Quare Pontificis con¬ firmatione indigere potest, et nunc re ipsa, propter jus positivum, novas religiones pro¬ hibens, omnino indiget. Itaque Antonius, Basilius, Augustinus, Benedictus, auctores religionum fuerunt , nec ullam leguntur a Pontifice approbationem quaesivisse, prop- terea quod nondum exstaret jus Ecclesiasti¬ cum id praecipiens. Condendi autem novi ju¬ ris haec fuit occasio. Ad annum Domini circiter 1170. pauperes de Lugduno ordinem quemdam religiosum instituerunt, sed multis admixtis superstitio¬ nibus , et haeresibus. Quocirca a Lucio III, Alexandri III successore, haereseos damnati fuerunt, et secta eorum reprobata, ut scribit Abbas Urspergensis in Chronico, anni 1212. Illi vero postmodum, id est, tempore Inno- centii III, sedem Apostolicam adeuntes diu institerunt , ut idem auctor ait, ut reconci¬ liarentur, et religio ipsorum confirmaretur, nec tamen impetrarunt. Inde igitur factum est , ut B. Franciscus, et B. Dominicus volentes similiter novos or¬ dines instituere, et metuentes, ne sibi acci¬ deret, quod videbant accidisse Waldensibus, noluerunt confidere suo judicio, sed a Pon¬ tice confirmationem petiverunt, et impetra¬ verunt. Paulo autem post, in Concilio Late¬ ranensi generali considerans Innocentius III periculum, quod imminebat Ecclesiae, si uni¬ cuique liceret novam religionem excogitare, prohibuit, ne deinceps ullus novus ordo ins¬ titueretur, nimirum sine approbatione Apos- tolicae Sedis, ut habemus cap. fin. de Relig. dom. Quod decretum renovavit Gregorius X, in Concilio Lugdunensi, ut habemus cap. Unico , de Relig. dom. in VI. Atque hinc coepit esse necessarium, quod antea erat li¬ berum.