Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Members of the Church · On Monks (Book II)
Chapter 23: The Same Asserted from Those Words of Matthew 19
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).
The second testimony for the vow of continence is Matthew 19, where the Lord says that there are certain eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. And He adds an exhortation: He that can take it, let him take it. For the very appellation of eunuchs plainly indicates a vow. For he is not a eunuch who only is continent, but who cannot but be continent. But the eunuchs of whom it here treats are not compelled to be continent by a defect of nature; for from these Christ Himself distinguished them. Nor are they compelled by any common law (for there is no law forbidding marriage absolutely); therefore this alone remains, that they cannot marry by reason of a particular law taken up of their own accord — that is, by reason of a vow. The same also is gathered from that word, who have made themselves eunuchs; for if the Lord were speaking of those who without any vow live celibate, He would say, who make themselves eunuchs daily, not who have made themselves eunuchs; since, then, He said, who have made themselves eunuchs, He signifies that they, by a single voluntary action, have cut off from themselves all faculty of contracting marriage. And this explanation is confirmed from the Fathers.
Saint Epiphanius (heresy 58, of the Valesii): “Who,” he says, “were these who made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven, but the noble Apostles, and those leading the monastic life, and thereafter the virgins?” And below: “But after these, the Apostles, how many thousands leading the solitary life in the world, both from the monasteries and from the assemblies of virgins, have borne off the glory of this contest.” So he. Who, while he affirms that to make oneself a eunuch for the kingdom of heaven is that which the monks and sacred virgins do, openly signifies that this castration signifies not simple continence, but continence devoted to God.
Saint Jerome (in his commentary on this passage): “Let each one,” he says, “consider his strength, whether he can fulfill the virginal precepts.” So he. But what are the virginal precepts, but the obligation of not marrying, which without a vow is none? And in Book 1 against Jovinian he says that those make themselves eunuchs who offer themselves to God as a most pure temple and a most acceptable holocaust; where too he calls not only celibacy, but celibacy devoted and consecrated to God, a castration.
Saint Augustine (in the book On Holy Virginity, chapter 30), alluding to this passage, where the Lord says of that voluntary castration, He that can take it, let him take it: “You too,” he says, “who have not yet vowed this, who can take it, take it.”
Saint Fulgentius (in the book On the Faith, to Peter, chapter 3): “Whoever,” he says, “shall make himself a eunuch for the kingdom of heaven, and in his heart shall vow continence to God,” etc.; where that (and) pertains to the explanation, there is no doubt.
But Peter Martyr meets this in his book On Celibacy and Vows, and teaches that from this passage a vow of continence cannot be established; for the Apostles, to whom the Lord answered by that similitude of eunuchs, only said, If the case be so with a wife, it is not expedient to marry; but they did not say, It is expedient to vow continence. Wherefore the Lord, if He wished to answer to the point, ought to discourse not of a vow, but of the utility and inconveniences of marriage; therefore by the eunuchs who make themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven He understands those to whom, by a peculiar gift of God, it is expedient not to marry, that they may preach the Gospel more expeditiously. Martyr adds also that force is not to be done on the metaphor of eunuchs, but on the chief scope of the parable itself; just as in the parable of the unjust steward, although the similitude is drawn from him who made himself friends out of another’s goods, yet Christ did not intend to teach this, that we make alms out of another’s goods.
But Peter Martyr labors in vain to obscure and pervert the words of the Lord, sufficiently open and clear; and he errs in many things. First, as to the scope of these words; for even if the Apostles were not speaking of a vow, but only asking whether it were expedient to marry, the Lord yet showed them something more perfect, and so confirmed that it is not expedient to marry, as even to add that it is expedient to bind oneself by a vow to not marrying, as is evident from the metaphor of eunuchs and castration.
Secondly, he errs when he says that force is not to be done on those words, because in parables not all things are set down to signify something. He errs, I say; for although in parables there can sometimes be certain parts which signify nothing, but are set down only to fill out the narration, yet in the words of the Gospel of which we treat there is no parable, but only two metaphorical words — namely, the name “eunuchs” and the name “castration” — which words, unless they contain a fitting similitude, render the whole discourse of Christ inept. But those words do not contain a fitting similitude, unless those who are metaphorically called eunuchs have a voluntary necessity of being continent, as eunuchs properly so called have a natural necessity of being continent.
Thirdly, Martyr errs, because although in prolix parables some part can signify nothing, yet that in which the parable chiefly consists cannot but signify something, unless the parable be most inept. Now in the words of the Gospel of which we now treat, if it were a parable, it would chiefly consist in the words (“eunuchs” and “castration”), as is evident, and accordingly force ought deservedly to be done on these words.
He errs, fourthly, in the example which he brings of the unjust steward. For he thinks it signifies nothing that that steward made himself friends out of another’s goods, whereas in this the parable chiefly consists; for the Lord wishes to teach us that, as that steward, by bestowing much of his master’s goods, procured himself many friends, so we too, out of the goods of our Lord — that is, of God, whose are all things that we have — by making alms may make ourselves many friends in heaven. This only is the difference, that he sinned in bestowing his master’s goods, because he bestowed against his will, and therefore is called the steward of iniquity; but we do not sin in bestowing the goods of our Lord, because this very thing pleases Him greatly, that we liberally expend His goods, since He suffers no loss from this bestowal. And indeed this thought vehemently kindles to the making of alms, that our wealth is another’s — that is, God’s — and yet out of such another’s goods we can procure ourselves the kingdom of heaven.
Lastly, Peter Martyr errs in thinking that here continence is praised only that, free from the care of a wife and children, one may more easily preach the Gospel; which error we refuted above in the disputation on the evangelical counsels. Here I will add only one testimony of Saint Augustine (in the book On Holy Virginity, chapter 23): “What,” he says, “could be said more truly, what more clearly? Christ says, Truth says, the Virtue and Wisdom of God says, that those who by a pious purpose have contained themselves from taking a wife make themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven; and on the contrary, human vanity with impious rashness contends that those who do this only avoid the present necessity of conjugal troubles, and have nothing more in the kingdom of heaven than the rest.” So he.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XXIII.
Idem asseritur ex illis verbis Matth. XIX.
Sunt Eunuchi , qui se castraverunt etc.
Alterum testimonium pro voto continen¬
tiae est, Matth. XIX, ubi Dominus quosdam
esse dicit Eunuchos , qui se castraverunt prop¬
ter regnum coelorum. Et addit cohortationem :
Qui potest capere , capiat { 1). Ipsa enim Eunu¬
chorum appellatio perspicue indicat votum.
Non enim est Eunuchus, qui solum continet,
sed qui non potest non continere. Eunuchi
autem, de quibus hic agitur, non coguntur
continere ex vitio naturae ; nam ab his eos
Christus ipse sejunxit. Neque coguntur lege
aliqua communi (nulla enim lex est prohi¬
bens nuptias absolute) igitur id solum rema¬
net, ut non possint ex lege particulari
sponte assumpta, id est, ex voto. Idem etiam
colligitur ex illo verbo : Qui se castraverunt ;
nam si Dominus loqueretur de his, qui sine
ullo voto ccelibes vivunt, diceret, qui se cas¬
trant quotidie, non qui se castraverunt;
cum ergo dixerit, qui se castraverunt, si¬
gnificat eos unica actione voluntaria ampu¬
tasse sibi omnem facultatem contrahendi
nuptias. Et confirmatur explicatio haec ex
Patribus.
S. Epiphanius haeresi 58 Valesiorum :
« Quinam, inquit, hi fuerint, qui se castra¬
verunt propter regnum coelorum, quam ge¬
nerosi Apostoli, ac monasticam vitam de¬
gentes ; et deinceps virgines ? » Et infra,
«post ipsos vero, Apostolos, quot millia in
mundo solitariam vitam agentes, et a mo¬
nasteriis, et virgineis conventibus hujus cer¬
taminis gloriam abstulerunt. » Haec ille. Qui
dum affirmat, castrare seipsum propter re¬
gnum coelorum id esse, quod ‘Monachi et
sacrae Virgines faciunt, aperte significat,
castrationem hanc non simplicem continen¬
tiam, sed continentiam Deo devotam signi¬
ficare.
S. Hieronymus in commentario hujus
loci : « Unusquisque, inquit, consideret vires
suas, utrum possit virginalia implere prae¬
cepta. » Haec ille. At quae sunt praecepta
virginalia, nisi obligatio non nubendi, quae
(1) Matii. XIX, 2.
CAPUT XXIII.
563
sine voto nulla est? Et lib. I, in Jovinianum
dicit, eos castrare seipsos, qui templum se
Deo purissimum, et holocaustum acceptissi¬
mum offerunt ; ubi quoque non solum coeli¬
batum, sed coelibatum Deo devotum et sa¬
cratum, castrationem vocat.
S. Augustinus lib. de sancta virginitate,
cap. 30. alludens ad hunc locum, ubi Domi¬
nus de castratione ista voluntaria ait: « Qiq
potest capere, capiat. Vos etiam, inquit, qui
hoc nondum vovistis, qui potestis capere,
capite. )>
Sanctus Fulgentius lib. de fide ad Petrum
cap. 3 : « Quisquis, inquit, seipsum castra¬
verit propter regnum coelorum, et in corde
suo continentiam Deo voverit etc. » ubi illud
(Et) ad explicationem pertinere, non du¬
bium est.
Sed occurrit Petrus Martyr in lib. suo de
coelibatu et votis, ac docet, ex hoc loco non
posse votum continentiae statui ; nam Apos¬
toli, quibus Dominus respondit per illam si¬
militudinem Eunuchorum , tantum dixe¬
runt : Si ita est causa cum uxore , non expedit
nubere (I); non autem dixerunt, expedit vo¬
vere continentiam. Quare Dominus si ad
propositum respondere voluit, non de voto,
Sed de utilitate et incommodis conjugii dis¬
serere debuit ; ergo per Eunuchos, qui se
castrant propter regnum coelorum, intelligit
eos, quibus ex peculiari Dei dono expedit
non nubere, ut expeditius Evangelium prae¬
dicent. Addit etiam Martyr, non oportere
vim facere in metaphora Eunuchorum, sed
in scopo praecipuo ipsius parabolae; quem¬
admodum in parabola de villico iniquita¬
tis, etsi ducatur similitudo ab eo qui ex bonis
alienis sibi fecit amicos : non tamen Christus
intendit hoc docere, ut ex bonis alienis
eleemosynas faciamus.
At frustra laborat Petrus Martyr, ut verba
Domini satis aperta et dilucida obscuret et
pervertat ; ac in multis errat. Primum,
quantum ad scopum horum verborum; nam
etiamsi Apostoli non loquerentur de voto,
sed solum quaererent, an expediret nubere,
Dominus tamen aliquid perfectius eis osten¬
dit, et sic confirmavit non expedire nubere,
ut etiam adderet, expedire, voto se obligare
ad non nubendum, ut patet ex metaphora
Eunuchorum et castrationis.
Secundo errat, cum ait, non esse vim fa¬
ciendam in vocibus istis, quod in parabolis
non omnia ponantur ad significandum.
Errat, inquam, nam licet in parabolis esse
possint interdum quaedam partes, quae nihil
significant, sed ponantur solum ad explen¬
dam narrationem, tamen in verbis Evange-
lii, de quibus agimus, nulla est parabola,
sed solum duo verba metaphorica, nimirum,
nomen, Eunuchi, et nomen, Castrationis;
quae verba nisi aptam similitudinem conti¬
neant, tota Christi oratio inepta redditur.
Non continent autem illa verba aptam simi¬
litudinem, nisi illi, qui dicuntur metapho¬
rice Eunuchi, habeant voluntariam necessi¬
tatem continendi, sicut Eunuchi proprie
dicti habent naturalem continendi necessita¬
tem.
Tertio deinde errat Martyr, quia licet in
parabolis prolixis possit aliqua pars nihil si¬
gnificare, tamen id in quo parabola praeci¬
pue consistit, non potest non significare,
nisi ineptissima sit parabola. Jam vero in
verbis Evangelii, de quibus nunc agimus, si
parabola esset, ea praecipue in vocibus (Eu¬
nuchi et Castrationis) consisteret, ut patet,
ac proinde merito in his vocibus vis facienda
esset.
Errat Quarto in exemplo, quod affert de
villico iniquitatis. Nam non existimat ali¬
quid significare, quod villicus ille ex alienis
bonis sibi amicos fecerit, cum tamen in hoc
maxime parabola consistat ; vult enim nos
Dominus docere, ut quemadmodum ille vil¬
licus ex bonis Domini sui multa largiendo,
sibi multos amicos comparavit : ita et nos
ex bonis Domini nostri, id est, Dei, cujus
sunt omnia quse habemus, Eleemosynas fa¬
ciendo multos amicos in coelo faciamus. Hoc
solum interest, quod ille peccabat bona Do¬
mini sui largiendo, quia contra ejus volun¬
tatem largiebatur, et idcirco dicitur villicus
iniquitatis ; nos autem non peccamus bona
Domini nostri largiendo, quia hoc ipsum ei
vehementer placet, «ut* bona sua liberaliter
erogemus, cum nullum ipse ex hac largi¬
tione dispendium patiatur. Et sane vehe¬
menter accendit ad Eleemosynam faciendum
ista cogitatio, quod opes nostrse res sint
alienae, id est. Dei, et tamen ex ejusmodi
alienis rebus possimus nobis regnum coelo¬
rum comparare.
Postremo errat Petrus Martyr, quod exis¬
timet, hic solum continentiam laudari, ut li¬
ber a cura uxoris et liberorum, facilius pos-
(1) Math. XIX, 19.
564
LIBER II.
sit Evangelium praedicare ; quem errorem
supra refutavimus disputatione de consiliis
Evangelicis. Hic unum dumtaxat S. Augus¬
tini testimonium addam, lib. de sancta vir¬
ginitate cap. 23 : « Quid, inquit, veracius,
'quid lucidius dici potuit, Christus dicit, Ve¬
ritas dicit, Virtus et Sapientia Dei dicit, eos
qui pio proposito ab uxore ducenda se con¬
tinuerint, castrare se propter regnum coelo¬
rum : et contra, humana vanitas impia te¬
meritate contendit, eos, qui hoc faciunt,
praesentem tantummodo necessitatem mo¬
lestiarum conjugalium devitare : in regno
coelorum amplius quidquam cseteris nihil
habere. » Haec ille.