Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Sacrament of Penance · Book II: On Contrition
Chapter 3: That Contrition Cannot Be Had without the Special Help of God
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. III, De Sacramento Poenitentiae, Book II, the fourth general controversy on the sacraments. 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 question was whether contrition, which we have already demonstrated to be a free action, so proceeds from free will that it can be had without the special help of God preventing and assisting the human heart. Which controversy indeed would be none at this time, if our adversaries would make some end of calumniating. There was indeed of old a most grave contention with the Pelagians, since they (as Augustine witnesses in the book On Heresies, chapter 88, and in letter 106) said that the grace by which we are freed from impiety is given according to our merits; while Catholics on the contrary contended that conversion to Penance is prevented and inspired by divine grace. But at this time we agree well enough with the Lutherans that Penance, and thereby contrition, is a gift of God, and cannot be obtained without divine inspiration, by the powers of nature alone. But because Martin Chemnitz, in the second part of the Examination, chapter 4 on Penance, page 963, has dared to write that the Council of Trent wished to establish that dogma which attributes to human powers, without the special help of God, that Penance which is a sufficient disposition for the remission of sins, we have therefore thought it necessary, first, to bring forward the testimonies of the same council and of recent theologians; then to confirm the opinion of the council and the theologians, and indeed of the whole Church, by the testimonies of Scripture and of the ancients.
The Council of Trent, then, session 6, chapter 5, has these words: “The holy synod declares moreover that the beginning of justification itself in adults is to be taken from the prevenient grace of God through Christ Jesus.” Then chapter 6: “They are disposed,” it says, “to justice itself when, aroused and aided by divine grace, conceiving faith by hearing, they are freely moved towards God,” and so on. Then chapter 14: “But those,” it says, “who by sin have fallen from the grace of justification received will again be able to be justified, when, God arousing them, they have procured through the sacrament of Penance to recover, by the merit of Christ, the grace lost.” And below, canon 3: “If anyone says that without the prevenient inspiration of the Holy Spirit and his help a man can believe, hope, love or repent as he ought, so that the grace of justification may be conferred on him, let him be anathema.” Finally, session 14, chapter 4, not only is it not found, as Chemnitz pretends, that contrition can be conceived from the powers of free will alone, but even in express words the council teaches that imperfect contrition itself, which we call attrition, is a gift of God and an impulse of the Holy Spirit. And not only the ecumenical council, in whose definitions all Catholics acquiesce, but also the most celebrated academies, in articles publicly published, most openly profess that faith. There are extant the articles of Paris published against the Lutherans in the year 1542; the second of those articles runs thus: “With the same constancy of faith it is to be held that a man has free will, by which he can act well or ill, and by which, even if he has been in mortal sin, with God’s help, he is able to rise again to grace.” There are extant also the articles of Louvain, promulgated a little later against the same enemies of the Church, of which the seventh runs thus: “It is to be held with certain faith that a man has free will, by which he can act ill, and, with the grace of God, well; and after mortal sin committed, with God’s help, can repent and obtain the remission of sins.” To the same opinion the older Scholastic theologians subscribed; for of those who lived or live in this century there can be no doubt. And not only Saint Thomas, Prima Secundae, question 109, articles 6 and 7, and Saint Bonaventure on book 2 of the Sentences, distinction 28, article 2, question 1, and distinction 29, question 1, and Gregory of Rimini on book 2 of the Sentences, distinction 26, question 1, and Marsilius on the same book, question 17, and very many others have most openly subscribed to the same opinion; but even Scotus, whom Chemnitz accuses by name, in more than one place acknowledges the necessity of divine help in conceiving Penance. For on book 1 of the Sentences, distinction 41, the sole question, he writes that therefore any sinner can be saved, because God can prevent him with his grace; and on book 4, distinction 14, question 3, he denies that a man can know by the powers of nature alone that sin is to be detested as offensive to God and turning one away (as he himself speaks) from him; and on the same book, distinction 22, article 2, at the end, he confesses that Penance is inspired by God. And how certain places of the same Scotus which seem to conflict with these are to be understood, Vega explains in the opuscule on justification, question 8.
Now we shall easily prove the truth of this Catholic opinion against the Pelagian heretics from the divine letters. First, the psalms of David are full of those words: “Convert us, O God our saviour,” Psalm 84. “O God of hosts, convert us,” Psalm 79. “I have gone astray like a sheep that is lost; seek thy servant,” Psalm 118. Then Jeremiah, chapter 31: “Convert me,” he says, “O Lord, and I shall be converted.” And a little below: “After thou didst convert me, I did penance”; on which place Saint Jerome, writing: “See,” he says, “how great is the help of God, and how frail the human condition, that this very thing, that we do penance, unless the Lord first convert us, and unless we lean on the help of God, we are by no means able to fulfil.” Then in Ezekiel, chapter 36, the Lord says in express words: “I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and will give you a heart of flesh.” Which certainly can signify nothing else than the gift of contrition and of true Penance. Further, Luke 22: “The Lord turning looked on Peter,” and stirred up in him such contrition that he at once wept most bitterly; on which place Ambrose, writing in book 10 on Luke: “Those,” he says, “on whom Jesus looks, weep for their offence. Peter denied, and did not weep, because the Lord had not looked; he denied a second time, and did not weep, because the Lord had not yet looked; he denied a third time, and Jesus looked, and he wept most bitterly.” Finally, to pass over other things, what is plainer than that testimony of blessed Paul, who in the second letter to Timothy, chapter 2, admonishes that those who resist the truth are to be corrected with modesty, “if peradventure God may give them repentance to know the truth, and they may recover themselves from the snares of the devil, by whom they are held captive”? Adducing which place, Augustine, book 3 against Julian, chapter 3: “However much,” he says, “he shows patience, unless he himself gives it, who does penance?” And in the book On Faith to Peter, chapter 31, from the same testimony of Paul, whether Augustine or Fulgentius was the author of that book, he sets forth the ecclesiastical dogma in these words: “Hold most firmly, and by no means doubt, that no one here can do penance unless God has enlightened him, and converted him by his gratuitous mercy.” To these are added the most open definitions of the ancient Church. For first of all, in the Synod of Palestine, in which Pelagius himself also was compelled to anathematise his errors, Augustine writes in letter 106 that this among other things was declared, that Penance is a gift of God. Then in the second Council of Orange, canon 4, it was again explained that by the infusion and operation of the Holy Spirit it comes about in us not only that we are purged from sins, but also that we will to be purged. The same also the most learned prelates of the Apostolic See, Innocent, Celestine and Leo, taught. Innocent, in the letter to the Council of Carthage, confirms that we need divine help to return to the right way. Celestine, in the letter to the bishops of Gaul, canon 8, proves the same from the prayers of the Church, in which we ask of God that he give faith to unbelievers, and that the remedy of Penance be conferred on the lapsed; and from the thanksgiving which we offer to God for the enlightening of unbelievers and the correction of the lapsed. Leo, in letter 91 to Bishop Theodore: “Penance itself,” he says, “we believe to be conceived from the inspiration of God, the Apostle saying: If peradventure God may give them repentance.” But enough of these things.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
Contntionem sine spcciali Dei auxilio
haberi non possc.
Ailora quacslio erat. Ulrum Contrilio, quam li-
beram ociionem esse jam demonslravimus.ita [)ro-
cedal e.\ libero {irbilno, ut sinc speciali Dei auxi-
lio cor liiimanum pracvenicntc ol adjuvanle^possit
haberi. Quae sanc conlroversia hoc tcmporo niilla
esscl. si Adversarii nostri finem ali(picm facoronl
calumniandi.Euil (piidcm olim ciim iNdagianis gra-
vissiiua conciMialio, ciim illi (Auguslino tcslc in
librodchaorcsibuscap.S8.elin cpisl. 101)) di-
cerent. graliam qua lil)cramur ab impielale, se-
cunilum merila noslra dari: Catholici conlra, con-
vcrsionem ad Poenilentiam divina gralia praevciii-
riKMAmilM. V.tl. 111
ri, alque inspirari contendcrenl. Sed hoc tcmpore
satis cum Liillicranis conveni(nus, Pocnilenliam;
ac per hoc Conlritionom,donuni csse Doi.nec pos-
se sine divina inspirationc, sohs iiaturac viribus
obiineri.
Quia tanipn Marlinus Ilomnitius in 2. par. exa-
minis cap. 4. tio Poonitciitia |)ag. (M»3.scribore au-
sus esl, concilium Iridenlinuin slabilirc voluisse
dogma illud, quod Iribuit humaiiis viribus sinc
spociali aiixilio Doi eani Poonileiiliam, quae sit
suiriciens dispositio ad remissioiiom poccalorum:
idcirco necessarium esse duximus, Primum adfer-
re iBslimoiii^ ejusdem concilii, et lecentium thc-
ologorum. Dcinde sentenliam coucilii el llieologo-
ruin, alque adeo totius Ecclosiae.lestiinoniis Scri-
plurae el velerum conrirmare.
Igitur Iridontinum concilium soss. C. cap. o.
haec habct vcrba: Dcclaral praeterea {sancidi sy-
nodus) ipsius j^istilicationis exordium in adiil-
tis a Dei per Christum Jesuni praerenienle gra-
tia sumendum esse. DiMndo cap. G. Disponunlur,
inquit,a(/ ipsam jusliliam dum excitali divina
gratia, atque adjuli.lidem ex audilu concipien-
tes, libere moventur in Deuni elc. Tum cap. 14.
Qui vero, in(|uit,a6 accepta juslilicationis gralia
per peccatum exciderunt. rursus justilicari po-
lerunt, ciim excilante Deo per Poenitenliae sa-
cramenluni merito Clirisli amissam gratiam re-
cuperare procuraverinl. El inlra cauon. li. Si
quis dixeril,sine praeveniente Spirlus sancli in-
spiralione, alque ejus adjulorio. hominem cre-
dere, sperare, diiigere, aul poenilere posse, si-
cut oj)orlel, ul ei juslificalionis gralia confera-
tur, analhema sit. Deniquc sess. 14. cap. 4. non
modo non habelur. (|UO(i Kemnilius fingil, contri-
tionem ex solis viribus liberi arbilrii coiicipi pos-
se; sed etiam disertis verhis ipsa eliam Conlrilio
iiiiperfecta, quam allrilionom dicimus , concili-
um essc doccl donum Dei, el S[)iritus sancli im-
pulsuui.
Nec solum concilium occumcnicum, in cujus
delinilionibus omnes calholici acquiescunl.sed el-
iain cclcbcrrima acadomiac in arliculis piiblice e-
dilis oam (idem apertissime profitentur. Exlantar-
ticuli Parisienses advorsns Lutlniranos cditi anno
1.')42. eorum articulorum socundus ila iiabot: /ia-
dem lidei constanliae est tenendum.hominiines-
se liberum arbilrium. qiio potesl bcne vel male
agere. ei per quod, si etiani in peccalo morlnle
faerit. Deo adjuvanle. ad graliam resurgerc va-
lel. Exlanl eliain arliculi Lovanienses paulo po-
sleiius advcrsus eosdom Ecclesiae hostos [>romul-
gali, quorum soptinms ila habot: Cerla jide te
nendem esl.hominem habere liberum arliilriumt
quo polesl male, et. cuni gralia Dei,bene ogere,
el posl morlale peccalum admissum, Deo adju-
vaiile, poenilere et peccalorum remissioncm con-
sequi.
In candomsonlcnliam scri[iscruntlhoolngiScho-
lastici anli(|uioros; iiam do liis (|ui hoc sat-ciilo vi-
xoruiil. aiit viviint, iiiilla diibitalio cssi; |i()losl.I\ec
soliiin s. Thomas in 1. 2. quaosl. HM>. arl. 0. ci
7. et s. Honavcntura in 2. lihriiin Scnlciil. dist.
2H. arlicul. 2. (piaesl. 1. o| d!>l. .lO» ipiacsl. I. cj
tt3S
D\L i'()t;iMrfc.Miv
Crt^irorius nriiiiinensis iii 2. siMiloul.tlisl/iG.qu^ifsl.
I. t'l Marsilius iii euntiem lii)iiiin (juiiest. 17. el
alii pluiiini. eidiMU scnlenliae iiperlissinie siibscri-
pserunl: Setl eliiuii Srolus, tiuom nci-usiil henuiili-
us uoniiiKilim.non uuo in lofo ;iu\ilii tlivini in Poe-
iiilentia concipienda necessilalemiignoscil. INani iu
1. senlenl. tlisl. ii. quaesl. nnica scribil: Meo
posse (lucmlibel pcccalorem salvari, tjuia polesl
cum Deiis sua {iralia praevonire: cl in 4. ilisl. 14.
quacst. 3. ncfral ab liominc solis nalurac viribus
posse cognosci, peccatum csse dctcslanduni. ul
olTensivum Dei.alquc nvcrsivum (ut ipsc loquilur),
ab eo: el in euntiem librum disl. 22. art. 2. cxlrc-
mo Poenilentiam a Deo iuspirari lalelur. Onemad-
niodum aulem inlellipenda sinl loca quacdam ejus-
dcm Scoli. quae cum bis pugnare vidcntur, expli-
cal Vega in opuscolo de juslificalionc quaesl. H.
Jam vero senlcnliac bujus ealbolicac verilalcm
adversus liaerelicos INilagianos cx divinis lileris
nollo negolio comprobnbimus. Primum psalmi Da-
vidis pleni sunt illis vocibus: Convcrtc nos deus
fiahUaris noslcr, psalm. 84. Dcns virlulmn con-
vorlc nos. psal. 71). Erravi siciU ovis quac pc-
riit. quare servum tainn. psalmus 118. Deindc
Hiercmias cap. 31. Convartc, inquit, ?ne Dominc,
et converlar. El Paulo infra: Poslquam converli-
sli me, ecji Pocnilcntiam, in quem locura sanclus
Hieronymus scribcns: Vide, inquil, quantum sil
auxifium Dei. ct quam frafiilis humana condi-
lio. ul hoc ipsum, quod Puenilcnliani afiimus,
nisi nos Dominus ante convei'tent.et nisi Dei ni-
lamur auxilio. ncquaquam implerc valcamus.
Tum Ezecbielis cap. SC.diserlis verbis Dominus
ilicil: Auferam cor lapideum de carnc vestra, et
dabo vohis carneum. Quod cerle nibil aliud.quam
donum Contrilionis, veraeque Pocnilentiae signifi-
care polesl.
Adliaec Luc. 22. Conversus Dominus rcspexit
Pelrum, el talem in eo conlrilionem excilavil, ut
coutinuo amarissime flevcril: in qucm locum scri-
bens Ambrosius lib. 10. in Lucam: Quos. inquit,
Jesus respicii. ploranl deliclum. Negavil Petrus,
el non flovii. quia non respexerat Dominus: ne-
gavit secundo, et no?i fievit, quia adhuc non rc-
spcxcral Dominus: ncqavil tertio cl rcspcxil Je-
siis. cl ille amarissime flevit.
Dviique. ut alia practcrmiltam, quid aperlins
illo b. Pauli tcslimtmio. qui in epistola posleriore
lid Timoiheum rap. 2. monet, cum modcslia cor-
ripieiidos esse eos, qui rcsislunt verilali^i^Ve (juayi-
do del illis Deus Poenitentiam, ad cogtioscen-
dam veritatem. et resipiscant a diaboli laqueis,
a qua captivi tcnmtur? Quem locum adducens
Auijuslinus lib. 3. in Julianum cap. 3. Quamtum-
libcl. inqiiil. praebeat paiicnliam.nisi ipscdede-
nt, quis aqit Poenitentiam? Et libro de fidead Pe-
trum cap. 31 . ex eodem Pnuli testimonio dogma ec-
clesinsticum his vcrbis proponil. sive Aiiguslinus,
sive Fulgenlius ejus libri auclor fueril:Firmissi77ie
tene. el nullalenus dubila , neminem hic posse
Poenitenliam agcre, nisi quem Deus illuminave-
ril. et gratuila sua miseralione converterit.
His accedunl veteris Ecclesiae aperlissimae de-
finiliones. Nam iii primis in synodo palestiua, in
tiua ipse etiam Pelapius errorcs suos aualbemati-
y.are compulsus esl, illud inler caelcra dcclaraluni
fuisse scribit Aut-usliuus iii e|usl. KMi. Poenilen-
liaiii doiium csse Dei. Deiiulc iii concilio arausi-
caiio II. cnn. 4. ilcruiu explicalum esl, |»cr saiicli
Spiriliis infusioucm el operationcin iii iiobis fieri ,
iitiii lanluiu iil a pcccatis pur^cmur, scd eliain ul
purgnri vclimiis.
Idein quoipie docucrunt doctissimi aposlolicao
scilis pracsuies. Innocculius, Coelesliiuis el Leo.
lunocenlius iii cpisl. ad concilium carlliaj^iniensc,
ul ad rcclam rcdeamus viam divino adjulorio nos
cgcro conlirmat. Coelcstinus in episl.ad episcopos
Galliarum can. H. idipsum probal ex oralionibus
Ecclcsiae, quibus a D(\o pclimiis . ut inlidelibus
del (idem, el ul lapsis Poenitenliae remedium con-
feratur; et e.\ graliarum aclione, quam Deo pro ii-
luminatioiie infidelium, el lapsorum corrcclione
delerimus. Leo in epist. 91. ad Tbeodorum episco-
pum: Ipsam, inquil, Poenilenliani ex Dci credi-
mus inspiratione conceptani , dicente apostulo :
Ne forle del illis Deus Poenilenliam. Sed de bis
salis.