Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Sacrament of Penance · Book II: On Contrition
Chapter 10: On the Quantity of Contrition; and the Same according to the Opinion of the Catholics
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 sixth controversy was: how great ought that sorrow to be which we take up for sins, that it may suffice for the justification of sinners. Here the adversaries wonderfully triumph and exult; for they think they have found a place from which to censure the Catholic doctrine of Penance with the applause of the crowd, as one which paves the way to desperation, or at least renders men plainly doubtful and uncertain of their justification. Martin Chemnitz, in the second part of the Examination, page 963, writes that the Council of Trent requires for justification a contrition perfected by charity; and that this contrition, to be perfect, must, as he proves from Scotus, have a certain degree of intensity and be continued for a certain space of time; whereas nevertheless it can by no means be settled what that degree is, nor how great a space of time is required. So, forsooth, everything is rendered perplexed and entangled. He adds also, from the testimony of other Scholastics, that contrition ought to proceed from charity; and that by charity God ought to be loved above all things; to which perfection none of the saints can attain in this life. From these he so gathers on the following page: “Impossible, therefore, is the sufficiency and perfection of contrition, and the persuasion of it makes either Pharisees or men in despair. For the conscience, which can never be certain of the sufficiency and perfection of contrition, will always remain doubtful and uncertain about the remission of sins and reconciliation with God.” So he. In the same way John Calvin, book 3 of the Institutes, chapter 4, section 2: “They exact,” he says, “a due contrition, that is, a just and full one; but meanwhile they do not settle when anyone can be secure that he has discharged this contrition in due measure.” And below: “But when a bitterness of sorrow is exacted which answers to the magnitude of the fault, and which is weighed in the balance with the confidence of pardon; here indeed wretched consciences are wonderfully tormented and harassed, when they see a due contrition for sins imposed on them, and do not attain the measure of the debt, so as to be able to determine with themselves that they have paid what they owed.” And section 3: “And if,” he says, “they say that I calumniate, let them come forward and show even one who by this doctrine of contrition has either not been driven to desperation, or has not set before the judgement of God a pretence of sorrow for true sorrow.” So he. Nor did Heshusius leave dissimilar writings in the book on the six hundred errors of the Papists, place 9, numbers 25 and 28.
We, then, shall perform two things in the present disputation. We shall demonstrate first that what the adversaries object to us fits themselves most truly, namely that they drive penitents to desperation. Then we shall briefly explain the common doctrine of the theologians on the quantity of contrition, which is true and full of consolation. To begin from the first: the adversaries, Chemnitz and Calvin, concede that contrition, and that serious and vehement, is necessary. Chemnitz, in the second part of the Examination, page 912: “It is a hard question,” he says, “how Penance can be so done that we may be certain we obtain reconciliation and the remission of sins; for if Penance is not rightly done, the sinner, though he seeks, does not obtain the remission of sins.” Then page 953, explaining how true Penance is done: “Altogether,” he says, “in those who do true and serious Penance contrition is necessary.” And page 954 he teaches that contrition ought to be sharp and vehement: “Hence follows,” he says, “the sorrow of a conscience grievously grieving that it has sinned and by sins offended God.” Calvin, book 3 of the Institutes, chapter 4, section 2: “I indeed confess,” he says, “that it must be diligently and sharply urged that each one, by bitterly bewailing his sins, may sharpen himself more to displeasure and hatred of them.” And section 3: “We too,” he says, “have said in a certain place that the remission of sins never comes without Penance; because none but the afflicted, and those wounded by the consciousness of sins, can sincerely implore the mercy of God.” So he. Now although in the same places they say and protest that they do not make contrition the cause or merit of the remission of sins, and Calvin boasts that he has taken away those torments of souls, that a due contrition is to be performed; yet from what they themselves teach it most openly follows that no one, in their opinion, is justified without true, serious and grave contrition, whether that contrition is the cause of justification, or only a condition, or something else; for that does not pertain to our matter in this place. But what true and serious contrition is, without which sins are not forgiven, we cannot learn from any source better and more safely than from the sacred letters. And the sacred letters everywhere require contrition from the whole heart, such as is also the true love of God, from which true contrition proceeds. Deuteronomy 4: “When thou shalt seek the Lord, thou shalt find him, if thou seek him with all thy heart, and all the affliction of thy soul.” Deuteronomy 30: “If, led by repentance of heart, thou return to the Lord with all thy heart and all thy soul, he will have mercy on thee.” 3 Kings 8: “If they sin against thee, and return to thee with all their heart and all their soul, thou wilt be merciful to thy people.” 2 Chronicles 30: “The Lord who is good will show mercy to all them who with their whole heart seek him.” Jeremiah 29: “You shall seek me, and shall find me, when you shall seek me with all your heart.” Joel 2: “Be converted to me with all your heart, in fasting, in weeping and in mourning, and rend your hearts.” The adversaries, then, must, whether they will or no, admit that without perfect contrition, and one which is from the whole heart, sins are not forgiven. But contrition of this kind, as also the love of God from the whole heart, they contend to be impossible in this life, and such as none of the saints has had, as all know who have read their writings, from the places cited above and from many others. Wherefore it follows that the remission of sins is plainly impossible, and that nothing else remains to penitents but desperation, if the doctrine of Chemnitz and Calvin is true. For what hope of salvation, I ask, will he conceive who judges contrition from the whole heart to be impossible, and cannot deny that that alone is true and serious contrition, and has most certainly persuaded himself that without true and serious contrition sins are not forgiven?
Chapter XI. On the quantity of contrition, according to the opinion of the Catholics
But now, dismissing the adversaries, let us comprise the true opinion on the quantity of contrition in several propositions.
The first proposition: It is not required, for that contrition which is to be sufficient for the remission of sin, that it be equal to the magnitude of the divine wrath. This is against the calumny and lie of Calvin, who, book 3 of the Institutes, chapter 4, section 2, as we also noted in the first book, dared to write that so perfect a contrition is exacted by Catholics that it is weighed in the balance with the confidence of pardon; but it cannot be weighed in the balance with the confidence of pardon unless it is a just price for sins, and by the rigour of justice satisfies God, and equals the magnitude of his wrath. And indeed that so great a contrition is not exacted by Catholics is plain from this, that all Catholics deny that by contrition we merit justification condignly, and some deny it even congruously. And that it is rightly not exacted can be proved, both because it is written, “Who knoweth the power of thy anger, and for thy fear can number thy wrath?” Psalm 89; and because mortal sin, offending God, who is of infinite dignity, merits infinite indignation and punishment; and a man cannot offer an infinite price to God, however much he grieves and torments himself. But we have an evident argument from the testimonies and examples of the divine Scriptures. For Scripture exacts nothing else of us than that we be converted to God with the whole heart; and to be converted to God with the whole heart is not to conceive that sorrow which is equal to the offence or the divine wrath, for that sorrow is without doubt impossible. If it were truly impossible to be converted to God with the whole heart, why would God himself demand it? Why would he say, Joel 2, “Be converted to me with all your heart”? Was God ignorant that this cannot be done, or did he wish to be done what he knew could not be done? Next, Scripture testifies that some returned to God with the whole heart, and pronounces that others will return; which are most certain proofs that this can be done, and therefore that to be converted with the whole heart does not signify a contrition equal to the divine wrath. 4 Kings 23: “There was no king like unto him, that returned to the Lord with all his heart.” Jeremiah 24: “I will be their God, because they shall return to me with their whole heart.” Wherefore what Saint Cyprian says in the sermon On the Lapsed, “As greatly as we have sinned, so greatly let us weep,” does not signify that the sorrow is to be made absolutely equal to the offence, which cannot be done, but that there ought to be that proportion between sins and sorrow for sins, that we grieve more for a greater sin and less for a lesser. And what Saint Ambrose writes in the book to a Corrupted Virgin, chapter 8, when he says, “But how great and of what kind do you think the Penance necessary, which may either equal the crimes, or certainly exceed them?” is not so to be taken as if Penance ought to equal or exceed the sin as an offence against God, but that the sorrow of Penance should equal or exceed the pleasure which we received in sinning; which Hugh of Saint Victor wrote in other words thus, book 2 On the Sacraments, part 14, chapter 2: “If in correction the affliction is less than the delight was in the fault, the fruit of your Penance is not worthy.”
The second proposition: Sorrow for sins ought to be the greatest, at least (as the theologians speak) appreciatively. For the doctors rightly teach that the greatest sorrow can be understood in two ways, intensively and appreciatively. Sorrow is called the greatest intensively when the will (for we speak here of sorrow of the spirit, not of the sense or body, although the one is accustomed to be born from the other), when, I say, the will detests something with the utmost effort; but the greatest appreciatively, when the will values the detestation of some evil more than the obtaining of any good whatever, or the avoiding of another evil. So the magnitude of sorrow intensively is reckoned on the part of the subject, its magnitude appreciatively on the part of the object; and it often happens that we grieve more intensively for something for which we grieve less appreciatively, and the contrary. For even good men are sometimes more grievously saddened and grieved at the deaths of their children than at their sins; who nevertheless, if the choice were given, would rather have lost their children than have offended God. Of Saint Paula the Roman, Saint Jerome writes in her life that at the deaths of her children she was accustomed to be so grievously affected that she was always in danger of her life; such a sorrow for crimes committed against God she is never read to have felt; and yet it cannot be doubted that that most holy and excellent woman would rather all her children had perished than that God should be even lightly offended. If anyone objects that it cannot be that the will should not grieve more intensely at the loss of that thing which it values more, since it grieves for this reason, that it has lost a thing dear and which it valued highly; we shall answer that this could not be if everything were equal; but everything is not always equal. For it often happens that what right reason judges to be valued less is nearer, better known, more agreeable to nature, joined by long familiarity, and so affects and moves more, although something else is absolutely and simply preferred to it. Which we experience even in bodily things, since we are more saddened and distressed at a sharp toothache, or some burning of a finger, though not deadly, than at a slow but pestilential fever; and yet who would not gladly exchange that slow and pestilential fever for the sharpest pain of teeth or fingers? These things being explained, our proposition is proved from all those places of Scripture which we adduced a little before, to show that contrition ought to be from the whole heart, and so the greatest and highest. Next, there could be added all those places which bid us love God from the whole heart, which are extant in Deuteronomy 6, Matthew 22, Luke 10 and elsewhere. For we who are bidden to love God from the whole heart are equally bidden to detest with the whole breast the sin by which we violate the friendship of God. Finally, reason teaches this very thing most openly; for since sin is the greatest of all evils, it is to be detested and fled above all things. And because, on the witness of the Apostle, Romans 3, evil is not to be done that good may come, therefore it is not lawful to choose sin on any condition proposed; and so one must grieve more appreciatively for sin committed than rejoice in any good work whatever.
The third proposition: It is not necessary that contrition be the greatest sorrow intensively. It is proved first, because if that were necessary, it would be chiefly on account of those places of Scripture which bid us be converted to God with the whole heart and all the affliction of our soul, Joel 2 and Deuteronomy 4; but those places do indeed exact the greatest sorrow appreciatively, as we said above, yet not intensively. For to be converted from the heart is nothing else than to be seriously and sincerely converted; and to be converted from the whole heart is to be wholly and perfectly converted, so that we do not partly detest sins and partly are drawn by them, or hold one sin in hatred and still cleave to another, but detest all and turn simply from all; and that so perfectly that there is no evil which we would rather have avoided than sin. Nor are those places which require conversion from the whole heart to be understood otherwise than those which command love from the whole heart; and that those places do not exact the greatest love intensively, but only appreciatively, namely that nothing be preferred or equalled to God, we showed in book 2 On the Members of the Church, which was on monks, chapter 13, where we thoroughly examined all these things. Next, the same proposition is proved by the experience of pious men, who (as we related a little before of Saint Paula) sometimes grieve more intensely at the death of dear ones than at sins, although they are most ready to suffer anything rather than commit a sin against God. Nor can that vehement sorrow be blamed which is seen in parents at the loss of children, both because it is natural, and also because it finds place in the holiest men. Certainly the patriarch Jacob so grieved the death of his son Joseph that Scripture says, Genesis 37: “And all his children being gathered together to comfort their father in his sorrow, he would not receive comfort, but said: I will go down to my son into hell, mourning.” And Saint David, 2 Kings 19, so vehemently bewailed his son Absalom that, although many things are read of his signal contrition for the sin of adultery and murder, yet he seems to have shown greater signs of sorrow at his son’s death. There is added, thirdly, that of those who seriously and as they ought grieve for their sins, some grieve more, some less. For the contrition of Mary Magdalene would not be so much celebrated if all who rightly do Penance had an equal contrition as to intensity, as they really have an equal one as to appreciation. Moreover, if the greatest sorrow were exacted for every mortal crime, no one could grieve more for one sin than for another; which is both against experience and against reason. For we experience that graver crimes prick the conscience more sharply, and beget both greater shame and greater displeasure than lighter ones; and the judgement of right reason demands this, that greater offences be followed by greater Penance and more intense contrition. Finally, if the greatest sorrow intensively were necessary for true contrition, we could scarcely ever, I do not say know for certain, but not even probably know, that we had done what we ought in detesting our crimes. For who is there who could not, if he chose to apply effort, stir himself up to a somewhat greater contrition? But surely it seems absurd and foreign to the divine goodness that he should have instituted that medicine in which we find no peace and tranquillity of mind.
The fourth proposition: Neither a certain degree of intensity nor any delay of time is required for true contrition. This is against some who deny that there is true contrition unless it reaches a certain degree of intensity and lasts for a certain space of time. But the refutation of this opinion is easy. For the Scriptures exact conversion and Penance, but make no mention of a certain degree or time; wherefore if a certain degree or a certain time were required, it would be altogether unknown, and so it would come about not by choice but by chance that some reached the just measure of sorrow and remained in that sorrow for the just time. Next, who has ever devised those measures in the precepts of faith, hope, love and the other virtues, so that there is no faith, or hope, or charity, unless it has a certain degree of intensity and a certain delay of time? And if these are not required in the other virtues, why should they be required in the virtue of Penance? What of this, that Scripture and the Fathers plainly enough hand down that at any moment a man can be justified through true Penance? Isaiah 30, according to the edition of the Seventy: “When thou shalt return and groan, thou shalt be saved”; and in Ezekiel, chapter 18, more than once God promises indulgence to those who have turned from sins and been converted to a better life; and Ecclesiasticus, chapter 11: “It is easy,” he says, “in the eyes of God on a sudden to make the poor man rich.” Saint Cyprian, tractate 1, which is to Demetrian, at the end: “For one remaining in this world,” he says, “no Penance is too late.” And below: “Though at the very departure and setting of temporal life you pray for your offences, and implore God, who is one and true, with confession and faith in the acknowledgement of him, pardon is given to the one confessing,” and so on. And in the sermon on the Lord’s Supper: “But,” he says, “even at that same moment of time, when the soul is now hastening to its departure, and going forth has risen to the expiring lips, the goodness of the most clement God does not spurn Penance.” And below: “Neither the quantity of the crime, nor the shortness of the time, nor the extremity of the hour, nor the enormity of the life, if there is true contrition, if there is a pure change of pleasures, excludes from pardon.” And below, of the good thief: “In a moment,” he says, “impiety put on religion, cruelty put on piety, and at once, made a citizen of the saints and a member of God’s household, he was sent before into the kingdom.” Saint Basil, homily on Penance: “Only be willing,” he says, “and God himself will run to meet you.” And Basil proves in the same place, by the example of the prodigal son, that the goodness of God towards penitents is incredible. Saint John Chrysostom, in the first letter to Theodore the lapsed: “Not,” he says, “by the reckoning of time, but according to the affection of the soul, is Penance accustomed to be judged.” And below, of the good thief: “In that moment,” he says, “he wiped away at once the sins of his whole life, and before the Apostles received the reward of a grateful office.” Saint Leo, in letter 91 to Bishop Theodore: “With God,” he says, “true conversion suffers no delays of pardon, the Spirit of God saying through the prophet: When thou shalt return and groan, thou shalt be saved.” Saint Celestine I, Pope, also, in the letter to the Gauls: “He despairs,” he says, “of the mercy of God who does not believe that it can suffice to come to the aid of a dying man even in a moment.” And below: “True conversion to God, then, in those set in their last moments, is to be estimated by the mind rather than by the time, the prophet asserting this thus: When thou shalt return and groan, then thou shalt be saved.”
The fifth proposition: Nor is this required, that there be as many acts of contrition as there are sins; provided we grieve from the heart for all which occur to the mind after examination. For as it is not to be denied that single sins are to be detested, since it is written, Isaiah 38, “I will recount to thee all my years,” and so on, and Ezekiel 18, “If the wicked do penance for all his sins,” and so on; so also it is to be conceded that a man can by a single action detest all the sins which perhaps occur to memory, and grieve for having committed them; for otherwise what we demonstrated a little before would be false, that a man can in a moment be converted and justified.
The sixth proposition: Nevertheless it is most useful so to bewail single sins most bitterly and for a long time, that the contrition may be called the greatest not only appreciatively, but also intensively and extensively, so to speak. This proposition the examples and exhortations of the saints sufficiently persuade us of; for David washed his bed every night, Psalm 6; and Saint Peter wept bitterly, Luke 22; and Magdalene watered the Lord’s feet with her tears, Luke 7; and Saint Augustine, speaking of himself, book 8 of the Confessions, chapter 12: “When,” he says, “deep consideration had drawn together and heaped up from the secret depth all my misery in the sight of my heart, there arose a mighty storm, bringing a mighty shower of tears.” And below: “I cast myself down under a certain fig tree, I know not how, and gave rein to my tears, and the rivers of my eyes gushed forth, an acceptable sacrifice to thee.” And below: “I said these things and wept with the most bitter contrition of my heart.” Saint Cyprian, in the sermon On the Lapsed, at the end: “We must pray,” he says, “more earnestly, and beg, pass the day in mourning, spend the nights in watchings and weepings, occupy all our time in tearful lamentations,” and so on. Saint Ambrose, in the book to a Corrupted Virgin, chapter 8: “Let the eyes flow with tears,” he says, “which did not look on a man simply; let the face grow pale, which once flushed shamelessly; and let the heart be melting like wax,” and so on. These and similar things are found everywhere in the holy Fathers, which indeed are to be embraced with the whole mind not only for this reason, that (as we said) contrition is the more useful the greater it is; but also because there is danger that a man deceive himself, and, while he does not strive to stir himself to a sharp and intense contrition, in reality not even appreciatively detest his crimes with the whole heart.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CkVlT X..
Dr qnanlitale ConirHionis.
iic.vla ctjiiliuveisia (Mal: Quanlanam esse debcal
c;i irisiili;i. quain de pecculis suscipimus, ul ad jii-
slilicalioniim peccjitorum sunicial. Hic mire Uiiim-
.phant, alquc exiillanl adversarii : cxistim;inl cnim
sc locum repcrisse. ex quo doclrinam c;itbolicam
do Poeiiiiciiti;! cnm plausii vulgi repreliendant. iit
qnae ad (lespcralioneni sU'rnal viam.vel (^imIc jila-
iie dubios, ulquc inccrlos de sua juslilicalionc bo-
niincs reJd;iI.
.Marliniis Kcmnilius in 2. piir. examinis , pag.
DOiJ. scribil concilinm tridentinnm exigere ad ju-
sUlicationem, coiilritioncm cbarilale pcrfeclam ;
eam aulcin coiilritionem.ul pcrlecta sil. probal cx
Scolo. habere debere cerluin gradum intensionis,
elccrlo spaiio temporis conlinuari;cum lamen nc-
que possii ulla ratione conslilui , qaolus ille gra-
'!us sil.neque quanlum spalium lemporis cxigalur.
lia nimirum redduntur pcrplexa el implirala o-
mnia. Addil eliam ex testimonio Scholaslicornm
aliorum. conirilionem oporiere ex charitale proce-
dere: charilale aulcm beuni super omnia diligi
deberc: ad qu:im perfectionem nullus Siinclorum
in liac vila pervenirc polest.Kx his ita rolligii pag.
sequenti : impofisibilis igitur esl sufficienliaet
perfeclio contriliunis, el ejus persuosio vel facit
pharisaeos. vel desperabundos.Conscientia enim,
quae nnmquam polesl certa esse de sufficienlia
ot perfecliune coatrilionis . semper dubia et in-
certa mcuiebit de remissione peccatorum et re-
conciliatione cum Deo. Hacc ille.
Ad eundem modum Joannes Galvinus lib. .3. In-
stii. cap. 4. § 2. Contritioncm, inquii , debitam
exiqunl. Iioc est.juslam ot plenam: sed interim
non constituunt quando securus aliquis esse pos-
sil, se hac contrilione adjusium modum defan-
clum esse. El infra:Sed?i6i exifjitur doloris acer-
bitas. quae culpae mafjniludini respondeal. ei
quae in trutina appendalur cum flducia r.eniae;
hic vero miserae conscienliae miris modis tor-
'juo.ntur cl exagHantur,dum sibi debilam pecca-
tuvuiu fonlnliitncm imponi vidont:nec assequun-
tur dobili monsnram.ulsecirm dooorno.ro possin.l,
se porsolrisse quod debo.banl. VA § W.Uuod si me,
\ui\u\l.caluiiini(iri ajunl: prodoanl sano.oi ■ununi
ali(iuomoslenda)il. qui hnjusniodi o.onlrilionis
doctrina, vel non sil ad dosperationem adaclus:
vel simnlalionom doloris. judicio Dci, pro vero
dolore non ojijiosuorit. \U\o.r, ilh;. Nec dissiiailiii
s('ri[)l;i reliipiit ileshusins in libro de scxcentis cr-
r(iril)iis Pontiiiciorum, Ut. 1). luim. 2.k cl 28.
.Aos igitur diio pr;ieslid)imiis iii pr;iescnti dispn-
liilione. Dcmonstriibimns Primuiii.(juod nobis oijji-
oiunl adversiirii, in ipsos verissiiiic convcnirc, ul
vidclicct iid dcspcralioiiein adigant poenilcntcs.
Deiiidc doclrinam eoininuncm tlieologorum vcr;iin,
el consolatiimis plenam dc (luiintitalc conlriliuiiis
breviter expliiuiibimus.
IJl iiicipiiiiniis a Priino, concedunt iidversarii ,
Kcmniliiis el (];ilvinus, conlrilionern, eamque se-
riam el vehcmentem, esse iiecessariam.Kemnilitis
in 2. par. examinis. piig. 012. Ardua,\nqm\..quae-
stio est. quomodo Poenitentia ita agi possit, tU
certi simas nos consequi reconciliationem el re-
missionempeccalorum: si enim Poenitenlia non
recte agitur. peccator licet quaerat, non tamen
assequitur remissionem peccato7'um. Dcindc piig,
l)o3. explicans qnomodo agatur vera Poenilenlia :
Omnino, inquii, in iis, qui veram et seriam Poe-
nHoaliam agnnl. nov.o.i^^iari.a osl cunlritio.VA p;ig.
O.ji-, docel: ContrilioiKMii acrem ae veheincnlcin
cssc dcbere: Hinc sequitur , inqnit, dolor con-
scieniiac. graviler dolcntis se peccasse ei pecca-
lis offendi^He Doum. Calvinus lib. 3. Institul. cap.
4. § 2. Equidem, iri(]uii. sedulo el acriter inslan-
dum esse fal.eor, ul quisqne amare deflendo sua
peccala.se ad eorum di^pliccnliam et odium ma-
gis acual. El § 3. IJiximus et nos, inquil. quodam
loco. numquam sine Poenitentia obvenire pecca-
loruin remissioncm ; quod nulli nisi afflicii et
peccatorum conscienlia vulneraii. Dei misericor-
diam implorare sincere jyossunt. Ilaec ille.
Oiiiimvis iiulcm iisdem in locis dicant, ac prolc-
stenlur se iion facere contrilionem caussam , iiut
incritum rcmissionis peccatoruin,et Calvinus jactet
se suslnlissc illa animiirum lormenla. Quod con-
Irilio debiiii praestandii sil: lainen ex iis, qiiiie ipsi
doitent, iiperlissimc seqnitur, ncminem ex scnleii-
liii ipsoruin sinc vcra, seria, griivi(|ue conlnlione
inslilicari, sive ea conlritro juslificationis caussa
sit. sive conditio taiiium, sive quid aliud ; id eniiii
ad retn iioslram hoc loco non pertinet.
Quac sil anlcm vera. seria^iue contrilio, sinc
qua peecata non remillunlur; non possumus aliun-
de melius ac lutius discere. (]u;im ex lileris Sii-
eris. Porro. lileriic sacrae uhi([ue requirunl eonlri-
tionem ex toto corde: qualis est etiam vera Dei di-
leclio, ex qua conlrilio vera procedil. Deuicron.i.
Cuin quaesieris Dominum, inve^iies eum, si toto
corde quaesieris eum.el lola tribulaiione animae
tuae. Deuleron. 30. Si ductus poeniludine cor-
dis, reversus fueris ad Dominum in lolo corde
luo o.t lota anima lua. miserebiturtiii.'i.]\eguiu.
8. Sipeccaverinl tibi, el reversi fuerint ad le in
universo eorde suo et tota anima sua. propitia-
LIBFI? SECUNDUS
Gi9
horis jwpulo luo. 2. Pnrolipom. 30. Bominm ho-
nns propiliahitnr cunciis, qui in loto corde rc-
quirunl imm. Ilierom. 29. Quaerelis elinvenielis
me, cum quaesierilis mc in tolo cordc veslro.
Joel. 2. Converlimini adme in toto corde vestro.
injejunio, flelu el jilanciu ei scinditc corda ve-
stra.
Debenligitur adversarii velint nolint, admillere;
sine conlrilione perfecla.et quae ex loto corde sit,
non remilli peccala. Alqui ejusmodi conlrilionem',
ut eliam dileclionem Oei, cx tolo corde, impossibi-
lem in hac vila esse contendunt, el quam nullus
quam sanctorum habueril,ut ex locis supra cilatis,
et ex aliis mullis omnes norunt, qui eorum scripla
legerunl. Quare sequilur, ut remissio peccalorum
plane sil impossibilis.el poenitenlibus nihil super-
sit aliud, nisi desperatio.si vcra est doctrina Rem-
nilii etCakini. Quam enim, quaeso , spem salutis
ille concipiet, qui conlrilionem ex lolo corde im-
possibilem esse censel; et cam solam veram ac
seriam Contrilionem esse, negare non polesl; et
sine vera seriaque Contritione peccata nonremilli
sibi cerlissime persuasit.
CAPLT XI.
De quaniilate Contriiionis, ex sentcntia
calholicorum.
Sed jam dimissis adversariis, veram de Conlri-
lionis quantilale senlenliara aliquot propositioni-
bus complcclainur.
Prima proposilio: IS'on requirilur adcam con-
Iriiionem. quae sit futura sufficiens ud remissio-
nem peccali, ut aequalis sit muqnitudini irae
(Ziiymae.IIaec est conlra calumniani el mcndacium
Calvini, qui lib. 3. Inslilul. cap. 4. §2. ul etiam
in primo libro nolavimus, scribere ausus csl, lam
perfeclam conlritioncm a calholicis exigi , ul in
Irutina appcndatur. cum fiducin veniae: non polest
aulem inlrutina appendi cum tiducia veniae , nisi
sil juslum prelium pcccatorum et cx rigore justi-
tiae satisfacialDeo;atque irae ipsius magniludinem
aequet.
Et quidcm non cxigi a catholicis tantam contri-
lionem, perspicuum csl ex eo, quod omnes calho-
lici negatil, Contriiionc mereri nos ex condigno ju-
stilicalionem, aliqui etiam negant ex congruo. Ke-
cle aulem nnn cxigi, probari potcst, lum qiiia scri-
plum est: Quisnovil polestatemirae tuae.etprae
timorc tuo iram iuam dinumerare? psalm. 85).
lum quia pecoalum Iclhale. Dcum qui infitiilac di-
gnitalis cst, oircndens, infinilam indignalioncfn et
pocnam mcrclur: non j)0leslaulem homo infinilum
prelium oflcrre Deo, quanlumvis dolcat ac seipsc
cxcruciet.
, Scd argumenlum cvidcns iiabemus ex divinarum
Scriplurarum tcslimoniis , atquc excmplis. Nam
Scriptura nihil aliud a nobis cxigil, nisi ut conver-
lamur ad Dcum in toto cordc: converli aulcm •id
Deuin in lolo cordc. non csl. dolorcm ilium conci-
pere. ([ui aequalis sil orfcnsioni vel irae divinae ,
nam dolor isle sine dubio impossibilis esl. Si vcre
impossibile cssel converli ad Ijeum in loto cordc,
cur Dcus ipse id postularet? cur dicerel Joel. 2.
Converlimini ad me in toto corde vestro? an Dcus
ignorabal id licri non posse, aiit llcri volebat quod
sciebat non posse fieri? Dcindc, Scriplura lcslatur
aliquos in toto corde reversos ad Deum , et alios
pronunciat rcvcrsuros: quac siint argume.ita cer-
tissima, id lieri posse ; et proinde converti in tolo
corde, non significarc contrilionem aequalem irao
divinae, 4. Rcg. 23. Similis illi nonfuit rex, qui
reverteretur ad Dominum in omni cordc suo.
Ilierem. 24. Ego ero illisin Deum, quia reverien-
lur ad me in ioto corde suo.
Quare quod s, Cyprianus ait in scrm. de lapsis :
Quam magna deliquimus, tam (jranditer deflca-
mus, non sigiiilicat. dolorem absolute oiTcnsioni
aequandum essc, quod fleri non polcsl: sed pro-
porlioncm illam intcr peccata ct dolorcm dc pec-
calis, cssc dcbere, ut dc majore peccalo magis.de
minore minus doleamus. Ouod vero scribit s. Am-
brosius in lib. ad Virgincm corruplam, cap. S.cum
ail: Sed quanta putas, et qualis nece^isaria Poc-
nitentia, quae aut aequet crimina, aut cerie ex-
cedai? non ila accipiendum esl, quasi Poenitcnlia
aequare, aut excedere debcat peccatum, ul offcn-
sam Dei, sed ut dolor Poenilcniiae acquct, aut ex-
ccdat voluptalcm,quara peccando accepimus: quod
aliis verbis ila scripsit Ilugo de s. A^ictorc lib. 2.
dc sacram. par. 4. cap. '2.Siin correciione minor
est a.fjUclio, quamin culpa fu.it delectatio , non
est di(jnus Poenitentiae tuac fructus.
Sccunda proposilio: Dolor dc peccatis esse de-
hctsummus. s(dieni (ul thcologi loquuntur) ap-
prctialive. Uecle enim doctores tradunl dolorem
summum posse duobus modis intelligi, inlensivc
el appretiative. Summus dolor inlensive dicitur ,
quando volunlas (nam de dolorespirilus, non sen-
sus sive corporis, hic loquimur, licel unus ex alle-
ro nasci soIcal),quando. inquam, voluntas sumrno
conatu detcstalur aliquid:suinmus autcm appretia-
tivc,quando volunlas pluris acslimat dctestationem
alicujus mali, quam cujuscumquc boni conscquu-
tioncm, aut altcrius mali cvitationcm. Ilaquc ma-
gniludodolorisintensivc , altemiilur c\ parle suh-
jecti, magnitudo apprcliat vc , ex parte objccli: et
"saepc accidit, ut de rc aliqua magis dolcamus in-
lcnsive, dc qun minus doleamus apprclialivc, ct
conlra. !\am viri elinm boni gravius Irislantur in-
tcrdiim ctdolcnt, ob morlcs fiIiorum,qiiain ob pcc-
cala; qui lamcn. si darctiir oplio , mallcnt lilios
amisissc, (luam Dciim offimdissc. l)e saiicla Paula
romana scribil s. Ilicronymus in cjus vita.in mor-
libus filiorum sic illam gravilcr afiici solilam , ul
scnipor dc vita pcriclitarctur: qiialcm dolorem ob
crimina in Dimm admissa.numquam scnsissc legi-
liir: ncc lamen dubilari polcsl. qiiin foemina illa
sanctissima ct opliina.malucril filios oiniies perirc,
(juam vcl lcvilcr Dcuin ollcndcr^;.
Si (juis objiciat. ficri non possc. ulvoluntas non
intcnsiiis dojcal dc ejusrci ainissionc, quam pluris
acstimat, cum idcn doleal , quia rcm charam , cl
quain magnilacichal, amisit. Hcspondcbimus, id
C.M)
1)1-: POKNirKNHA
liiTi ruui possi'. si omuia sinl palriii: tamen iioii
scinper essf cimnia p.nia. Saepe eiiim lil, ul id
i|uod tninoris racieiuliun essu recla ralio jiuiioal ,
lit pr*>piiu|iiiiis, noliiis. naturne convtMiienluis.loii-
^M familiaritale coujuiuium. (luoii proimle mai;is
:i|]icial el inoveal. Iicet illi alitul quicipiam ahsolu-
le ac simplioiler praeferatnr. Id quod in rebus el-
lain rorporalihus experiiiuir, (piippe (lui magis Iri-
slaiiuir el anj;iiuur ob aerem dolorem denlium.aul
uslioncm aliquain di<?iti, quamvis nou lellialem ,
tpiam ob fobrim lenlain. sed |)eslifcram: cl lamen
(piis iu)n libcnler febrim illam lenlam cl pestife-
rani, cum acerbissimo dentium aul digilorum do-
lore mutaret?
!lis explieatis, proposilio nostra probatur cx o-
uinibus illis Seriplurae locis, (juae paulo anle ad-
duximus, ul oslendercmus, coiilrilionem ex tolo
eorde, atque adeo summam el maximam esse de-
bere. Deinde, addi possenl illa()mnia loca , quae
jubenl ul Deum cx loto corde ({iliganms, quae ex-
slant Deut. i. .Maltli. 22. Luc. lo'. et alibi. Qui e-
iiim juhemur Deum ex toto corde dilig.TC , jubc-
mur pariter peecalum, quo Dci amiciliam viola-
nius, tolo pectore delestari.Denique ratio idipsum
aperlissime (loeet:Nam ciim peccalum sitmalorum
omnium maximum. supcr omnia deleslandum, fu-
jziendumque est. 1:11 quia leslc Apostolo. Rom. 3.
yon sunt facienda mala, ul venianl bona, ideo
iion licet peccatum eligere quacumque conditione
proposita: proinde magis dolendum est appreliali-
ve dc comraisso pcccato,quain laetandum de quo-
vis opere bono.
Tertia proposilio: Non cst necesse . ul contritio
sit dolor summus intensive. Probalur primum ,
(juia si id essel necesse; maxime ob ea loca Scri-
plurae, quae jubonl ut convertamur ad Deum in
loto cordc el tota Iribulntione animac noslrae, Joe-
lis 2. et Deuler. 4. sed ista loca exigunt quidem
dolorem summum apprelialive, ul supra diximus,
iion lamen inlensive. Converti enim ex cordc, ni-
liil esl aliud, nisi serio ac sinccrc converli: ex loto
aulem corde converti, est inlegre et perfecte con-
verti, ila ut non partim peecala detestemur,partim
illis alliciamur, sive,non unum peccatum odio ha-
Leamus, et alteri adhuc adhaereamus , sed omnia
delestemur , ab omnibus simpliciter avertamur ;
idque tam perfecte. ut nullum sit malura qiiod vi-
tatum malimus, quam peccatura. IVeque aliter in-
lelligenda sunt loca isla , quae conversionem ex
loto cordc requirunl, quam illa, quae dileclionem
ex toto corde praecipiunl; illa aulera loca nou exi-
gere summam dilectionem intensive, sed solum
appretiative, ut videlicet nihil Deo anleponalur ,
vel acquetur; oslendimus in 2. lib. de membris
Ecclesiae. qui eral de monachis, cap. 13. ubi isla
omnia diligenler excussimus.
Deinde, probalur eadem propositio cxperimento
liominum piorum,qui (ut paulo anle de sancla Pau-
la referebamus) intensius aliquando dolent ob mor-
tein charorum, quam ob peccata, licet paratissimi
sint omnia pnrpeti potius, quara ut peccatum in
Deum committerent. IVeque reprehe'ndi potestve-
liemens ille dolor,qui ex amissione filiorum in pa-
rentibus cernitur, tum quia naluralis esl , tum et-
iam (juia in sanctissitiiis lioiiiiiuhus lociim invfuiif.
(]frle patriareha Jacoh ila doluit morlciu iilii siii
Joseph, ul Scriptura dicat (lenes. 37. Congvenalis
cunclis libcris cjus, ut lcnircnt dulorcm pniris ,
nolnil c())isohilioncm accij)crc; scd ail, Desccn-
dam ad fHiuni mcum lufiens in infcrnum. Kl
s. David 2. Ueg. 19. ita veheinenler Absalonem li-
liuiu suuin denevit, ut licel miilla lcgantnr de in-
sigiii contritione ejus ob pecealnm adultcrii.alque
homicidii;majora tamen signa dolorisob lilii mor-
tein ostendisse videatur.
Accedil Tertio, quod ex iis, qiii scrio ct ulopor-
tet. dc peccatis suis dolent, alii magis , alii minus
doleut. Non eniiu taiitoperc celebraretur Mariae
Magdalenae conliitio, si omnes, qui recle Poeni-
tenliam agiint.parem conlrilioiicm haberenl,quoad
intensionem,sicut rcvera parcm habent,quoad ap-
prclialionem.
Praclcrea: Si dolor summus pro quolibet lethali
crimine exigerelur, nemo posset magis de uno ,
quam de alio peccalo dolerc; quod est et contra
cxpericntiam el conlra rationem. Experimur enim,
graviora crimina acrius conscicnliain |)ungcre cl
majorem lum verccundiam, lum displicentiam pa-
rere. quam Icviora: etjudicium reclae rationis id
poslulal, ul majora delicta major Poeuitentia el
conlritio iulensior consequalur.
Deniquc: Si summus dolor intensive ad veram
contrilionem necessarius esset,vix unquam posse-
mus, non dico certo scire.sed ne probabiliter qui-
dem cognoscere, nos id fecisse quod debemus. iu
sceleribus dctestandis.Quis enim est.qui non pos-
sit,si studium adhibere velit.ad contrilionem paulo
majorem se excitare? At profecto absurdum el alie-
num a divina benignilale videtur, ut eam medici-
nam insliluerit, in qua pacem animi ac tranquilli-
talem nullam inveniaraus.
Qaarla \)VO[)0?,\t\o: I\on requiritur ccrtus gradus
intcjisionis, neque mora ulla temporis^ad veram
contritionem. Uaec esi adversus nonnuUos , qui
veram conlrilionem esse negant, nisi ad ccrtum
quendam intensionis gradum perveniat , et certo
spatio temporis duret.Sed facilis esl hujus sentcn-
tiae confulalio. Nam Scripturae conversionem ct
Poenitentiam exigunt; sed cerli gradus aut tempo-
ris mentionem nullam faciunl ; quare si cerlus
gradus, certumve tempus requireretur, id cssel o-
mnino ineognilum, el proinde non ex eleclione ,
sed casu fieret, ut aliqui ad justam mensuram do-
loris pervenirent, et in eo dolore justo tempore
versarentur. Deinde, quis unquam in praeceplis
fidei, spei, dilectionis, aliarumque virtutum istas
mensuras excogitavit, ut non sit fides, aut spes ,
aut charitas, nisi cerlum gradum intensionis et
certam morara temporis habeal? quod si in virlu-
tibus caeteris isla non requiruntur,currequirentur
in Poenilentiae virtute?
Quid, quod Scriptura et Patres salis aperle tra-
dunt, quovis momento posse tiominem per veram
Poenitenliam juslificari? Isaiae 30. juxta edilionem
LXX. interpretura: Cum reversus ingemueris, sal-
vus eris; et Ezechielis cap. 18. non semel Deus
indulgenliam promittil iis, quia peccalis aversi ^
alque ad vitam meliorem conversi fueriut: El Ec-
LIBER SECUNDUS
6:5 1
clesiast. cap, 11. FacUe esl, inqiiit, m oculis Dei,
siihito lionestare pauperem.
S. Cyprianiis Iract. 1. qui esl ad Demelriiinum ,
exlremo: Inlsto, inquil. mundo manenli, Poeni-
tenlianulla sera esl. Elinfra: Ta sub ipso licel
exilu etvitae temporalis occasu pro deliclis roges.
e.t Deum, qui unus et verus est, confessione et fi-
de afinitionis ejus implores, venia confilenli da-
tur eic. El iii sermone de coeiia Domiui: Sed, in-
(luil. el in eodem articulo lemporis, cum jam a-
nima festinct ad exilum et Cfirediens ad labia ex-
jnrantia emerscrit . Poemtentinm clementissimi
De.i benifinitds non aspernalur.El infrjKiVcc quan-
lilas criminis. ncc brevitas temporis , nee liorae
extremitas,nec vitae cnormitas. si vera contritio,
si pura fuerit voluptatum mutalio, excludit ave-
nia. Et infra, de bono latrone:/;i, momento.inquit,
impietas religionem, crudelitas induit pietatem,
elstatim consummatus civis sanctoru7n, cl dome-
sticus Dei praemissus est in regnum. S. Basilius
homii. dc Poenitentia: Tantummodo voles. inquit,
el ipse Deus ultro occurret. Et probat ibidem Ba-
silius exemplo filii prodii:;i. incredibilcui essc Dtii
benignilalem erga poenitenles. S. Joannes cbryso-
stomus iii episl. priore ad Tbeodoruni lapsum :
yon. inquil, ad temporis rationem , sed juxla
affectum animae solet dijudicari Poenilentia. Et
inlra de bono lalrone: In eo momento, inquil. to-
lius vitae peccata simul abstcrsit, atque ante a-
■postolos. ojficii grati praemiiun suseepit. S. Leo
in episl. 91. ad Theod. episcopuin: Apud Deum ,
inquit, nullas patitur veniae moras vera conver-
sio, dicenle Sjjiritu Deiper prophelam:Cum con-
versus ingemueris , salvus eris. Sanctus etiam
Goeleslinus I. papa in epist. ad Gallos: Desperat,
inquit, de misericordia Dei. qui ei ad subvenien-
dum morienti sufficere, vel in momento non cre-
dit posse. Et infra: Yera ergo ad Deum conversio
in ullimis posilorum, menta poHus aestimanda
esl. quam tempore , propheta hoc faliter asse-
rente: Cum conversus ingemueris , limc salvus
eris.
Quinta \)ro[iO^\[\o: Nequeillud exigitur, ut lot
sint actus conlrilionis, quot sunt pcccata; modo
de omnibus, quaepost examenmenti occurrunl,
ex animo doleamus. INarn ut negandum non esl ,
singula peccala delcslanda csse, cum scriptum sit
Isiiiae .'>8. Rccogilabo libi omnes annos meos etc.
Et Ezechiclis 18. Siimpius egerit Poenitentiam
nb omnibus peccatis suis etc. Sic est eliani concc-
dendum, posse bomincm unica actione peccata o-
mnia, quae memoriae fortc occurrunl , deteslari .
alquc cb ea commissa dolere: alioqui cnim lalsum
ftsset quod paulo ante demonstravimus, in momen-
lo posse hominem converti el juslilicari.
Sexla propositio: Vtilissimum tamen est,pecca-
ta singula amarissime et longe lempore ita de-
flere. ut contritio non solum appreliative, sed et-
iam inlensivc ct exlcnsive,ul sic loquamur, sum-
ma dici possit.
Uanc propositioncm salis nobis pcrsuadent e-
xempla et coborlalioncs sanctorum; nam ct David
lavabal per singulas nocles Icctum suuin , psalm.
0. et s. Petrus flevit amnre, l-uc. 22. ct Macrdalciia
laclirymis suis pedes Dom ini inigavil, Luc. 7. el
s. Auguslinus dc se loqucns lib. 8. Confcss. cap.
12. Ubi, inquit. a fundo arcano alla consideratio
contraxit et congessit totam miseriam meam in
conspectumcordismei,oborta est procella ingens,
ferens ingentem imbrem lachrgmarum. Et iiifra :
Ego sub quadam fici arbore stravi me, nescio
quomodo. el dimisi habenas lachrymis et proru-
perunt flumina oculorum meorum. acceptabile
sacrificium tuum. Et inlrji: Dicebam haec et fle-
bam amarissima contritione cordis mei. S. Cy-
prianus in serm. delapsis, cxtremo: Orare, inquit,
oportet impensius. ct rogarc, diem luctu trami-
gere, vigiliis noctes ac flelibus ducere, tempus o-
mne lachrymosis lamcntationibus occuparc etc.
S. Ambrosius in libro ad Virginem corruplam,cap.
8. Defiuanl, inquil, oculi lachrymas. qni mascu-
lum simpliciler non aspexerunt: paUcscat facies,
quae quondam viruit impudice: cor vero sit li-
quescens, siciit caera ctc.
Haec el sirailia passiin apud sanclos Palres in-
veniuntur, quae quidein non co solum tolo animo
ampleclenda sunt, quod (ut diximus) conlrilio eo
silulilior, quo est major:sed eliain quia pcriculum
est, ne borao se ipsefallat;el duin se ad acrem et
inlensam conlrilionem excilare non salagit, revcra
ne apprelialive quidem loto corde criraina delesle-
tur.