Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Church That Is in Purgatory · Book I: On Purgatory
Chapter 6: Purgatory is proved from the New Testament: 1 Corinthians 15, baptized for the dead
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. II, De Ecclesia quae est in Purgatorio, Book I, the third general controversy. 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 place is 1 Corinthians 15: “Otherwise what shall they do that are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not again at all? why are they then baptized for them?” This place plainly proves what we wish, if it is well understood; therefore we shall briefly weigh it. I find six expositions of this place.
The first is that the Apostle proves the resurrection to come from the error of certain persons who received baptism in the name of some friend of theirs who had died without baptism; for they thought that as the prayers and fasts of the living profit the dead, so baptism also would profit them. So expound Tertullian, book 5 against Marcion and the book on the resurrection, Ambrose, Anselm and Haymo; according to which exposition prayer for the dead is gathered from this place, because these Fathers teach that the Apostle, although he does not approve the error of these people, yet approves the intention they had of helping the dead, and argues from it; if, then, the Apostle approves the intention of helping the dead, surely it cannot and ought not to be disapproved by any Christian. Yet I do not think this exposition true. First, because the Apostle ought at least to have hinted that this was an error, so as not to give occasion for erring. Second, because the Apostle would not be arguing solidly; for it could be answered that the resurrection is not well proved from the fact that certain people in error so believe. For as they err in baptizing one for another, so they can err in believing the resurrection to come. Third, because none of the ancient historians reports that this error existed in the time of the apostles; for Philaster attributes this error to the Montanists, who arose a hundred years after the death of Saint Paul; Chrysostom and Theophylact, in the places above, attribute the same to the Marcionites, who also began eighty years after the death of Paul; finally Epiphanius, heresy 28, attributes it to the Cerinthians, whose sect arose twenty years after the death of Paul. Add that Chrysostom and Epiphanius attribute this error not to Marcion and Cerinthus themselves, but to their posterity, and rightly. For otherwise how would Irenaeus and Tertullian not have refuted this error, who most diligently refuted all the errors of Cerinthus and Marcion? Tertullian does indeed say that this error was of the time of the apostles, but he has this from nowhere but this place, and so ought to be counted with Epiphanius and Theophylact, who interpret it as they think best.
The second exposition is that the Apostle understands sins by the name of the dead, when he says, who are baptized for the dead, as if he said: what shall they do who are baptized for the dead, that is, for sins to be washed away? So Sedulius and blessed Thomas on this place, the second time. But on the contrary: first, because the Apostle adds, if the dead rise not again at all, why are they then baptized for them? namely for dead men, who do not rise; and so he clearly teaches that he is treating not of sins but of men. For he does not wish to prove that sins rise, but that men rise. Second, because the whole force of the argument perishes if it is said, what shall they do who are baptized for sins to be washed away, if the dead do not rise? For it could be answered that it profits much to wash away sins even if the dead do not rise, because it is good in this life to enjoy the testimony of a good conscience. Third, because sins are not called dead except when they have been blotted out and extinguished; therefore Paul does not understand by the name of the dead sins which are still to be blotted out.
The third exposition is that to be baptized for the dead is to be baptized simply with the baptism of Christ, but that those who receive baptism are said to be baptized for the dead because before they are baptized they recite the Creed, in which is that one article, the resurrection of the flesh; so that, for the dead, signifies for the hope of the resurrection, or for dead bodies, that is, to this end, that our bodies which are to die may one day rise immortal. So Chrysostom, Oecumenius and Theophylact; but it is certainly a hard and forced exposition. First, because the Apostle would not say, what shall they do who are baptized for the dead, but, what shall we do who are baptized for the dead? For not some, but all are so baptized. But the Apostle speaks of some only, as is plain both from the form of the words and from what follows, why also are we in danger every hour? Second, because it is unheard of that by the name of the dead should be understood the hope of resurrection, or dead bodies, since in Greek it is nekroi, in the masculine gender, and bodies are of the neuter gender, somata. Third, because if we were said to be baptized for the dead because we recite the article on the resurrection of the dead, we could also be said to be baptized for God the Father, and for Christ, and for the Holy Spirit, and for the Church, because we recite all these in the Creed. Fourth, because the Apostle seems altogether to understand by the name of the dead dead men, and nothing else; for when he says, if the dead rise not again, why are they then baptized for them? what can we understand by the word, them, except those dead who do not rise?
The fourth exposition is that to be baptized for the dead is to be baptized with the baptism of Christ; but that baptism is said to be for the dead because while we are baptized we act and represent the person of one dead, while we are plunged in the water, and of one rising, while we rise from the waters; and so we profess the resurrection, and from this profession the Apostle proves the resurrection to come. So expound Theodoret and Cajetan. But on the contrary: first, because neither in Hebrew, nor in Greek, nor in Latin does to act for someone signify to represent him, but to act in his place, or for his benefit. Who ever said of an actor in the theatre playing the part of Davus or Pamphilus, he acted for Davus, or for Pamphilus? Second, because those who are baptized represent the death of Christ and at the same time their own death, as is plain from the Apostle, Romans 6: All we who are baptized in Christ Jesus are baptized in his death; for we are buried together with him by baptism, and so on. And so to be baptized for the dead would be to be baptized for oneself and for Christ, which is most absurd. Nor is it ever found in the Scriptures, to be baptized for Christ, but only to be baptized in Christ, or in his name, as is plain in Romans 6, Galatians 3, Acts 10 and 19. Third, because the Apostle's argument would be nothing; for from the fact that he who is baptized acts the person of one dead it does not follow that he professes the resurrection. The Apostle ought then to have said: what shall they do who are baptized for the raised, or for the dead and raised? But even if he had said this, his argument would still be light, because it could be answered that in baptism is represented a resurrection not of the flesh from death, but of the soul from sin. For that is what the Apostle signifies in Romans 6: that we may walk in newness of life; and Colossians 3: If you be risen with Christ, seek the things that are above.
The fifth exposition is that of Epiphanius, heresy 28, which Peter Martyr brings forward, that Paul speaks of the baptism of those who were baptized in bed when they were at the point of death, who were formerly called clinics, and whom Cyprian wittily sets against the peripatetics, book 4, epistle 7, to Magnus, since the clinics, namely, do not walk about, but stick fastened to the bed; for kline signifies a bed. Some, then, wish this to be the Apostle's sense: what shall they do who are baptized for the dead, that is, who are baptized when they are held rather for dead than for living, and when it is certain that they are not baptized for any advantage of this life, since they are held for dead. This exposition is refuted, first, from those words, why are they then baptized for them? for he ought to have said, why are they baptized for themselves, not, for them. Second, because that phrase, for one dead, cannot be said except in those actions which are done about the dead. For example, we rightly say, he fell from a high place and was taken up for dead, or was washed and buried for dead, even if he was alive. But it is not rightly said, he walked, or ate, or spoke, for dead. But to be baptized belongs to the living, not to the dead; therefore it is not rightly said that someone is baptized for dead, even if he is at the point of death, but rather it ought to be said that he is baptized for living, even if he is almost dead.
The sixth exposition, then, is the true and genuine one, that the Apostle speaks of the baptism of tears and penance, which is received by praying, fasting, giving alms, and so on; and the sense is: what shall they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead do not rise; that is, what shall they do who pray, fast, groan, afflict themselves for the dead, if the dead do not rise? So expound Ephrem in his testament, Peter of Cluny in the book against the Petrobrusians, Denis, Hugh, Gagnaeus and others on this place. This exposition is most true. First, because to be baptized is everywhere in Scripture and the Fathers taken for to be afflicted, as Mark 10: Can you drink of the chalice that I drink of: or be baptized with the baptism wherewith I am baptized? Luke 12: I have a baptism wherewith I am to be baptized. The Fathers everywhere call the affliction of penance a laborious baptism and a second plank. Cyprian in the sermon on the Lord's supper: “He baptizes himself,” he says, “with tears.” And in the preface of the book on the exhortation to martyrdom he frequently calls dying for Christ a baptism; and Gregory Nazianzen in the oration on the Epiphany: “I know,” he says, “a fourth baptism, which is by martyrdom and blood; I know also a fifth, of tears and penance.” Second, because the very punishment of purgatory is called by Scripture and the Fathers a baptism; for what we read in Matthew 3, He shall baptize you in the Holy Ghost and fire, blessed Jerome expounds, in the Holy Ghost, in this life, but in fire, in the next; as before him blessed Basil had expounded in the book on the Holy Spirit, chapter 15, and after them Bede on chapter 3 of Luke. Likewise Gregory Nazianzen at the end of the oration on the Epiphany calls the fire of purgatory in the other life the last baptism. And so the Apostle most elegantly said that those are baptized for the dead who, afflicting themselves with prayer and fasting, take upon themselves a part of that fiery baptism with which souls are baptized in purgatory. Third, because this exposition squares best with what follows: Why also are we in danger every hour? as if he said: why do some afflict themselves praying for the dead, and I afflict myself preaching the gospel, if there is no resurrection of the dead? Fourth, because this sentence is the same as that of 2 Maccabees 12: if the dead do not rise, it is superfluous and vain to pray for the dead.
But against this exposition two arguments are objected. The first is that the Apostle ought not to have said, what shall they do who are baptized for the dead, but, what shall we do who are baptized for the dead; for all Christians pray for the dead. I answer that the Apostle wished to argue not from the custom of Christians, which as new could have been rejected by unbelievers, but from the custom of the Jews, who by ancient practice, and according to the examples of the Scriptures, prayed and fasted for the dead; as if he said: what shall they do who, imitating the ancient Fathers, fast and pray and afflict themselves for the dead, if the dead do not rise? The second argument is that the resurrection of the dead does not seem to be well proved from the fact that prayer is made for the dead, because prayer is made not that they may rise, but that they may be freed from those punishments and pass to rest. I answer that the question of the resurrection and of the immortality of souls were so joined in the time of the apostles that they were held as one, as we showed above when we expounded the testimony from the books of Maccabees. Whether, then, we follow this exposition, which seems to us most true, or the first, which is better than the other three, prayer for the dead is plainly gathered.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPIIT VI. Tcrtius ioeiis csl , 1. C.or. 1"). Quid facionl qni haplizantiir pro niortiiis , si inorlui non rcsur- yunl? ui (luid biiplizonhir pro iUis:^ llic locus a- porlo convineil , (luoii vohiiuus , si beno iiileilij;!»- lur . idco bn^vilor ciiiu cxpeiuliiiuus. Scx iiiveiiio liujus loci CNposilioucs. i'rima csl,(pii)ii aposlolus probct futnrnin rcsur- rcclioiicm, c\ crrorc (pioruiuliim , qui biiplismuni suscipicbanl nomiiic iiliiMijns amici sui (icruncli sino baplismo: cxislimabiint ciiiiu, (piod sicul orii- tioncs cl jcjuuia vivoruin prosunl dcrunctis. ila cl baptismns prodcssol.lla cxpoiuinl Tcrlulliiuiiis lib. 5. in Marcioucu),et libro dc rcsurrcctione,.\mbro- sius, Anseliuns et Haymo; secundum quaru expo- silioncmcoUijjilur oralio pro dcfunclis cx lioc loco, quia doccnl isli Palrcs , (piod iipo.slolus, iiccl non probel errorcm islorum.lamcn probat inlenlionem, quam babcbanl juvandi defnnclos , el cx ea argu- mcnlalur : si igitur aposlolus probat inlenlionera juvaiuii morluos . ccrlc rcprobari non potcst. nec dcbel ab ullo Olirisliauo : laiiieu non puto veram haiic cxposilionem. Priino.quia aposlolus debuissel sallem iusinua- re bunc esse errorcm, ne darel occasionem erran- di. Seciindo, quia non solide argumenlarelur apo- slolus; posset enira responderi, non bcne probaii resurrectionein cx eo.quod ila credanl quidam er- rantes. Sieul enira errant in eo, quod baplizanl u- num pro alio. sic possunl errare in eo , quod cre- dunl luluraiu resurreclionem. Terlio , quia nulius veteruin bistoricorum tradil hunc errorein tempo- re aposlolorura fuisse;lribuit enim Pbylasler hunc errorein Monlanislis qni 100. annis post obilura s. Pauli exorli sunl , eandem tribuunl Chrysoslomus el Theophylactus.ubi supra,Marcionistis,qui eliam posl obilum Pauh 80. annis inceperunl ; denique Epiphanius haeresi 28. boc tribuil Cherinlbianis, quorum sexta 20.annis post obilura Pauli orla est. Adde quod Clirysoslomns el Epiphanius, non ipsi Marcioni et Clicrinlbo, sed postcrilali corum hunc errorera Iribuunl el merilo. Alioqui enim quomo- do Irenueus et Tcrlullianus hunc errorcm non re- fulassenl, qui diligenlissime refularunl omnes er- BtLi.Auni.M. Voi. 11. rorcs Cjicriiitiii iM .M.irciunis. Dicit ((uidrm Tcrlul li.imiH.iiiiiic rrrorcm ruiiH» (oinpnrii nposlcdoruin, .scd luui liiibct nisi liiiic Ii.upic liii^rilo (!l> ' >■ IIIIIS ll Kpl|l||.||lll|H l'l 1 llC Ipllvl.K lllS . Il I , I Hilioiit III iit rihiiiii ri'jii:iuol. .MttM.i cNpiisilUi rst , (piod iipicittdili iKillliIin iiiiirliioiiiiii inlclli^.il pcrc;ilii. riiiii ilicil, ipii b.ipli- -/.iinliir pKi inortiiii, (pt.isl dical: (jiiid fji ii!i|( . ipii bii|ili/..iiitiir pro iiii)rtuis,idcsl, pro piMTiiiJH diiiicn- dis? ila S.'diiliii ; , c( b. ilioiiiaH iii iiiiiic iociim ii postoii. A( coiilni; Priino.ipiia nposlolus subdil: Sl mor liii uon rcHiiriiunt: iit iinid haptizanlur pro dli»? iiiiniruin luiiniiiilius iiioiluis, ipii iioii rcsiir(;iiiil ;\ iiiupic cl.irn ilocel, sc non (i(; pecciiiis, .scd dc lio- miiiibiis ii;;(M'c. Ntin (Miiiii vuK probarc. (piod pi.T- Ciitii riisiir^jiint. simI (piod hoiiiiiics rcsiirKant. Se- ciiiido. ipiia to(a vis ar^iimitnti [uMit , si dicalur . (piid fiici(M>l qiii iiapti-^iintiir pro peccati.sdiliurndiii si morlui nou rcsur^Minl? Possct ciiiiii rcspondcri, ninllnm |)roilcssc, iIiIu(M'c ptMM-aia , (;(iiiiiisi mordii nou i'esurgau(.quia lioiium ost iiiiiac vilafrui tcsd- luonio boiiiu^ coiiscieiitiiic.Teriio.ipiia fu*ccata non dicuntur mortiia, uisi (piaiidosniit dtdct.i ot cxtiii- cla, iion crno P.iiilus noinine morliioruiii inlelligit pcccala, (piii,^ adliuc dtdenda snnt. Tcrtia cxpositio csl, biipti/.ari [irn mortnis, csse, ba|)li/,ari sinqiiicitcr iiaplisino Cbrisli , sed ideo dici ba|)li/.ari |)ro moriuis , qui ba[)tismum susci- [)iunt, (iiiia iiutci|Uiiin i);i|)ti7.cnlur , rcciliinl sym- boliim, iii (juo esl uiuis iirticuliis, Carnis rcsurrc- ctioneni, ila illud, pro morluis, signilicet pro spe resurrcclionis, vcl [^ro corporibus mortuis , idnst, in eum Iiiumii, ul c()r|)ora noslrn (|uac mnrilura sunl, aliquiindo immorlidia rcsur^'anl. Ita Cliryso- slomiis, Occumcnius et Thcopbylactus , sed certc dura ct violcnla exposilio e.sl. Primo: Ouia non dicerct nposlolus: Quid facient quihaplizanturpro morluis, sed quid faciraos qui bapllzamur [iro mortuis? Xon enim quidam , sed omncs sicbiipli7.iinlur..\poslolus autcm de qui- busdnm tanlum io(iuitur, ul pnlel tum ex forma verborum, lum ex eo quod sequitur.ut quid ct nos periclilanuir tota dio? Secundo : Quia inaudilum est, nl nomine morluorum inlelligatur spes resur- recliouis , vel corpora mortua, cum in gracco sil vsxpol. in gonore masculino, el corpora sintgenc- ris neulri oiopLata. Tertio: Quia si ideo diceremur baplizari pro morluis. quia recitamus articulum de inortuorum resnrreclione , eliam possemus dici bnplizari pro Dco Pnlre, et pro Chrislo, et pro Spi- rilu sancto, et pro Ecclesia. quia haec omnia reci- tamus in symbolo. Quarlo: Quia aposlolus videtur omnino nomine mortuorum, homines morluos in- telligere, el nihil aliud, cura enim ait : Si mortui non resurfiunt, ut quid haptizantur pro illis ? quid possumus inlelligere per vocem , illis , nisi illis morluis, qui non resurgunt? Quarln exposilio est, baptizari pro mortuis esse baplizari bnplismo Chrisli; dici aulem baptismnm pro morluis. quin dum baplizamur, agiraus e( re- praesenlamus personam morlui, dum mergimur in aquam; et resurgenlis, dum surgimus ab aquis, et sic proruemur resurreclionem, el ex hac profes- :m DE PIIRGVTORIO - sione •aposfolus probal fuUiram resurrectionem.Ila exponunl Theodorelus el Oajetanus. Al contra: Primo: Quia neque liebrnice , noquc graece, neque latine, agere pro aliquo, significal eura repraesenlare. sed agere ioco ejus, vel in e- jus utilitalem. Quis unquam dixil de agenle in Iheatro personam Davi, aul Pampiiili, ilie egil pro Davo, aut pro Pamphilo ? Secundo: Quia qui baplizanlur , repraesentant morlem Christi, el simul morteui suam,ut palet e.\ apostolo, Uom. 6. Qaotquot haplizali su7nus iti Christo Jesu. in morte ipsius baptizati swnus , consepulti cnim sumus cum illo per baptismum etc. Ilaque baptizari pro mortuis, erit bapiizari pro se et pro Christo , quod absurdissimum est. Nec in Scripturis unquam reperilur baplizari pro Cliri- sto, sed sohim baplizari in Christo , vel in eius nomine , utpalet Roman. 6. Gal. 3. Acl. 10. et 19, Terlio:Quia argumentum apostoli nullum esset; nam ex eo quod qui baplizatur , agit personam mortui, non sequitur quod profilealur resurrectio- nem. Debuissel ergo a[)ostolus dicere:Quid facienl qui baplizanlur pro suscitalis, vel pro mortuis et suscitatis? sed etiamsi boc dixisset , adhuc leve esset argumentum ejus. quia posset responderi , in bapli.smo repraesenlari resurrectionem . non carnis a morte , sed animae a peccalo. Id enim apostolus significat Rom. G. Vtin novitate ritae ambulemus. El Coloss. 3. Si consurrexistis cum Chrislo, quae sursum sunt quaerite. Quinla expositio esl Epiphanii,haeresi 28.quam adlerl Pelrus Marlyr, quod Paulus loquatur de ba- plismo eorum, qui baplizabanlur in lecto, cum es- sent in exlremis, qui olim dicebantur clinici, et quos Cyprianus festive opponit peripateticis lib.4. epist. 7. ad Jlagnum, quod nimirum clinici non ambulent, sed haereant leclo afllxi; xXivyj enim le- clum significal. Volunt ergo quidam hunc esse a- posloli sensum: Quid facient qui baplizantur pro mortuis. idest, qui baptizantur quando habenlur magis pro mortuis, quam viveniibus, el quando certum est eos non baplizari pro ullo commodo hujus vilae, cum pro morluis habeantur. Haec expositio refelhtur. Primo, ex illis vcrbis, ut quid baptizanlur pro illis? nara dicere debuis- sel, ut quid baptizantur pro se, non pro illis; Se- cundo, quia illud. pro morluo , non potest dici, nisi in iis actionibus quae fiunt circa morluos.Ver- bi gratia, recte dicimus, ille cecidit ex loco edito; et pro mortuo sublalus fuit, vcl pro mortuo lolus sepuliusque fuit, eliamsi viverel. At non recle di- citur, ille ambulabat , vol comedebat, vel loque- balur pro mortuo. Atbaptizari est vivorum non mortuorum; non ergo recle dicilur baplizari ali- quem pro morluo. eliamsi agal in extremis , sed potius debereldici baptizari pro vivo, ctiamsi fere sil morluus. Est igilur sexta oxpositio vera et germana.quod apostolus loquaiur de baplismo lachrymarum et pocnilentiae , qui suscipilur orando , jejunando , eleemosynas faciendo etc. El sensus sit: Quid fa- cient qni baptizantur pro moriuis.si mortui non resurgent, idest, quid facient qui orant , jcjunant, gemunt , alTligunl se pro mortuis , si mortui non resurgunl? ita cxponunt Ephrem in suo le.stamen- to, Petrus Cluniacensis in hb. contra Pelrobrusia- nos , Dionysius , Hugo , Gagnejus , el alii in hunc locum, Haec expositio verissima est. Primo,quia bapti- zari passim in Scriplura et Patribus accipitur pro affligi. ut Marc. 10. Poteslis hibere calicem quem pgo hihilurus sum,, et baptismo quo ego baptizor baptizari ?Luc. 12. Baptismo habeo haptizari. Patrcs passira vocanl poenitentiae afilictionem ba- plismum laboriosum , el secundam labulam. Cy- prianus in sermone de coena Domini:iacft,ri/rms, inquit, se baptizal. Et in prooemio lib. de exhor- talione martyrii , mori pro Chrislo , frequenler vo- cal baptisma;et Gregorms nazianzenus oralione de Fpiphania: Scio, inquit, quartum baptisma,quod per martyrium et sanguinem fit , scio et quin- tum, lachrymarum etpoenitentiae. Secundo: Quia ipsa poena purgatorii a Scriptu- ra cl Patribus vocatur baptisma.nam quod legimus Matlh. 3. Ipse vos baptizabit in Spiritu sancto et igni. B. Hieronymus exponil in Spiritu sancto , in hac vitn, igne vero, in fulura ; sicut ante eum ex- posuerat b. Basihus lib. de Spirilu sanclo, cap.15. et post eos Beda in cap. 3. Lucae. Item Gregorius nazianzenus in fine orationis de Epiphania . vocat ignem purgatorii in alia vita,ullimumbaptisma, I- taque elegantissime aposlolus dixit, eos baptizari pro morluis, qui allligentes se oratione et jejunio, sumunt in sc partem illius baplismi ignei , quo a- nimae baptizantur in purgatorio. Tertio:Quia haec exposilio maximequadrat cum sequentibus: Vt quid et nos pericUtamur tota die? quasi dicat; Cur quidam se affligunl orando pro mortuis,el ego affligo me praedicando evangeliura si mortuorum resurrectio non esl? Quarto: Quia ista senlenlia eadem est cum illa ; 2. Machab. 12. si mortui non resurgunt,superfluum cst et vanum orare pro morluis. At conlra hancexposilionem duoargumenta ob- jiciuniur. Primum est, quia non debuisset apo- stolus dicere.quid facientqui baptizanturpro mor- luis, sed quid faciemus qui baplizaraur pro mor- tuis: nam omnes Chrisliani oranl pro morluis. Re- spondeo: Apostolus argumcntari voluil non a con- suetudine Christianorum,quae lamquam nova reji- ci poluisset ab incredulis, sed a consuetudine Ju- daeorum, qui more veleri , et secundum Scriplu- rarum exempla orabant et jejunabanl pro morluis, quasi dicat:Quid facienl illi qui irnilantesantiquos Palres jejunant el orant. ac se affligunt pro mor- luis, si mortui non resurgunt? Secundum argumentum est : Quia non videtur bene probari mortuorum resurrectio, ex eo, quod oratur pro mortuis, quia oratur non utresurgant , sed ut a poenis illis liberenlur , atquc ad requiem transeant. Rcspondeo: Quaeslioncm de resurre- clione elde iminorlalilate animorum ita fiiisse con- junctas tempore aposlolorum, ut pro una haberen- tur, ut supra ostendimus, cum teslimonium ex li- bris Machabaeorum exponeremus.Sive igilur hane expositionem sequamur, quae nobis verissima vi- delur, sive primam, quae melior esl caeteris Iri- bus, aperle colligitur oralio pro defunclis. .tUl.h fMiMI S W