Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Church That Is in Purgatory · Book I: On Purgatory
Chapter 7: Purgatory is proved from the New Testament: the prison and the last farthing, Matthew 5 and Luke 12
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 fourth place is Matthew 5 and Luke 12: “Be at agreement with thy adversary betimes, whilst thou art in the way with him: lest perhaps the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. Amen I say to thee, thou shalt not go out from thence till thou repay the last farthing.” It must be explained what the way is, what the adversary, what the judge, what the officer, what the prison, what the farthing.
On the first, Chrysostom on chapter 5 of Matthew teaches that the way is here taken properly for a true road, by which one goes to the judge in this world; for Chrysostom thinks that there is no parable here, but that the Lord literally frightens the distrustful with the threat of human danger, so that the judge too is understood as a man, the officer, a human being, the prison, a material one of this life, and the farthing, a true coin of bronze; and Ochino contends with great noise that this place is to be so expounded. Of this explanation I say two things. First, that it is simply not probable, both because all the other expositors are against it, Origen, Cyprian, Hilary, Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine, Bede, Anselm, and the more recent, Tostatus, Lyranus, Cajetan, Jansen and others, who all teach that the way here signifies the present life, as when it is said, Blessed are the undefiled in the way, Psalm 118, and that this discourse is in great part metaphorical; and also because the Lord is not accustomed so seriously to teach and instruct human prudence, since he himself has often witnessed that the children of this world are wiser than the children of light. Add that the Lord would not say so assertively, Amen I say to thee, thou shalt not go out from thence till thou repay the last farthing, if he were speaking of human judgment, since we often see the contrary happen, that the accused are freed by someone's favour, or escape by themselves and pay nothing. I say, second, that if Chrysostom's opinion is to be received as probable, it can be received only for those words which are found in Matthew 5, which he himself expounds; but for those found in Luke 12 it can in no way be received; for, as Ambrose rightly noted, the Lord spoke these words twice, and on different occasions. For in Matthew 5 he said these words when he was speaking of the love of enemies and of forgiving injuries, and therefore Chrysostom's exposition can somehow be tolerated. But in Luke 12 the Lord speaks of the judgment to come; for he says, Let your loins be girt; and afterwards, Watch, because at what hour you think not the Lord will come; and at the end he concludes, When thou goest with thy adversary to the prince. There he openly shows that he speaks of the judgment to come, which will be after this life; which is also confirmed from the words immediately preceding, for he says, And why even of yourselves do you not judge that which is just? For when thou goest with thy adversary, and so on. For he wishes to remind them that this parable is taken from what men are accustomed to do; for debtors take every pains to free themselves from a creditor before it comes to judgment. Wherefore Theophylact and Euthymius, who on chapter 5 of Matthew follow Chrysostom, yet on chapter 12 of Luke say that by the way is to be understood life, by the judge, God, and so on.
On the second, although it matters little to our purpose about purgatory who the adversary is, yet because the matter is celebrated among the commentators, let us explain it briefly. Some understand by the adversary the devil, as Origen, homily 35 on Luke; Ambrose, Euthymius and Theophylact on chapter 12 of Luke; and Jerome in the epistle to Demetrias. Nor does Jerome reprove this opinion in the commentary on Matthew 5 when he says, Some have said more coarsely, and so on; for that, coarsely, is an error of the printers, and ought to be read, more cautiously. If you ask how we ought to be in agreement with the devil, when on the contrary we are commanded to resist him, Jerome answers that we ought to agree with him insofar as we are bound to stand by the pacts entered into with him in baptism; for then we renounced the devil and his pomps; if then we again desire and seize his pomps, which we renounced, he will deservedly accuse us of them before the Lord. This opinion is not very probable, and is refuted by Augustine, book 1 on the Lord's sermon on the mount, chapter 22; for the Greek word is eunoon, that is, well-disposed and friendly, and we cannot be well-disposed to the devil; then, since he himself desires that we lust after his pomps, and tempts us to this, we would be in agreement with him only if we sought his pomps and offended God. Others expound the adversary as the flesh; but they are deservedly refuted by Augustine, since the spirit cannot be commanded to consent to the flesh, for this is a sin. Others understand the spirit by the adversary, to which the flesh is commanded to consent. Jerome refutes this, because it is not credible that the spirit would deliver its own flesh to the judge; nor will the flesh go to prison without the spirit, but either the spirit alone, or spirit and flesh. Others understand by the adversary, at least in Luke, sin, because Luke says, Endeavour to be delivered from him; so Ambrose; but it is not probable, for to be delivered from an adversary is not to flee from him, or to extinguish him, but to come to terms with him, as is plain both from Matthew and from the word antidikos, that is, litigant or plaintiff. Others understand by the adversary another man, namely one who has harmed us, or we him; so Hilary, Anselm and Jerome on chapter 5 of Matthew. Which opinion, although it is probable as to the place in Matthew, Augustine yet refutes in the place cited. First, because the Lord seems here to speak of an adversary who is always with us in the way, and with whom we can always come to agreement while the way lasts; but an adversary who is a man often dies before his adversary, and leaves him in the way. Nor yet is it to be said that a just man who is in the way cannot be saved by penance although he cannot agree with his adversary. Second, because one man does not properly deliver another to God the judge; or at least there are many other things which are more properly said to deliver, as we shall say; especially because the Greek word is antidikos, which signifies an adversary not by reason of injury but by reason of a lawsuit, that is, a plaintiff or accuser. The most true exposition, then, is that the adversary is the law of God, or God himself insofar as he commands things contrary to the flesh, or conscience, which always sets the law of God against the sinner; for these nearly coincide in the same thing; so expound Ambrose, Bede and Bonaventure on chapter 12 of Luke; likewise Anselm and Augustine on chapter 5 of Matthew, and also the same Augustine in homily 1 on the words of the Lord, homily 5 in the book of fifty homilies, and in the book on the ten strings, chapter 3; Gregory, homily 39, and Bernard, sermon 83 on the Canticle. For the law of God and our conscience are always with us in the way, always oppose evil desires, and it is most useful to agree with them quickly and to be freed from their enmity; and finally they will be accusers and witnesses against us in the judgment. One thing only seems to stand against this exposition, that in Matthew 5, immediately before this parable, the Lord was speaking of reconciliation with an adversary who is a man. I answer that the Lord, after he had taught that a man ought to be reconciled to a man, wished by this parable to warn him also to remember to be reconciled with God, or with his law. Besides, even if it is probable for that reason that in Matthew 5 a man is understood by the adversary, yet in Luke 12 we cannot understand anything but the law of God or conscience; whence Cajetan, who expounded Matthew 5 of a man, expounded Luke 12 of conscience.
On the third, all agree that the judge is Christ; for the Scriptures everywhere teach this, and especially John 5, The Father hath given all judgment to the Son. On the fourth, Ambrose on chapter 12 of Luke and Augustine, book 1 on the Lord's sermon on the mount, chapter 21, understand by the officers the good angels; Gregory, homily 39, and Theophylact on Luke 12, understand demons; both are probable. On the fifth, all likewise agree that the prison is the lower world, in which however there are many mansions, some for the damned, others for those who are being purged. There existed of old the most absurd heresy of Carpocrates, as Irenaeus reports, book 1, chapter 24, who said that each one ought to be exercised in every kind of wickedness, and that therefore souls departing from the body as from a prison are examined by the judge, and unless they have committed all wickednesses are sent back again into another body as into a prison, and this is done as often as needed until the soul has passed through absolutely all wickednesses, and that the Lord meant this when he said, Thou shalt not go out from thence till thou repay the last farthing. But the opinion is too absurd to need refuting. On the sixth, nearly all also agree that by the last farthing are understood small sins, for the farthing is the smallest coin. For what Augustine says, that the last farthing signifies earthly sins, because earth is the last element, seems too hard and forced; but since the Lord does not mean to say that only a farthing is to be paid, but the whole debt down to the last farthing, it remains doubtful whether this payment is made in hell or in purgatory. Augustine thinks the matter here is the eternal punishments of hell, and therefore says that that, till thou repay, does not signify a fixed time but eternity, as when it is said in Matthew 1, He knew her not till she brought forth her son; and Psalm 109, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thy enemies thy footstool; and 1 Corinthians 15, He must reign, until he hath put all his enemies under his feet. For it is not lawful to gather, therefore after Mary brought forth Joseph knew her, and so on. Others, as Albert and Cajetan, expound it of hell and purgatory together, so that the sense is: if the debt is unpayable, you will never go out; if it is payable, you will go out when you have paid the whole exactly; others understand it of purgatory alone, namely those whom we shall cite at once.
This third opinion is the truest of all. It is proved, first, because the most ancient Fathers understood this place in this way. Tertullian, in the book on the soul, chapter 17: “Let him,” he says, “commit you to the prison of the lower world, whence you will not be let go until even the smallest fault is paid off by the delay of the resurrection.” Where note that one is to remain in the prison of purgatory at most only until the resurrection. Cyprian, book 4, epistle 2: “It is one thing to stand for pardon, another to arrive at glory; one thing, being sent to prison, not to go out thence until one pays the last farthing, another to receive at once the reward of faith and virtue; one thing to be amended for sins by long torment and purged a long time in fire, another to have purged all sins by suffering.” Origen, homily 35 on Luke: “But if we owe a great sum, like him who is written to have owed ten thousand talents, for how long a time we shall be shut up in prison I cannot plainly declare; for if he who owes little does not go out unless he pays the smallest farthing, surely for him who is liable for so great a debt infinite ages will be counted for repaying.” And in the epistle to the Romans: “Although,” he says, “it is promised that one will go out of prison some day, yet it is indicated that one cannot go out thence unless each one repays the last farthing.” Eusebius of Emesa, or rather Caesarius of Arles, or whoever was the author of those homilies, homily 3 on the Epiphany: “But those,” he says, “who have done things deserving temporal punishments, to whom the word of God is directed, that they do not go out thence until they repay the last farthing, will pass through the river of fire,” and so on. Ambrose on chapter 12 of Luke, expounding this place: “We remember,” he says, “that a farthing is accustomed to be given at the baths, by the offering of which, as there each one receives the means of washing, so here he receives the means of cleansing. Because each one's sin is cleansed by the kind of condition described above, when the guilty man is exercised with punishments so long as to pay the penalties of the error committed.” Jerome on chapter 5 of Matthew: “This is what he says,” he writes, “you shall not go out of prison until you pay off even the smallest sins.” Bernard, sermon on the death of Humbert: “Know this,” he says, “that after this life, in the places of purgation, what was neglected here is repaid a hundredfold, down to the last farthing.” It is proved, second, because that, till thou repay the last farthing, does not seem able to be rightly said unless at some time there will be an end of the payment. Nor do the examples of blessed Augustine satisfy; for when it is said, He knew her not till she brought forth, it is not lawful indeed to infer, therefore afterwards he knew her; but it is rightly inferred, therefore at some time she brought forth. Likewise when it is said, Sit at my right hand until I put, and so on, it is rightly inferred, therefore at some time all the enemies of Christ will be put under his feet; otherwise that, until, would be said ineptly. So then, when it is said, Thou shalt not go out till thou repay the last farthing, it is rightly inferred, therefore at some time he will pay the last farthing, and consequently will go out thence. It is proved, third, from the argument and scope of the parable itself; for the likeness is not taken from a murderer, or adulterer, or traitor, who are condemned to death, or to perpetual prisons, or to the galleys, but from a debtor, who not on account of a crime but on account of a money debt is thrown into prison until he pays. And men of this kind are accustomed ordinarily to go out after some time, as is plain. And so the scope of the parable is that in this life we come to terms with God, when we easily obtain remission of the punishment owed for our sins, and not wait for the world to come, in which it will be handled most severely. And so much for this place.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
(wVriiT VII.
^>uarliis lociis csl , M;iUli. .►. tl l.ur. \2. /■;«/<)
v.(mtnuilii'nn iLtlvoiHario tao citu dittn ch riiin tui
t;i vin, iit' farli' tnulnl tr iidrrrsdriiin jinliri, v.l
jndr.r tnrlori, rl niittnris in ranrrrin. .{iiirn ili-
t'o lihi,non o.xina indr.donrc rcdda^ noviasiinuin
<liiailraiiti'in\ i'\|)imii'iiiIiiiii csl (|iii*l .sil vi:i, (|iii(l
nilvcisiirids, (|ui(l |ii(li;\, (|ui(l lorliii', (|ui(l (.arccr ,
(]ui<l (|u;i(li'aMs.
Dc priiiii) r.hrysusloiiius iii vi\\). .'». M.illli.ddccl,
viiiiii liic iiccipi |ii'(iprlc pru vcni via , (piii ilurinl
Jti(liC(Uii iii liiii' iiuiiKio; (llirvsosliiiiius i<iiiiu i-^isii-
iiiiit Mulliiiu liic cssi) piinitxiliiu), stul Dtiuiiiiiiiii inl
lilcriiiii (crrcrc (lilVidculcs coiiiiiiiiiiilioiic liiiiiiiiiii
pcriitiili, ilii iil t;tiiiiu ju(li:\ iiilclli^Mliir lioiiio, loi''
lor, liotiu), ciirccr iiiiitcriiilis liujus viliic , el ipiii-
(Iriiiis vcrus uuiuiiiiis iicroiis.^Miocliiiiu lutido coii-
lciidit Ochiiius cssc liiiuc locuiu (V\poiiou(liiiii. Da
(piii c\pliciili(iiii; diio (licu.
I*riiiu); Kain siiiiplicitcr iioii cssc prohiiliilciii ,
liiiu (piod rcpiii,'iiciil oiiincs iilii cxposilorcs , Ori-
^'cucs, (lypriiiiiiis. Ililiirius, Aiiilirosius , Uicroiiy-
iiius, Au^iusliuus, Hcdii, Aiisolinus, ct rcccntiorcs,
Ahulcusis, l-yraiius. (liijetiiuus. .I;iiisciiius , t!l alii
(pii ouiucs doceiit, liic viiiin si^Miilic.ire vil;iu) prac-
sculciu, ut cuin diciliir: livali iniinaculati iii ria,
psaliu. IIS. ct inii^iia cx parte lumc serinoncm
(^ssc nicliiphoricum; tum ctiain (piod iion soical
Doiuiiuis laiu serio doccrc ct iiislrucre Immauain
prudcntiam, cuin ipsc sacpo lcsliitiis sil, Illios lui-
jus sacculi prudcntiorcs cssc liliis lucis. Addc ,
(juod non lain asscrlivo Domiuus diccrcl : Anicii
dico tibi^ non exies indc, donec rcddm novissi-
viuni quadrantcm; si loqiierctnr de huiiiano judi-
cio, cuin sacpe vidcamus conlrariuin accidcre. ul
rci libcrcijtur favorc alicujus, vcl pcr sc lugiaiit
ct nihil solvant.
Dico sccuudo: Si Chrysoslomi sentcnlia rccipi
(lcbcat, ut prohabilis, soliim rccipi possc pro iis
vcrbis quac habenlur Malthnei 5. quac ipse expo-
nil; pro iis autcm quac liiibenlur Lucac 12. nuI!o
niodo rccipi possc: ul cnim Ainbrosius rcctc nota-
vil, bis Dominus hacc vcrba loquulus est,divcrsis-
que oblatis occasionibus. Nam iMalthaci i>. dixit
liaec verba. cum loqucrelnr dc amorc inimicoruin,
cldeiujuriis condouandis, cl ideo tolerari ulcum-
(lue cxposilio Clirysostomi polcst. Al Lucac 12.
Doiuiiius lotjuitur de judicio i'uluro;dicilcnim:Sm;
luinbi vcstri praccincli. El poslea : Yigilaic quia
qua hora non pulaUs.Doininus veniet. Et in linc
concludit: Cuin crgo vadis cuin advcrsario luo
adprincipcin. Ibi apcrle ostcndil se loqui dc f'u-
turo ju(i;"io. nuod cril post hanc vilam; quod el-
iam conlirmalur ex vcrbis immedialc praecedcnli-
bus, ait enim. Quid aulcm et avobisipsis non
jud icalis quod jusluui cst? Cuincniin vadis cuin
adLcrsario etc. Vull cnim eos admoncre, parabo-
laiii hauc sumptam cx iis quae bomines facere so-
lciit; nara dcbilorcs , daiil omnem operaiu libe-
i';ii)(ii se a credilore anlcquiim iid judicium venia-
tur. Quocirca Theophylaclus el Euthymius qui in
cai). 5. .Mallli. scquunlur Clirysoslomum, lamcu iii
ctip. li Liicno (licuiil rnuln iiitollii^i por viniu, «i
taiii; pcr Jiidiciiiii, Dimiiii cIc.
Ilc scc.tiiido, olsi piiruiii rcriTl. ({iioil iilliiicl aA
iiiiHiriiiii propiiKiliiii) dii piiry:iil(jrio.(|uiH hI( advcr-
surius, i|iiia liiiiicn rits cHldiKiiiHniinu c(i((iillioun .
cvpliccmiis brcvilcr. 'iiiid.tiii pcr advcrs.iriijiii iii
lclli^tiiil diiiboliiiii, til On^ciics lioiii. Mi. iii Lu
1 .iiii; Aiiibrosiu.s, EulliyiiiiiH cl TlMtopliylacliis in
c. 12. Liiciie, ct llicroiiymiis iii cpist. K.inj Dc.iin;-
Iriadciii. .Nctpic ilKUimyiiius liaiic hcnl<miiiim ro-
pridiciidil iii coiuiiKuiliirio .Mattli. .'>. (;uin ail : (Jui,
dain roactius di.sncrunt ctr. i^am illud, (iuacliM,
(!St crror imprcssoruin, ct dcbcl lcyi, Cantiun.
Si pcl.is ipiomodo dcbciiiiis CKSC coiisciiticiilcii
diiibolo, cuiii c conlrario Jtibcamur illi rcsititQrc ?
Itcspoiidct IIi(;roiiymiis: Dtdicrc. nos consiMiliro
illi, (piiilciuis tcuuinur slarc p;ictis cuiii ipso iiiilis
111 biiptismo; luiic ciiiiii rcnuiiciaviinus di.ibulo ct
ponipis cjus; si cuiiii riirsuin iip(ict;imt)s ct invada-
iiius poiniias cjus, (piibiib rciitiiiciiivimus, nicrito
(los coriiiu Domiiio ai;cusiibit. ILico o[iinio noii csl
miiltuiii probiibilis, cl ab Augusl. rniVllilur lib. 1.
do scrmono Douiiiii iii inoiilo, ciip. 22. n iin (^Tacc.i
vox o>l d'jv^(-)'> , idost , bcncvolus cl roncon .il
diiibolo nou possumus csse bencvoli; doindc ciim
ipso ciipiiil iil coucii|)isc;imus pompiis cjiis, i-A ad
lioc iios toiitct. tiiiic os^omus coiisculiciitcs illi ,
si appclcrcmus cjus pompas cl Dcum offendere-
inus.
Alii cxponiint pcr advcrsariuin, carncm; scd rc-
follunlur mcrito ab Aiij^usliuo , cuui noii pos.sit Ju-
bcri spiritui ul consenlial carni , cum huc pecca-
tuin sit. Alii inlelligunl spiritum [)or advcrsarium,
cui caro Jubotur consenliro. Hefollit lioc Ilierony-
mus,quia non esl credibilc spirilumtraditurum Ju-
dici suam carncm; nequc ibit in carcerem caro .si-
nc spiritu , scd vcl solus spiritus, vcl spiritus ef
caro. Alii pcr advorsariuin, saltcin apud Lucam .
intcllij^unl peccalum, quiaLucas dicil: Daoperam
Ubcrari ab eo , ila Ambrosius , sed non esl pro-
babile; nam liberari ab adversario, non est ab illo
fugere, vel illum exlingucre, sed componere cuni
illo, ut palel lum cx .Mailbaeo, tum ex vcrbo dv-i-
6i-/.o^, idesl, UUgator, sivo actor. Alii inlcUigunl
]>or advcrsarium. altorum homincm , qui nimirum
nos laesit, aul nos illum : ita llihirlus , Anselmus
ct Ilieronymus in caput Matihaoi 5. Qunc scntou-
tia etsi probabilis esl.quantum ad locum .Mallliaei,
lamen eam refellil Augustinus loco citato. Primo,
quia vidclur hic Dominus loqui de adversario qui
sempcr nobiscum est in via, et cuni quo seraper
possumus concordare, dum via durat: al advcrsa-
rius homo saepe morilur aute suura adversarium ,
cl illum descril in via. Nec tanien dicendum esl ,
nou posse Juslum, qui cst in via , per poeniten-
liam salvari, licel non possit cum advcrsario con-
scnlire.
Secundo. quia non proprie unus homo tradel
allerum Deo Judici;vei sallem raulla sunlalia: quae
niagis proprie dicanlur tradcro. ul diccmus, prae-
scrtim quia vox graeca osl dv-(o'./.c?, quae non si-
gnifical adversarium ratiouc injuriao, scd raiione
litis, idesl, aotorem, sive accusatorom.
Esl ergo vcrissiina exposilio, advcrsarium esse
3C8
DE PURGATOKIO
Dci legem, sive Dcum ipsum , qualeuus praecipil
conlraiia carni, sive conscienliam , quae Dei le-
gcm semper objicit peccanli; iiaec enim fcre in i-
dcui coincidunl; ilaexponunl Ambrosius, Beda et
Bonavenlura in cap, 12. Lucac. llem Anselmuset
Augusliuus iri c. 5. Mallhaei, nccnon idem Augu-
slinns homil. 1. de verbisDomini, homil. 5.in lib.
50. Iiomiliarum, cl in libro de decem chordis,cap.
3. Gregorius homil. 39. el Bernardus serm. 83. iu
Cantica.Nam lex Dci et conscienlia noslra semper
suntnobiscura in via , sempcr adversanlur pravis
desideriis, iisque ulilissimum esl cito consenlire,
cl ab eoruin inimicitia liberari : denique accusato-
res et testes erunt contra nos in judicio.
Unum solum obstare videtur huic cxpositioni ,
quod Mallh. 5. immediute ante hanc parabolam
Dominus loquebalur de reconoiliatione adversarii
hominis. Kespondeo: Dominum posteaquam docuit
debere hominem homini reconciliari , monere vo-
luisse hac parabola, ut etiam recordarelur recon-
ciliari cum Deo sive cum ejus lege. Praeterea , et-
iamsi probabile sit propler eara ralionem,Mallhaei
5. per adversarium inlelligi hominem , lamen Lu-
cae 12. non possumus intelligere nisi legem Dei ,
aut conscienliam; unde Cajetanus qui Blatthaei 3.
exposuit de homine, Lucae, 12. exposuit de con-
scicntia.
De lerlio, conveniunl omnes, judicem esse Chri-
stum; nara Scripturae passim hoc docent, et prae-
cipue Joan. 5. Pater omne judicium deditfilio.
De quarlo, Ambrosius in cap. 12. Lucae, et Au-
gustinus lib. \. de sermone Domini in monte,
cap, 21. intelligunt per minislros , angelos bo-
nos. Grcgorius homil. 39. et Theophylactus in 12.
Lucae, intelligunt daemoaes , utrumque est pro-
babile.
De quinto, conveniunt similiter omnes carce-
rera esse infernum^in quo tamen mullae sunt man-
siones, aliae pro daranatis, aliae pro his, qui pur-
ganlur. Exslititolira absurdissiraa haeresis Carpo-
cratis, ut referl Irenaeus lib. 1. cap. 24. qui dice-
bat, debere unumquemqueexerceri in omni gene-
re flagiliorum, et ideo animas a corpore , quasi a
carcere abcunles exarainari a judice, el nisi omnia
flagitia palrassent, rursum rerailti in aliud corpus
laraquam in carcerera, et toties id fieri, donec per
orania omnino flagitia transisset , et hoc voluisse
Dominum dicere cum ait : yVori exies indQ donec
reddas novissimum quadranlem. Sed absurdior
est senlentia, quam ul refulari debeat.
De sexto, conveniunl etiam fere omnes, per no-
vissimum quadranlem inteiligi minula peccata ,
quadrans enim est minima monela.Quod onim Au-
gustinus dicit,ultimum quadrantemsiguilicare pec-
cata terrena , quia lcrru cst ullimum elcmenluin ,
nimis dururn et coactum videlur, quia lamen non
Tult dicere Dominus , solum quadranlem solven-
dum , sed lolum debilura usquc ad ullimum qua-
drantem, dubium manet,an haec soluliofiat in ge-
Iienna , an in purgalorio. Augustinus pulat liic Jigi
de poenis aelernis gehcnnae , et idco dicil , illud:
Donecreddas, non significare certum tempus,sed
aelernilatem , sicut cum dicilur Mallh. 1. I\on co-
gnovit eamdonec pareret (ilium suum.E\ psalm.
109. Sede a dexlris meis,donec ponam inimicos
tuos scabellum pedum tuorum. Et 1. Cor. 15. 0-
portet iUum coelum suscipere.donec omnia sub-
jicianlur pedibus ejus. Non enim licet colligere,
ergo postquam Maria peperit , cognovit eam Jo-
seph etc.
Alii , ut Albertus et Cajetanus exponunt de ge-
lienna el purgatorio simul, ut sensus sit; si debi-
lum erit insolul)ile, nuraquam exibis ; si erit solu-
bile, exibis, cum tolum exacte solveris ; alii intel-
ligunt de solo purgatorio , nempe ii , quos statim
cilabimus.
Terlia haec sententia est oranium verissiraa.Pro-
batur primo,quia hoc raodo hunc locum inlellexe-
runt vetuslissimi Patres. Tertullianus libro de ani-
ma, cap, 17. Illc te in carcerem , inquit, mandcl
infcrnumAinde non dimittaris.nisi modico quo-
que delicto mora resurrectionis expenso. Ubi
nota, solum esse manendum in carcere purgatorii
ad suramura, usque ad resurrectionem.
Cyprianus lib. 4. epist. 2. Aliud est ad veniam
stare; aliud ad gloriam pervenire; aliud missum
in carcerem non exire inde, donec solvat novis-
simum quadrantem; aliud stalim fidei el virlutis
accipere mercedem : aliud pro peccatis longo
tempore crucialum emendari , et purgari diu
igne : aliud peccala omnia passione purgasse.
Origenes homil.35. in Lucnm-.Quod si magnam
pecuniam debuerimus, sicul ille , qui scribitur
decem millia talenla debuisse, quanto tenipore
claudamur in carcere , non possum manifeste
pronunciare: si enim qui parum debet non e-
gredilur nisi exsolvat minutum quadrantem, u-
tique qui tanlo debito fuerit obnoxius infinila ei
ad reddendum saecula numei^abunlur.FA in epi-
stola ad Rom.Quamvis,\nq\i[[.promiltatur exeun-
dum esse quandoque de carcere, tamen designa-
tur non inde exiri posse , nisi reddat quisque
novissimum quadrantem.
Eusebius Eraissenus, sed potius Caesarius Are-
latensis , vel quicumque fuit auclor earura homi-
liarum homil. 3. de Epiphania: Hi vero,\nquil,qui
temporalibus poenis digna gesserunt , ad quos
sermo Dei dirigitur, quod non exeunt indc, do-
nec reddant novissimum quadrantem , per flu-
vium igneiim transibunt etc.
Ambrosius in cap. 12. Luc. exponens hunc lo-
cum: Quadrantem, inquit, in balneis dare solere
reminisciniur, cujus oblatione, ut illic unusqui-
que lava7idi acciiit facultatem , ita hic accipit
eluendi. Quia uniuscujusque peccatum supra-
scriptae genere conditionis eluitur , cum tandiu
cxercetur noxius poenis , ut commissi supplicia
erroris expendal.
Ilieronymus in cap. 3. Matlh. Hoc est , inquit ,
quod dicit, non egredieris de carcere, donec et-
iam munita peccaia persolvas. Bernardus serm.
de obitu Iluberli: lllud , inquil , scitote quia post
hanc vitam in purgatoriis locis centupliciter ,
quac fuerint hic neglecta, redduntur , usque ad
novissimum quadrantem.
Probalur sccundo, quia illud: Donec solvas ul-
timum quadra7item.non videtur recle posse dici,
nisi aliquando sit fulurus finis solutionis. Neque
I iiii.ii i'HiMi S 3'>^
oxninpla U. Aiiii^uslliil salisrnciitiil ; nain rnui dirl- Itcspoinlro priino: kU Aii^iihIIiio uliiH(|iii; 1'ulrl'
lur: Non connoHccbal cnm doncc pnrcrrl , non II- hiis jiiiiir Inrum inli'llli;l «li* pocnli posl hnnc »1-
cot (iiiiilfiii iiir<M"io, •'i^^'!» poslrii (•n^;iiiivil ciim, scd l.iiii, Scnimlo iliro: Siillcin c\ Unr joro po ' '-
iiiriTic liicl , cr^ii ill.i iilii|ii.iii'lo p.niliiiM cr.il; si- iliiri pncoiis iilnpi.is posl li.ior vit^im porj^' <
niililiir (Mim iliciliir .* Soili^ a dcxtiU incin , dnnc.c cnsi';iiiitn lilin' li.ilicmon ipi.irilinii iicrrnln non inn-
pondvt c(c. rcctc inrciliir , cr^^i» iiliipiioilo poocii- rcri iii-<i |iiii-ii.ioi lciiipiiinlciii; -mmI polcsl llcrl. iil
liir omiics iiiiiiiici CJirisli siih iicililio-^ cjos ; alio- ipii-> oiiiri.iliir rooi l.ililiiis p<-rr.ilM , ipii.i (lolriii
ipii illiiil : Ihnwc , iiicplc ilircrcliir ; tta cri;o riim iiniri rcpcolc; vcl ilonniciiH, Itn ol imiIIiioi liiihcal
diriliir : A'oM c.vicH doncc HolcaH nUimuni qna- sp.iiiiioi pociiilcoii:ic. cr^;o io !ilia vil.i por^j.ibilur,
dranfcin , iiircnonis rcctn , i!ri^'o ;ilii|ii;iiii|o snl- iiliiiipii vd ilnl iii roclom ali'piid coirfjoiiialiim ,
vcl oltiiiiiim iiiiiidr.iiilcm , cl coiiscipiciilcr cxiltil vd iiijiisli' d.iiiiii.ilntor ad pocons ndcrniis , qiii
iiidi^ iioii mcrch.ilur nisi lcmporiilcs.
'rcilio proltiiliir c\ rmiiiiiiiicnlo d scnpo ipMiis Srvlos lnnis cst F.iii'. 10. Vanli' rnlnK (iimcns
pnraliolac; ikiiii simililinln ihmi csl siim|)lii ;ili lio- dc viitininnna iniiiHilnlis, ul inm d<'fi'iiTiti>*. rc-
inioida, vol adiiltoro. vd prodiloro, qiii diiiimaiiliir cipianlvonin aclfrna ialic.rnncnla.Vcr {drfirnre)
«d morlcm, vd iiil pcrpi liios riirrorcs , vcl Irirc.- inldlii^Miiil omiics iiinri, |tcr iainiviiH) iolcilii,'iml
niivs, scd ii ddiilorc, (pii iinii proplcr rrioiiMi, sod s;inrlos, ipii riiiii Olirisln rcj;o;iiil, «!V qoilois se-
proplor ddiiliim pcriiiii;iriiiiii roojiritor in r.jircc- (piiliir liomiiics posl morlcm joviiri pr«M:il>us san-
rcin, donoc solviil.Solcnt inilnm liojiismodi liomi- cloriim.
iics ordinario cj^rcdi post iilnpiod lcinpos.nl p;il(U. S(;d (]uia possiU nliqiiis dicorc, liic n^\ dc virlu-
llinpii; sco|>iis p;iral)ol.ic cst, iil iii li;ir, vit;i com- te (^lccmosyii;io, ct sciisiim cssc, cos qui cW.vmn-
ponamus cum Dco, (piiuulo facilc impdramus re- synas rcccrunl, ciirn moriiintur salvnri proptcr o-
niissioncm pocnac pcrciilis noslris (lchilac , ncc pcr;i ilin I)on;i, (ii';ic rcrcruiit ; obscrv^indiim cst ,
cxspcctcnuis sncciilum fulunim , iii quo scvcrissi- non lior, sojiini vdlc Dixiiinmn , scd cli;im vclie
nie agctur. Alquc liacc dc isto loco. post inorlcm juvari animas prccibus sandoruin ;
nnm primo nd id co;,M)iit vcrb.i illa:Faci7c aniivos,