Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Church That Is in Purgatory · Book II: On the Circumstances of Purgatory
Chapter 3: The objections are solved
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. II, De Ecclesia quae est in Purgatorio, Book II, 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).
It remains to solve the arguments. The first argument: the souls which dwell in purgatory are imperfect in charity; therefore they ought to advance and merit, that they may be perfected. That they are imperfect is proved, first, because if those souls were perfect they certainly would not be punished; for to what end should perfect spirits be punished? If you say, that they may satisfy God: on the contrary, because God is most satisfied through charity; for charity covereth a multitude of sins, says Peter, 1 Peter 4. Second, because if he who dies is still a debtor of ten days of fasting, and yet loves God supremely, it is incredible that God does not forgive him those ten days, since God is accustomed willingly to accept the will where he does not find the ability; therefore if he does not forgive him the debt, it is a sign that he was not perfect in charity. Third, because if they were perfect they would not fear punishments; for perfect charity casts out fear; if they did not fear punishments, they would not be punished, because that is not a punishment which is loved and willingly received; therefore they would not be in purgatory unless they were imperfect. Fourth, because nothing can be perfect outside God, according to that of 1 Corinthians 13, When that which is perfect is come, that which is in part shall be done away; therefore the souls of purgatory, which are not blessed, are necessarily imperfect. Then the consequence of the first argument is proved. First, it is impossible to stand still in the way; for one must always go forward or backward, as Bernard says; but the souls of purgatory are in the way, for they have not yet arrived. Second, virtue is perfected in weakness, 2 Corinthians 12, and gold in the furnace becomes brighter. Third, it is impossible for any creature to be preserved unless it always receives more and more, until it is absorbed into its principle, as is plain in rivers, which always receive new water until they enter the sea; whence preservation is accustomed to be called a certain continuous creation. Fourth, charity after this life will be greater; therefore it will be increased; therefore through merits.
I answer to the antecedent that the souls of purgatory can be called imperfect with respect to those which are in glory; and also one in purgatory can be called imperfect with respect to another, whether existing in purgatory or in this world. Yet absolutely every soul existing in purgatory is perfect in charity. There is no charity simply imperfect; for it is said in 1 John 2: He that keepeth his word, in him in very deed the charity of God is perfected. But any degree of charity suffices for one to keep his word, that is, the commandments of the Lord. To the consequence I say that the souls of purgatory, insofar as they are imperfect with respect to those which are in heaven, ought to be perfected in charity, but that that increase does not require new merits; for it will be the reward of all past merits. For charity is increased in two ways: in one way in the kind of grace, so that a man is made fitter for meriting more, and this increase is not given after this life; in the other way in the kind of glory, so that all past merits are rewarded, and this will happen in blessedness itself, for part of the reward will be, as Augustine says in the book on rebuke and grace, chapter 10, such an abundance of charity that he who is endowed with that abundance of charity can never fall from blessedness and from justice. And to answer in order to the several heads of this argument: to the first I say that those souls are punished, although they are perfect in charity, because their charity, although supremely pleasing to God, is not always accompanied by that sorrow for sins which is required for full satisfaction; and therefore something remains to be paid in purgatory; for the guilt of punishment, for which satisfaction is to be made, is not repugnant to that perfection of charity which is had outside the kingdom of heaven. To the words of blessed Peter I say that charity covers a multitude of sins, but not in the same way as to fault and as to punishment; for it always blots out the whole fault by its own proper act, but it does not always take away the whole punishment by its own act, but by satisfactory works, which charity itself commands. To the second I say likewise: if he who dies grieves for his sins with supreme love, he can in that way satisfy for all punishment; but if the sorrow is not so great, he ought to satisfy afterwards in purgatory. Nor does it stand in the way that he would have wished to fast if life had remained, and that God accepts the will where he does not find the ability; for in this man the ability of satisfying is found, if not by fasting, certainly by suffering in purgatory. To the third I say that the soul of purgatory does not fear, but in fact suffers, punishments; for fear is of things to come, not of things present; I say besides that fear of punishment is not repugnant to perfect charity; otherwise Christ, who feared punishments, and from that fear sweated blood, Luke 22, would not have been perfect in charity. But what John says, Perfect charity casteth out fear, is not understood of any fear of punishment whatever, such as natural or filial, but of servile fear, that is, of the fear of fault chiefly on account of the punishment; for he who loves perfectly fears to offend God chiefly on account of God himself, not on account of the punishment which follows those who offend God; and so perfect charity is free from that servile dread by which one does not dare to sin lest he be damned, being ready to sin if he did not fear to be damned. To the fourth I say that outside God nothing can be found so perfect that it ought not to be called imperfect with respect to the perfection of glory; yet that same thing will be simply perfect; whence Paul says in Philippians 3, Not as though I had already attained, or were already perfect; but I follow after, if I may by any means apprehend. And below: Let us therefore, as many as are perfect; where he calls himself perfect absolutely, and yet imperfect, a comparison being made with the blessed.
Now to the first in confirmation of the consequence I say that the souls of purgatory are not in the way but at the end, as regards the increase of grace; for he who travels to some city and comes to its gates at night is said to have already arrived and finished the whole road, although he finds the gates shut and cannot enter until the sun rises. Besides, what Bernard says, that in the way of God not to go forward is to go backward, is not to be taken in the strictest sense, but morally; for he means to say not that in every act one ought to merit an increase of grace or lose something of grace, but that those who do not take pains to go forward can easily be driven by the devil and the world to a fall, and so on. To the second I say, first, that Paul literally speaks of the power of God, which is said to be perfected in weakness, because from this the power of God appears more, by which the weak resist; for in the Greek it is dynamis, that is, power. I say besides that our virtue also is perfected in tribulations, but in this life only as to a true increase of virtue, because in this life only is the place of meriting; but in the life to come it can be said to be perfected in purgatory, not that something is added to it, but that the rust of sins is taken away; as gold in the furnace becomes brighter, not because something is added to it, but because it is separated from earth and lead and filth. To the third I say that that principle of Luther is most false in permanent things, and has place only in successive things; otherwise permanent things would never be the same, and so God would not now be punishing in hell that Judas who sinned, but another whom he afterwards created; nor would he reward the Peter who merited, but some other created afterwards. But what is said, that preservation is a continuous creation, is true, but it is understood that the same thing is created, not increased or made into something new. To the fourth answer has already been made.
Luther's second argument: souls in purgatory sin continually; therefore they are in a state of meriting and demeriting. He proves the antecedent: those souls dread punishments and flee them, and seek rest; therefore they sin. He proves the antecedent, both because otherwise they would not be punished, for punishment ought to be involuntary and bitter; and also because we ought not to pray for them for rest and deliverance from purgatory if they themselves loved their punishments. Then he proves the consequence. First, because to one who truly loves all punishments grow sweet; therefore those souls, while they flee punishments, do not love perfectly, and accordingly sin. Second, because while they flee punishments they seek the things that are their own, not the honour of God. Third, because they love God with a love of concupiscence, while they desire to be freed by him. Fourth, because Christ says, He that taketh not up his cross is not worthy of me, that is, he who does not take it up willingly and gladly. But the cross of souls is purgatory; they sin, therefore, while they flee that cross. I answer that souls in purgatory dread and flee punishments, and seek rest, insofar as they consider them as evils and contrary to nature, and yet at the same time willingly admit and bear them, insofar as they consider them as instruments by which they are purged; as a sick man dreads bitter medicine, and yet willingly takes it, because he hopes to be cured by it; nor can there be any sin in this. For the Lord, who could not sin, nevertheless dreaded punishments, and said, Father, remove this chalice from me, Matthew 26; and David cries out, For I am in trouble, hear me speedily, Psalm 68; and of Peter Christ says in the last chapter of John, When thou shalt be old, another shall gird thee, and lead thee whither thou wouldst not; and Saint Cyprian, in the book on mortality, says that no one is said to bear the martyrdom of persecution who does not feel it; and blessed Augustine, book 10 of the Confessions, chapter 28, speaks of punishments: “Who would wish troubles and difficulties? Thou commandest them to be borne, not to be loved. No one loves what he bears, even if he loves to bear it.” To the first, then, by which the consequence is proved, I say that to one who truly loves punishments do not grow so sweet that he does not feel them, but so that, although he feels them, he willingly bears them on account of God, as is plain both from what has been said and from the words of blessed Eleazar, 2 Maccabees 6: “O Lord,” he says, “who hast the holy knowledge, thou knowest manifestly that whereas I might be delivered from death, I suffer grievous pains in body; but in soul am well content to suffer these things because I fear thee.” And this was the common feeling of the martyrs, who truly felt the sharpest pains, and yet willingly bore them; although to some God by a certain privilege took away the sense of pain by an abundance of consolation, as Ruffinus writes, book 10 of the history, chapter 36, of Theodore. To the second I say that they do not seek the things that are their own, but the honour of God; for they desire to be quickly freed so that they may praise God more and better. To the third I say that they love God with a love of friendship, because they refer their own good to God. To the fourth I say that they take up their cross, because they willingly suffer, and do not ask to be freed except according to the will of God and through the means which God has instituted; and certainly if what Luther says were true, that is, if those souls fled the things that are their own, and loved God with a love of concupiscence, and were unwilling to take up the cross, they would have not imperfect charity but none, and would be not in purgatory but in hell.
The third argument, of certain Catholics: the souls of purgatory have everything necessary for merit; for they have grace, faith, hope, charity and free will, at least as regards its exercise; why then do they not merit? Then, the blessed can merit, as is plain of Christ, who was always blessed and yet merited; therefore much more can the souls of purgatory merit. Likewise the rich man in hell prayed for himself and his kin, Luke 16; therefore the souls of purgatory too can pray; but that prayer proceeds without doubt from charity; therefore it merits to be heard. Finally they confirm the same by the authority of Saint Thomas, who on the fourth book, distinction 21, question 1, article 3, to the fourth, says that after this life merit cannot be found with respect to the essential reward, but only with respect to the accidental. I answer to the argument that for merit the souls of purgatory lack the state of life; for God, as is manifestly proved from the Scriptures, appointed to accept good works for merit or demerit only for the time of this life. After this life good works will be effects of glory, and bad ones effects of damnation. To the first confirmation I say that Christ was at the same time a comprehensor and a wayfarer, and therefore in the part in which he was a wayfarer he could merit; whence after his death, because he ceased to be a wayfarer, he merited nothing more. To the second I say that if the souls of purgatory pray for themselves or for us, of which we shall discuss below in the question on suffrages, they do not merit, but only obtain from past merits, as now the saints by praying for us obtain, although they do not merit. To the third confirmation I say that Saint Thomas changed his opinion; for in question 7 on evil, article 11, he expressly teaches that in purgatory there can be no merit, neither of the essential nor of the accidental reward; which the same Bonaventure, Scotus, Durandus and others teach; perhaps also blessed Thomas on the fourth book did not wish to use the name of merit properly but improperly; for he called the act of love in purgatory meritorious of the remission of venial fault, because it is remissive, though not by way of merit properly so called, but by way of a contrary taking away its contrary.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
C,A1»UT ll[.
Solvunlur ohjv.ctiones.
Superosl argumenla soivcre , Argumcnlum Pri-
mum : Animue quae in puri^alorio deginil siinl im-
pL'rrei.'lac in cliarilatc , igilur proncere (lcbenl cl
niereri i;l pcrliciantur. Quoil sinl impcrlcclac pi'o-
balur. Primo.quia sl lllae aiiimae cssenl pcrfectac,
cerle non punirciiliir;quorsum cnim punianlur s|)i-
ritus pcrrccli ? Si diccs . ul salisfacianl Dco. Con-
tra. quia Deo maxime salis fil per charilalcm: CIki-
ritas cnim opcrii inuUiludinem j)eccaioruni , in-
<piil Pclrus 1 . Pcl. 'i.
Sccmido: Quia si is qui moritur , dcbilor sil ad-
liuc de(;em <licriim jcjnnii.cl lamcn siimnic diligal
Deum. incredibile esl Deum non condonare illi de-
cem illos dies, cnm soieal Dcus libenter acceptarc
voluntal'Mn, ubi non invenil lacullatcm, ergo si illi
non condonalurdcbilum,signum esl non fuisse per-
lectum iii cliarilatc.
Tcrlio : Quia si cssenl perfeclae , non limerenl
poenas:nam perfccla cliarilas foras mitlil limorem;
si non limercnt pocnas, non punirentur, (juia non
csl pocna id quod amatur , cl lil)cnl('r rccipitur ;
ergo non cssenl in purgatorio , nisi essenl imper-
fcctae.
Quarto : Ouia nihil esse potesl perfectum exlra
Deum. juxta illud 1. Co\'\n\hA'^.Cuniveneril.quod
jyerfeclum est^evaciiahUur quod ex parte es(,'ergo
animac purgalorii, quae bealae non suiit, necessa-
rio impcrfectae siinl. Deinde probatur consequen-
lia priiiii argumenli.
Primo:ImpossibiIe csl in via slare;semper cnim
oporlet progredi , aul regredi. ul Rernanlus dicil,
animae autem purgatorii sunl in via.nondum enim
pervenerunl. Sccundo: Yirlus ininlirmilatepcrfi-
cilur, 2. Corinth.l2, e/ aurum inforriace fU luci-
dius. Tcrtio : Impossibile esl creaturam aliquam
conscrvari, nisi accipiat semper amplius et ampli-
us, doncc absorbealur in suum principium, ut pa-
tel iii iluviis, qiii scmpcr iiccipiunl novam aquam,
doiicc in mnrc iiigrcdiaiilur, undc conscrvatio dici
soJ(;l coiilinua (]uacd;ini creatio. Quarlo : Charitas
post liaiic vilam cril major , ergo augcbitur , ergo
pcr uierila.
Hcspon(h'o ad anlccedcns : Animas purgalorii
possii dici iiiipcricclas respeclu carum quae suiit
in gluria ; (!t ctiam unam in purgalorio posse dici
impcrlVciam respcctu allcrius, sive in purgalorio,
sivc iii li<jc miindo existenlis. Tamcn absolute o-
innem aniinam in purgatorio cxislcnlcm esse perfe-
clam in cliarilalc. Nulla est charitas simplicitcr im-
perfecla ; diciliir enim 1. Joan. 2. Qui servai ver-
hum ojus , vp.re in lioc charilas Dei perfecta esl.
Sufiicii aulcm quilibel gradus charitalis , ul quis
servel vcrbiiiii. idesl. praecepta Domiiii.
Ad consc(pi(;uliam dico, aiiimas pnrgalorii, qua-
tenus siiit impcrlectae respcctu earum , quae suiil
in coelo. dcbcio pcilici in cliaritale, scd iiltid aug-
UDcnliim non rc^iuircre nova mcrila^nam erit prae-
iDuim omniuin merilornm practerilorum. Duplici-
ter enim augcUir cliaritas;uno modo in genere gra-
liae.ut fial liorno aplior ad magis mcrcmjnm.cl hoc
augmentutn non dalur posl lianc vitam;allero modo
in gencrc gloriac , ul reuninerenlur omnia nierita
pract(!rita,cl lioc fiel in ipsa beatitudine,pars cnini
pracmii cril, ul Augustinus dicil, lib.de corrept. el
gralia cap. 10. lanla copia charitalis, ut numquam
cxcidcre possil a bcatitudinc , et a juslitia , qui ea
copia charilatis praeditus erit.
Ac nt ordinc rcspondeamus ad singula capila hu-
jus objeclionis. Ad [)iimum dico : Quamquam po-
tcsl ficri , nt dolor inlernus sit lanlus , ct a tanla
charilalc proccdcns, ul plenc salisfaciat pro omni
rcalii , tamen potcst ctiam fieri , ul non sit tanlus
dolor. el proplcrca remaneal aliquid in purgalorio
Inendnnr.non cnim repugnal perfcclioni charitatis,
qiiac luibelur cxtra rcguum coelorum, realus poe-
nac, pro quo satisfaciendum sil. Ad verba b. Pclri
dico charilalem opcrire multiludinem peccalorum,
sed non codem modo quoad culpam,el quoad poe-
nam ; nam culpam tolain semper delet per aclum
suiim proprium , pocnam aulem lollit non semper
lolam pcr acluin suum,scd per opera salisfacloria,
quac ipsa charitas imperat.
Ad sccundiim dico simililer : Si is qui raoritur,
suinaio amore doleat de peccalis , posse eum eo
modo salisfaccrc pro omni poena; si aulem non sil
tanlus dolor, dcbere salisfacere postea in purgato-
rio. Neqiie obstat , quod ille cuperel jejunare , si
supcresset vila . et Deus acceplat volunlalem ubi
noii invcnil facultatcm;nam in islo invenitur facul-
tas salislaciendi, si non jcjunando, cerle paliendo
in piirgalorio.
Ad tcrlium dico , animam purgatorii non time-
rc, scd pali reipsa pocnas ; limor cnim est futuro-
rum , non praescnlium : dico praelerea non rcpu-
gnarc pcrlcclae charitati timorem poenae , alioqui
Cliristns qni limuil poenas,et ex eo limore sangui-
ncm sudavil. Luc. 22.non fuisset perfectus in cha-
ritalc. Quod aiilem Joannes dicit : Perfecta cJiari-
tas foras mittii timorem , non inlelligilur de quo-
cumqiic timore poenacul nalurali vel filiali,sedde
liinor(!servili,idest,detimorecu!pae praecipue pro-
ptcr pocnam;qui enim perfecle diligit,metuit olTen-
derc Dcuin . praecipue proplcr ipsum Deum , non
proplcr pocnain, quae scquitur oircndenles Deum;
alqiic ila pcrrccla charitas libera est ab illo raelu
servili, quo quis non audet pcccare, nc damnetur,
peccaturns si non limcret damnari.
Ad quarlura dico : Extra Deum non posse inve-
niri aliquid ita perfectum, quod non dcbeat dici
impcrfectum respeclu pcrfcctionis gloriae , lamen
illiid ipsuin eril simpliciter perfcctum: nnde Pau-
lus Philip. 3. dicil: Non quodjam perfectus swi;
sequor a.utem si quo modo apprehendam. Et in-
fra: Quicumque ergo perfecti sumus : ubi se per-
fcclum dicil absoluic, ct lamcn imperfeclum, com-
paratione facta ad bcalos.
Jain ad priinum in confirmalioncm consequen-
liiie. dico: Animas purgalorii non essc in via. sed
111 lermiiio , quanlum ad graliac augmentum ; qui
enim ad urbcm aliquam lcndit,ct pcrvcnil ad ejus
portas nncturno lcmpore , dicitur jam pervenisse,
cl tolnm viam confccisse.licet porlas invcniat clau-
sas. ct non possit ingrcdi.doncc Sol orialur. Pr;ie-
terca qiiod Hcrnardus ait: In via Dei non jnofjre-
(U cKiiO retrDtjrcili, iinii (Itilit;! ii(M||ii iiiillioiliiitii!!-, lii>iil(|iio s. ('.y|iri.iiiiis tiil lili.ili^ iriorlitlilnliv tjmn
S(!il iiitiriilitcr; iiini imiIiii viill diffrc iii (|ii<)IiIm'1 o- nun ln:,iin nirfri' iniU l.'ii\iimi»n nil Inriiiinm vr-
pcn* iitis iiiiircri iiii;^'iiiciiliiiii ^'riiti;ic iiiil |i(iilcrc /i/rc /cs/i/jcf:' i;i [>. Ain^fii^^liniis lil». 10. (Jinfcs^if»
:ilii|iii(l ^'niliiif , scd ctis t|iii iioii il.nil (i|iciiiiii . iil lunii c. 2K. i|c ikkmiis |i>(|iiimii: '/Vi/crt/r/! cfiji juArit,
linillciiiiil, riUMli) iiiipclli ptissi) ii (liiiliolo.ct iiiiiiulo nnnnnmri';n('innniiti'tn iiudiL lolcriUninul.iinnm-
iitl ciisiiiii iMr. 1 i.H liilrrnri' ntniil.
Ail sci iiiiiliiiii ilico:lii priiiiis Piitiliiiii iul lilitniiii .\il piiiiiinii i'r^'ii , qini proliitnr cori*t(>f|in!nliii ,
Idipii ilc virliilc Dci.ipiiiii (liciliir pcrlici iii iiillriiii* tlii;(i:Vi!rn luiiiiiili iioii stc iliiknscnri) poiMiuH.iil tmi
U\U-. , tpiia liiiic iiiic^is iippiircl |)cj poNMilin , t|iio iioii sciili.il, m>(| sic, iil lir(;| iuiiiiriis. lilcrct hiiniMt
pliini ci rcsisliiiit; liiilK^tiir tMiiiii iii j^nitMM) o/ivi;!'.' .iliUMiltM' iiroptiT iiiiiiiliiiii , iit p:itcl liiiii cx iIic.Iih ,
|iGu , idcst , virtiis iiicit. l)i(M) pniiMiM-cti , virtiiltMii titiii i!v vcrliis h. KliMi/iiri 2. M.icliiih. ft : Tu nr.in ,
oliiiiii iioslnim ptMlici iii InliiiliilioiiilMis^scd iii liiic iiiipiil . hinnlnc , //u/n rnm a mnrti' ^nisM-m hhr-
vilii liiiiliiiii ipioiid v(M"iiiii :iti^'iiuMiliiiii virtiilis.ipii;i rnri, ilnrus cnrjniris ynslinm liilnirrs: Hi-nniilnm
iii li;ic vilii liiiiltiiii csi lot iis iiiiMtMiili ; iil iii liiliirii nnintnni vrrn jirniilrr limnrrm tnnm Ithrnlrr
dici possn pcrllci in jMirKiilorio , iioii tpiod ci iili- ftiwc palinr. VA liic rnit roininiinis ;inct;lus iii.irly-
tjtiid ;idd;itiir , simI tpiod ;iiirtMiiliir riilii^;o ptMMMilo- riiin , tpii rc\cr;i sciiticliiiiit ;iccr|jissiiiio>, dolrir/rs .
riliii : tpioiiiotlo ;iiiriiiii iii roriiiicc lil liiiMtlins. iioii cl t;iiii( ii IiIkmiIim' (min rcridi.iiit , liccl ipiiloiMliirii
(|iiiii illi iditpiitl iitlditiir.siHl (jiiiii supiiriiltir ii tiMTii, Dimis privilc;;io (piudiin) scnsuin doloris iil/sliilcrit
cl pltiiitho, ct siiiiiiihiis. piM' :iI11o(miIi;iiii (M)ii>iol;ilioiiis , ut scrihit Hiiniiiu^
.\d t(M'liiiiii tliiM) : i'';i!sissiiiuiiii csst! illiid priiici- lih. 10. hisl. c;ip. 'M\. lic 'rinMitloro.
piiiiii I.iilluM'i 11) rchiis ptMiiiiiiiiMilihtis , soliiiiitpic .\d siM-iiiidiiin dico : Kiis iinii (|ii:icrcrc, (|u:ic sun
liahcrc, locum in sticccssivis , nlioipii rcs piMiiia- sunt, scd lioiioriMii Mci: ciipiiint cnim cilo iihcriirl,
lUMiIcs iiuiiitpiaiii cssciil CiicdiMti. (;l >ic Dciis iiunc, iil possiiit ui;i^'is, cl itKdiiis DiMim hiiidarc.
iioii puiiircl iii iiircnio JiuJam illum tpii ptM-ciivil , Ad tcrliuni tlico : Kns :iiii irc Dimiiii ;iM)orc :iinici-
sod iilium (]ucm poslca crcavit ; ncc r^Miiiincnirct tiac. (piia honuin suiim rcfcrunl in Dimiiii.
Pctnim.titii mcriiit.scd aliiim (puMulam poslca crc- Atl tpiarliim tlico : K;is :iccip(M-c criiccm sii;im .
attmi. Qiiod iiiilcm dicilur, conscrviilioiicm (!ssc tpiiii lihtMiliM- p:ititiiiltir , niM; pcluiit lihcrari , iiisi
coiitiniiim) crcalioncin, cst vcnim , scd intclli^iliir stMMiiidiun Dci voluitlalcm.ct pcr mcdiii.qiiai; Iicus
crcari illiid idcm,non au^'tM'i vcl llcri aliud novum. iiistiliiil, cl ccrlc si csscnt viMit quac dicit Kiitlic-
Ad (luiulum jam csl rcspoiistim. riis,idcsl,anim;ic illac si fiii;icrtM'(MiI (juac siia siiiil,
Scciiiidimi ;ii{^uimMiIiim l.iiIlicri;Anim;ic iii pur- ct am;irciil Dciim ;imorc concupisiM-iiliac, ncc vcl-
{lalorio contintio pcccanUcr^o siint iii stali) mcrcn- lcnl acci[)crc cruccm, non jiim impcrfcctam chiiri-
di ct dcmtM-ciidi. Pn)I);il iiiilcccdcns: Anim;ic illnc hilcm. scd niillam li;ihcrcnl, cl non in purgaloriu,
liorrcul pocnas.ac rchi^imU, cl rcquiem qua(M'unl, scd in iiilcrno cssciil.
crgo pecc;tiU. Anlcccdcns prohal. lum quia aliotpii Argiiincnlum tcrlium , quoriindnm calholico-
non pimircnUir, pociia cnim involunlnria essc dc- niiu. Aiiim;ic piiriralorii luihcul oiiiiii;i ncccssaria
hcl. ct amara, Imii cliam.quia non dchcrcmus prc- atl mcrilir.n ; nain luihcnl giiiliam , lidcm , s[)cin •
cari illis rcquicm cl lihcruiionem a purgalorio , si cluirilalcm, ct lihcrum arhiiriiim.s:illcm qiio;id cx-
am;ircnl ipsae imis pocnas. crcilium ; cur igilur non mcrcitltir ? Dcimlc hc;ili
Prohal tlcindc conscqiicntiam. Primo: Quia vcrc mcrcri possunl , ul p;ilcl tlc Clirislo qui scinpcr
amaiili omncs |iocn;ic dulccscunt. crgo ;iiiimnc il- fiiil hciilus , cl lamcn merchalur . crjj;o mtillo nia-
lao duiii rcfufjiunl poenas non pcrfcclc amant.pro- gis anim;ie purcfalorii mercri polerunt. Itcm divcs
iiidc j)ccc;uU.Sccuiido.quia dtim rcfutiiunl pocuiis, in infcrno oravil pro se. ct snis Liiciic Hl. crjro r.\-
qti;icniiil quat; stia sunt, non honorcin Dci.Tcrlio. iain animac purjralorii orart; posstint , ;it ist:i ora-
quia Dciim ainanl ;tmorc concupisecnliac,tlum cu- tio proccdil sinc duhio e.K ch;irilatc , merelur i^i-
piiinl ;ih eo lihcrari. Quarlo , quia Clirislus dicil , lur cxaudiri. Deniqut; idem conlirinanl aiicloritiilc
quia non accipit cruccm suam,non cst mc dignus, s. 'rhomnc, qui in i. disl. 21. qu;icst. 1. ;irl. .'^ ;id
itltst . qui non atM-ipit spoiilc ct lihcnlcr. Al cnix i. tlicil, posl hanc vilam non possc rcpcriri mcri-
animaruu) pursatorium esl;peccant igilur dum cam tum respcclu praemii essciilialis , scd tanlum re-
cniccin rcfugiunl. spcciu nccidenlalis.
IJcspondco: Animas in purgalorio horrcrc ac re- Hi^spondeo ad argumcnlum: Deessc ad merilum
fugcrc poenas, et rcquicm quacrcrc. quatcnus (mis ;inim;ihus purgatorii sliilum vilac : Dcus cniin . ul
coiisidcraut ul iniilas cl nalurac conlrarias . cl ta- ex Scripluris raanifcslc prohiilur . solum pro lcm-
mcn simul eus lihenler admillere cl lolerarc. qun- porc Iiiijus vitne coiisiiluil ncceptnrc hona opcr;i
tcnus consideranl ul instrumenta.per quac purg;in- nd mcriiuin, vel dcmcriliim. Posl liniic vilam vem
lur: quoraodo aegrolus horrct mcdicinnm amaram, Jiona opcra erunl cfTcclus gloriae, ct mala cffcclus
cl tamen lihcnter sumit , quia per eam curari spe- damniilionis.
rat , neque in lioc ullum peccatuin csse polcst. Ad primain conQrmationcm dico : Chrislnm si-
Nam Dorainus qui peccare non poluit . horruil ta- miil hiissc comprehcnsorcm el viatorem , ct iilco
men poenas.et dixil: Paler transfer calicem Jinnc qua pnrlc vialor cral . mcrcri polcral , undc post
(i mc. Mnlth. 2G. el Dnvid clnmnt: Quoniamlriha- morlcm sunm. quia dcsiil cssc viator, nihil nmpli-
lor , vclociter exaudi me , iisalm. CS. Kt dc Petro us mcruil.
Chrislus ait, Joaii. ult. Cuin scuueris alius cinrjet Ad sccundiini diiMi : Si animiic purgalorii orciit
lc, ct ducct quo lu non vis. pro sc vcl nohis. dc quo inlerius in quiicstiuuo dt;
3U2
l)E PURGATORIO
siilTragiis dissercmus, non mcreri , scd sokim im-
potrarc cx merilis praelcritis. (iiiomodo luinc san-
cti urando pro nobis impclraiiL , liccl noii merc-
anlur.
Ad terliam confirnialioncm dico : S. Thomam
nmtassc senlcnliam; nam in (iuaesl.7. de malo ar-
lic. 11. diserle doccl, in purgalorio nulium posse
csseiiiorituin ncc esscnlialis.nccaccidcnlalis prac-
mii: quod idcm doccnl Bonavenlnra . Scolus, Du-
randus. cl alii: fortasse cliam b. Thomas in 4. no-
minc meriti non propric uli voluit, sed improprie;
vocavit eiiim acliim dilcclionis iii purgatorio me-
ritorium rcmissionis cuipac veuialis , quia esl re-
missorius, licct non pcr modum mcrili proprie di-
cii . scd pcr niodum conlrarii lollentis suum con-
trarium.