Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Church That Is in Purgatory · Book II: On the Circumstances of Purgatory
Chapter 8: Whether the souls of the dead can go out of their receptacles
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).
Of the other question there can be a threefold sense. The first, whether they can go out never to return, because namely they are transferred from one receptacle to another. The second, whether they can go out so as to return again to their place. The third, whether they can so go out as to live here again with us.
As to the first sense, it can easily be answered that from the hell of the damned and the limbo of children there is no return; from purgatory and the limbo of the Fathers there is; for the souls of the ungodly are damned to perpetual prisons and the fires of hell, and likewise the souls of children to perpetual exile and darkness. But the souls of the holy Fathers were damned to a temporal exile, and the souls of purgatory to temporal prisons. The reason is that the cause of the prison or exile of the damned is mortal fault, actual or original, which will never be remitted; but the cause of the exile of the Fathers was a temporal debt contracted from the sin of the first parent; for he by his sin had shut heaven, which could not be opened except by the blood of Christ actually shed; but the cause of purgatory is the guilt of temporal punishment, which necessarily has an end. Against this, however, is the authority of John Damascene, who in the oration on the dead says that by the prayers of Saint Thecla the soul of Falconilla, a certain pagan woman, was freed from hell, and by the prayers of Saint Gregory the pope the soul of the emperor Trajan. I answer that if this history is to be defended, one must say that Trajan was not damned absolutely to hell, but only punished in hell according to his present deserts, and the sentence suspended on account of the foreseen prayers of blessed Gregory; and besides, that he did not pass immediately from hell to heaven, but was first united to his body, and then baptized, and did penance in this life. For this is the common solution of blessed Thomas, Durandus, Richard and others on the fourth book, distinction 45. But because it is said without a witness that Trajan rose again, for none of the ancients mentions this matter, and this contradicts the opinion of Damascene, who teaches plainly enough that Trajan passed from hell to heaven, and did not return to this life, and if he did penance, did it in hell; and since the authors cited rest on the authority of Damascene alone; I therefore incline more to the opinion of Melchior Cano, who in book 11 on the sources, chapter 2, simply rejects this history as invented, and of Dominic Soto, who on the fourth book, distinction 45, question 2, article 2, says that this history is very hard for him to believe, notwithstanding the apology of Alphonsus Ciaconius for this history, published three years ago. The reasons by which I am moved are four. First, because all who admitted this history did so on account of the authority of Damascene; but that that book is not Damascene's can easily be proved; for in that book the author says not only that Trajan and Falconilla passed from the hell of the damned to the kingdom of heaven, but also that many others who had gone down to hell because they lacked divine faith were converted and saved by Christ when he descended to the lower regions; which is both erroneous in itself and contrary to the words of Damascene, book 2 on the faith, chapter 4, where he says that death is to men what the fall was to angels. The second reason is that no Latin author mentions this history, such as Paul the Deacon, Anastasius the Librarian, Marianus Scotus, Ado, and not even Bede himself, who was most devoted to blessed Gregory. Indeed in the Roman Church itself and its archives no memory of this matter existed when John the Deacon wrote the life of blessed Gregory. For he gathered the life of blessed Gregory most carefully from the Roman archives, and yet in book 2, chapter 44, says that this history of Trajan was found in a certain church of the English, and that no certain credit was given it by the Romans. Third, because blessed Gregory, book 34 of the Morals, chapter 15, otherwise 16, expressly teaches that prayer cannot be made for dead unbelievers, just as not for the devil, since they are in the same eternal and irrevocable damnation. How, then, is it credible that he did it? Tostatus answers, question 57 on the fourth book of Kings, that Gregory therefore sinned mortally by praying for Trajan. But that is most absurd and almost blasphemous, since it is agreed that Gregory was a man not only most holy but also most prudent. Then, if he sinned mortally by praying, how was he heard? For is God appeased when he is offended? Ciaconius answers that Gregory did not sin by praying, but rather merited, because although ordinarily it is not lawful to pray for the damned, yet it is lawful from a particular divine instinct. But on the contrary, the same history reports that Gregory was punished for this sin with a perpetual pain of the stomach and feet. He himself answers that this pain was not given to Gregory as a punishment, but lest pride should creep upon him. But on the contrary; for Peter the Deacon, whom he himself cites from a certain book of the Vatican library, says that it was said to Gregory by an angel that because he had presumed to ask this, he should labour until death with pain, and so on; therefore as a punishment of sin, for presumption is a sin. The fourth reason is that the arguments of Ciaconius do not conclude; for he relies chiefly on these witnesses. First, the testimony of Peter and John, the deacons of Gregory, which he says exists in the Vatican library. Second, the testimony of an unnamed author who wrote the life of blessed Gregory which is prefixed to his works printed at Basel in the year 1564, which author seems to have lived in the time of Gregory himself. Third, the testimony of Damascene. Fourth, the testimony of John the Deacon, book 2, chapter 44, of the life of blessed Gregory. Fifth, the testimony of blessed Thomas. Sixth, the testimony of Saint Bridget. Seventh, the testimony of Mechtild. The first testimony is very suspect to me; for if it were truly Peter the Deacon's, John the Deacon would not say that this history does not exist in the Roman Church, but only among the English. Besides, that Peter says that Gregory asked of God that all who were buried in the church of Saint Andrew on the Clivus Scauri could not be damned, provided they held the Christian faith, and that he obtained it. But surely Gregory, a most prudent man, would never have so prayed; for either he means unformed faith or formed; if unformed, then he would have wished men dying without charity to be saved, which who would believe? If formed, there was no need to ask it; for wherever he is buried, he who dies with charity cannot be damned. Add that that whole fragment smells of novelty, and therefore seems spurious; for it calls Gregory divus, which name was unusual at that time. Likewise it sets cardinals before bishops, which contradicts John the Deacon, who in the life of Saint Gregory writes that many were accustomed to be promoted by Gregory from among the cardinals to the episcopate, as to a higher degree; it also has not a few other signs of novelty. The second testimony brings nothing new; for that nameless author did not live in the time of Saint Gregory, but at a later time; for he reduced into a compendium the life of Saint Gregory which John the Deacon had written at great length. The third testimony has already been rejected. The fourth is against Ciaconius himself; for John the Deacon says that the soul of Trajan was not freed from hell, but only obtained this, that existing in hell it should not suffer the punishment of fire; but Ciaconius wants it blessed in heaven. The fifth is also against him, for blessed Thomas, where he treats this on purpose, namely on the fourth book, distinction 45, question 2, thinks it most probable that the soul of Trajan was freed only from the punishments of hell until the day of judgment, and thereafter to be tormented with the rest. The sixth is very obscure; for Saint Bridget does not say that Trajan is saved, but only raised to a higher place, which indicates that he is still in hell, as Denis the Carthusian expounds this example. The seventh is expressly against him; for Mechtild says that she asked of the Lord what he had done with the souls of Samson, Solomon, Origen and Trajan, and that it was answered that God willed it to be unknown to all what his liberality had done with them. If, then, God wills it to be unknown, no credit is to be given to the authors who assert that Trajan is in heaven. Add that God in this revelation joins Trajan with Origen; but in the spiritual meadow which is cited by the seventh synod, and by John the Deacon, book 2, chapter 45, of the life of blessed Gregory, another revelation is related, in which Origen was seen in the hell of fire with Arius and Nestorius, and the fifth synod, chapter 11, says that Origen is anathema like Arius, Nestorius and the other heretics.
As to the second, some think that souls can never go out of their receptacles, but that all apparitions are of demons, who pretend that they are souls going out of purgatory and asking for suffrages. So Tertullian, in the book on the soul near the end, and the author of the questions to Antiochus, questions 12 and 13; the same seem to say Chrysostom, homily 29 on Matthew and homilies 2 and 5 on Lazarus, and Theophylact on chapter 8 of Matthew; although these two, if they are read well, do not deny that souls can in any way go out to us, but that they cannot go out at their own pleasure, nor be turned into demons, nor wander among us after the manner of demons. The heretics of this time laugh at all apparitions of souls as illusions of demons, especially the Magdeburgians. Yet the opinion of Augustine is most true, book on the care for the dead, chapters 15 and 16, that it is too great impudence to deny that souls sometimes return to us, God commanding or permitting. For we have the testimonies of most weighty authors on the return of souls from all the receptacles, except the limbo of children. For that blessed souls from heaven sometimes come to us there are most certain examples in Eusebius, book 6 of the history, chapter 5; Augustine on the care for the dead, chapter 16; Sulpicius in the life of Martin; Paulinus in the life of Ambrose; Theodoret, book 5 of the history, chapter 24; Gregory, book 3 of the Dialogues, chapters 24 and 25; and in the seventh synod, act 4. That souls from the limbo of the Fathers appeared Augustine proves, book on the care for the dead, chapters 15 and 16, from 1 Kings 28, where the soul of Samuel appeared to Saul, and from Matthew 17, where Moses appeared with Elias on Mount Tabor; for although Hilary on this place, and Ambrose, book 1 on Cain, chapter 1, say that Moses was still alive, yet the contrary is expressly found in the last chapter of Deuteronomy and Joshua 1. That they have appeared from purgatory there are examples in Gregory, book 4 of the Dialogues, chapters 40 and 55, and other authors cited above. That, finally, they have appeared from hell the author of the books on the properties of bees proves by many examples, and the same appears from that apparition of the Paris doctor in the life of blessed Bruno, who three days after death said he was condemned. It is credible that that soul went down to hell immediately from death, but yet appeared three times, and first made known its accusation, second its judgment, third its damnation, so that by this means that example might become known to more.
As to the third, that some have been called back to life from purgatory or from the limbo of the Fathers cannot be doubted; for the dead whom Elias, Elisha, the Lord Christ and Peter and Paul raised, since they were believers, are believed to have been in purgatory or in limbo. Nor does any difficulty follow if some rise from these places, since this is nothing else than to change their exile or prison. You will say: but they were already certain of their salvation, and by the resurrection became uncertain. Tostatus answers well, question 51 on the fourth book of Kings, that those who were called back to life from purgatory or the limbo of the Fathers were without doubt confirmed in grace, so that in no way could they perish, since otherwise an injury would have been done them. But that some could be called back to life from heaven or from the hell of the damned would seem incredible, unless there existed examples which cannot be denied. For blessed Gregory, book 1 of the Dialogues, chapter 9, writes that a certain Marcellus, a holy man, who had been led by angels to a most excellent place, was raised by Saint Fortunatus. And chapter 12 he writes that a certain most wicked man, who was being led by demons to hell, was raised by Saint Severus. Hegesippus writes, book 3, chapter 2, that Peter raised from death a certain kinsman of Caesar, a heathen. Nor can it be doubted that the apostles raised some heathen. Maximus, sermon 2 on Saint Agnes, says that the son of the prefect, who had died in sin, was raised by her. And Evodius, book 1 on the miracles of Saint Stephen, says that a little boy who had died before baptism was raised at the relics of Saint Stephen. I say, then, that those already blessed cannot be called back to life. For blessedness includes certainty of never losing happiness, as blessed Augustine teaches on rebuke and grace, chapter 10, and the reason is manifest, because blessedness is a state perfect by the gathering of all goods; but he does not have all goods who does not have that certainty. If, then, some holy men returned to the body, they were not blessed, but God, foreseeing their raising, put off their beatification, and meanwhile kept them in some excellent place, as happened to that Marcellus of whom Gregory speaks. Of the damned I say likewise that one damned absolutely to eternal punishments cannot be called back to life, since otherwise the damnation of the ungodly would become uncertain; and indeed blessed Augustine, book 21 of the City of God, chapter 24, says that it is too great presumption to assert that those will not remain for ever in the fire to whom the Truth says, Depart into everlasting fire. And the Truth says this to all whom it damns both in the particular and in the universal judgment. Besides, there would be none of the damned who could not hope for salvation, and for whom we could not pray. For now we do not pray for damned unbelievers because according to the faith we believe they cannot be saved; but if they can be saved at least by privilege, surely prayer should be made for them, as in this world we pray for those obstinate in evil, that God may give them efficacious grace, which certainly is not given except by privilege. But Tostatus objects, question 57 on the fourth book of Kings, that to him who is raised from the hell of the damned neither fault nor punishment is remitted by the raising itself, nor is any other miracle necessary here than the simple raising of a dead man; therefore it can happen that such return. I answer that neither fault nor punishment is remitted, but an equivalent benefit is given, because he is placed in a state in which he will be able to be freed from fault and punishment; from which follow all the absurdities said above, that the damnation of the ungodly will not be certain, that they will be able to hope, that it will be lawful to pray for them. To those examples which are brought forward Soto answers, on the fourth book, distinction 45, question 2, article 2, that all the heathen whom the apostles raised laboured under invincible ignorance of the faith, and accordingly were in purgatory. But what will Soto answer to Ambrose, who in sermon 90, and Maximus, who in sermon 2, say that blessed Agnes raised the son of the prefect, whom the devil had killed when he wished to violate the holy virgin herself? I say, then, that those who were raised, when they deserved eternal punishments, were not damned, but their sentence was suspended, and meanwhile they were punished according to present justice, as blessed Thomas teaches on the fourth book of the Sentences, distinction 45, question 2, article 2; in which way also Richard, Durandus and others answer in the same place.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPIIT VIII.
yam ex rcceptnculis suis animae defuncln-
rum egredi valeant.
Allcrius aulcni quacslionis tri[)lcx cssc polcsl
scnsus. 1'rimus , an possinl exire numquam rcdi-
lura?. quia nimirum iransfcrantur dc uno rcceplii-
culo ad aliud. Sccundus. an possinl cxiro. ul rur-
suni rcdeant ad suum Iocum.Tcrlius,an possinl ila
cgrcdi, ut bic nobiscum ilcrum vivant.
Qu;inlum ad primum sensum , facilc rcsponderi
polosl , cx infcrno damnalorum, lymboquo puero-
rum non dari rcgrcssum: ex purgalorio, lymboijuc
Palrurn dari ; sunl cniin animac in.ipioruni damna-
lae iid pcrpeluos carcercs cl igncs gclicnnae , et
siinililcr iinimao puerorum ad pcrpotuum cxilium
cl tcucbras. Animac aulcm sanclorum Palrum da-
mnatac eranl ad exilium lcmpor;iIe.ol animae pur-
galorii ad carccres lcmporales.Ratio esl.quia caus-
sa c;irceris , vcl exilii clamnalorum est culpa mor-
lalis aclualis, vcl originalis.quae nuinquara rerait-
tclur:caussa aulcm exilii Patrum fuil dcbilum tem-
poralc conlraclum cx peccato prirai parcnlis ; ille
cnim suo pcccalo coelum clauscrat , quod aperiri
non potuit,nisi Cbrisli sanguinc reipsa erfuso;caus-
sa vcro purgatorii csl realus lemporalis pucnae .
quac nccessario finem habcl.
Conlra boc tamen esl auclorilas Joannis Dama-
sconi.(}ui in oratione de morluis dicil, oralioiiibus
s. Thcclae liberalam dc infcrno animam Falconil-
lao cujusdam foeminac paganae . el oralionibus s.
Gregorii pnpac animani Triijani imperatoris.
51
898
DE PIHGATORIO
Uespondoo: Si haec hisloria (lefciuli debeal, o-
p)orlcre Jicere,Trajammi non hiissc (.iamnalnm ab-
soliile ad inreros,sed soUim punilurn in inferno se-
rundum praesenlia ejus demerila , el suspensani
senlcjiliam propler pracvisas b. Gregorii preces:el
praeterea non immedialc ex inferno ad coeium
iransisse, sed prius corpori nnilum. el lunc bapli-
zalum,et poenitenliam in hac vita cgisse.Ista enim
esl cominunis soiiilio b. Tiiomae, Durandi.RicIiar-
di, el alioruui iu 4. disl. 4i).Quia lamcn Trajanum
resurrexisse, sine tesle dicilur, nec enim ullus ve-
teruin liujus rei ineminil, el repugnal lioc senlen-
liae Damasccni , ([ui salis aperle docel de inferno
ad coelum transisse, non anlem ad iianc vilnm re-
diisse Trajanum,el si poenilenliam egit.in inferno
illam egisse : Cuin tamcn solius Damasccni auclo-
ritate nilanlur auclores cilali . idco magis propen-
deo in sentenliam Mclchioris Cani. qui iib. 11. de
locis, oap. 2. simpliciler improbal hanc hisloriam
ul conlictam, et Dominici a Solo,qni in 4. dist.4.>.
quaest. 2.art. 2. dicit, hanc hisloriam sibi credilu
durissimain esse. non obslanle apologia Alphonsi
Ciaconis, pro hac hisloria ante hoc tricnnium edi-
ta.Raliones autem ,quibus moveor, sunt qualuor.
Prima:Quia quotquothanc hisloriam admiserunt,
id fecerunt propler Diimasceni aucloritalera ; at li-
brum illum non esse Damasceni,faciie probari po-
lest ; nam in eo libro auctor non solum dicit Tra-
janum el Falconillam ab inferno darnnalorum ad
regnum coelorura transivisse.scd ctiani multos ali-
os, qui in infernum descenderant, quia lide divina
caruerinl, a Clirislo conversos, elsalvatos quando
ad inferos descendil;quod el per se erroneum est,
et conlrarium verbis Dumasceni lib. 2. de Ode, c.
4. ubi dicit hominibus id esse mortem , quod fuil
angelis casus.
Secunda ralio esl:Quia nullus auclor lalinns hi-
storiae cjus meminit, ul Paulus diaconus , Anasla-
sius bibliothecarius. Marianus Scotus , Ado, ac ne
ipse quidem Reda,qui bealiGregorii sludiosissimus
fuit. Immo in ipsa romana Ecciesia, et ejus archi-
viis nulla hujiis rei menioria exslabat , quando Jo-
annes diacoiius vilam bcati Grcgorii scripsit. Ipse
enim vilain beati Gregorii ex archiviis romanis di-
ligcnlissime collegit . et lamen lib. 2. cap. 44. di-
cit. haiic liisloriam de Trajano reperlam in Eccle-
sia quadam aiigloruin, nec fidem ccrlam illi iiabi-
tam a Romanis.
Terlia, qu:a b. Gregor. lib. o4. mor. c 13. nlias
16. diserle docet , non posse orari pro inDdelibns
delunclis . queraadinodum nec pro diabolo, quan-
dofpjitlem in cadem aeterna,et irrcvocabili damna-
tione suul; Onomodo ergo credibile esteum id fe-
cisse? Rospoiidet Abulensis quaesl. j7. in 4 .lib.
Kegum. ideo Gregorium peccasse mortaliler oran-
du pro Trajano.Scd absurdissimum est etferebla-
spliemiim.cum consliit Gregorium virurn fuisse iion
modo sanctissiinum.verum eliain prudentissimum.
Deindf si peccavil inorlaliler orando, quomodo liiit
^'XaudiUis? i\uin Deus placalur, quando offendilur?
HespondelCiaconus.non peccasseGregorium oran-
do . sed meruisse polius , quia licet ordinarie non
liceal urare pro dumnalis. lamen iicel ex pecuiiari
iiiilinclu diviiio.
At conlra. Eadem liistoria rcfert Grcgnrium pro-
pter hoc pcccalum punilum fuissc pcrpetuo dolore
slomachi el pedum. Respondet ipse : Hunc doio-
rem non datum Gregorio in poenam. sed ne elalio
iili subrcperet. At conlra ; nam Petrus diuconus ,
qucin ipse cilat ex libro quodam bibiiolhccae va-
ticanae , dicit , Grcgorio ab angclo diclum fuisse ,
quoad quia praesumpserat hoc pctere , laborarel
usque ad morlem dolorc ctc. ergo in poenam pec-
cali, nam praesuinplio peccatum esl.
Qnarla ratio est , quia argumenta Ciaconis non
concludunl ; ipse eniin nitilur praecipue his lesli-
bus.Primo.testimonio Petii cl .loannis diaconorum
Grcgorii, quoad exstare dicit in bibliotiieca vatica-
na. Secundo , testimonio innominali auctoris , qui
scripsit vilam b. Gregorii, quae praeponitur operi-
biis ejus impressis Basilcae anno 1504. qui auclor
videlur vixisse tempore insius Gregoi-ii. Tertio,le-
stimonio Damasceni. Quarto , teslimonio Joannis
diaconi, iib. 2. cap. 44. vilae b. Gregorii. Quinto,
testimonio b. Thomae. Sexlo, lestimonio s. Birgil-
tae. Seplimo, teslimonio Mechtildis.
Primum lestimonium mihi vaidc suspeclum esl;
nain si iliud esset vere Pelri diaconi , non diceret
Joannes diaconus , Iiisloriam hanc non exstare in
romana Ecclesia , sed solum apud Anglos. Praete-
rea iste Pelrus dicit, Gregorium a Deo petivisse,ut
quolquol scpelirenlur in ccciesia s.Andreae in cli-
vo Scauri , non possent damnari , dummodo fidem
tenuerint chrislianam,et impelravisse.At certe Gre-
gorius vir prudentissimus numquam ita orasset ;
nain vei intelligit de fide informi , vel de formata;
si dc informi , ergo voluisset saivari homines mo-
rienles sine charilale, quod quis credal? si de for-
mala, non erat opus id pelere;nam ubicumque se-
pelialur. qui morilur cum charilale , damnari non
polest. Adde, quod toUim iliud fragmentum redo-
iet novitalem, et proinde supposititium videtnr:vo-
cat enim Gregorium <livu«) , quod nomen eo tem-
pore erat inusitalum.llom anteponilcardinales epi-
scopis: quod repngnal Joanni diacono, qui in vita
s.Gregorii scribil.ex cardinalibus consuevisse pro-
moveri a Gregorio mullos ad eprscopatum , ut ad
gradum alliorem, aiia quoque habet non pauca si-
gna novilatis.
Secundum teslimonium nihil novi adfcrl;auclor
enim ille sine nomine non vixil lempore s. Grego-
rii, sed posleriore lempore; redegit enim in com-
pendium vilam s. Gregorii, quam scripseral fusis-
sirae Joannes diaconus.
Terlium teslimonium jam est rejectum.
Quarlum esl conira ipsum Ciaconum;nam Joan-
nes diaconus dicil, aniinam Trajani non esse libe-
ratam de infcrno , sed solnm id oblinuisse , ut in
inferno exislens non palerctur poenam ignis, Cia-
coniis aulein vulleam in coelo bealam.
Quinlum est eliam conlra ipsum , nam b. Tho-
mas ubi ex professo hoc traclat , nimirum in 4.
liisl. 4a. quaest. 2.probabilissimnm pulat unimam
Trajani liberatam soluin a poenis inlerni nsque ad
dicm judicii , ac deinceps cruciandam cum cae-
leris.
Sextum est valde obscurum;nain s. Birgitla non
dicit Trajanum esse salvum . scd solnm eievaUnn
'l
I IM.Il M.i.LMil S V>n
iltl i>.l'.ltlillll iiltii)n>iii. iilii ili(lir;)t III iiilrriio ulli|til<l •li<4iiiii. iriliii , siMiii il.iiiiii.itiiiiiriii , iil liuc llitido
.MlliillN riM rpr<M'. |iliiritiiis iiiiioIcmimcI Ikd' rKi-iii|tliiiM.
Srptiiiiiiiii it.sl o.\|M'u.s.s(> r.Diilrii i|)suiii;iiuiii Mi-rli (.Miiiiiliiiii iiil (crliiiiii . <|ii<mI !ili(|iii i'i piir;;iiloriii
lililis iliiil, so pclivi>sn II Diiiiiniu i|(iiil r^'i>rit riilll \rl lyiiilni l*.ilriiiii riDTliil inl viLiiii rirvociili , liillli
.illllllillMI^ .Siiiiip.Sdlil.S, .'^.iliiiiiiMil.s, Oil^flil^ rl '|'ni- ilillnillll <>ssr piilcsl. .\.||ii lliorllll , IjilUs <'Xriliirillll
|.iiil, i-l rc.spiilisiiiii (>ssi>.|li'iiiii vrllii vss>' oiiiiiiliiis llrliiiH. llrlis.iiMis, iIoiiiiiiiih ('.IiiIsIiih. c( l'i'triiH, itl
iiico^Miiliiiii.ipiiil .sii.i lili(>riiliiiis ciiiii illis c^i>ril.Si l'ii(il(is,(:iiiii llilclcs f(i<>rtiil.( rciliiitiur fiii^M; iii pur-
(>r^'o Dctis viilt cssi> iiicii^'iiiliiiii , luiii cst crcdcii- ^'iilorlo. init iii lyiiili(i:\i'<pi<' iilliiiii s<'(piiliir Iik (iii-
• liiiii iiiicloriliiis.ipii iissrniiiliiujiiiiiiiii csso iii coc- miiiciis, si c\ liis locis ;i|i(pii icsiir({iiiil, siipiiil<-in
lu. Adili'. ipi".! |i(>iis III liiic ri>vcliiliiiiiu ('(iiijiiii^il lioc nilnl iiliud chI, (|iiiiiii imiliiK! iIIih (■iiliuiii, vcl
Triijiiiiiiiii I niii (»ri^,'ciic: \l iii iMiilo spirilii;ili,ipioil i .nccrciii.
I iliiliir II \ II. syiioilo , cl ii Joiiiiiic diiicoiio lili. 2. hiccs: iil j.iiii cr;iiil ccrli <l<* sii;i s;iliit<',<'l p<'r rc-
(Ui|). 4.*». viliiu l). (irij^urii , iiiirriitiir iiliii rrvcliilio, siirr(>('ti(iiiciii llciil iiiccrli.Uc.siioiidcl Itcin; Aliulcii-
ipiii Orij^ciics visus (>sl iii t,'('liciiii;i i^'iiis ciiiii .\rio ;>is ippirst. .'Jl.iii 4. Il<'^'iiiii (iiinici» cos <pii «'x (lur-
ct l\(>sloiio , cl V. syiiodiis ciip. 1 l.dirit iiiiiilliriiiii ;;iitorio .iiit lyiiilio Piilriiiii iii vil.iiii rcvociili liicrniil,
Orinciii sicut Ario. .Ncsiorio , cl ciictciis li.icrclicis. siiii! diiliio coiillriniilos liiissc in ^riiliii.iit iiullo ino-
Uuiiiitiiin iid scciiiidiiiii , ipiidiiin (>.\isliiiiiint uiii- do pcrirc poluorint, ipiiii iilioipii injuriu illi.s lacla
inas 111)11 possc iiiKpiiiiii d(> siiis r(>('cpt;iciilis <"^'r<'- fnisx'!.
di,S(!(l oiiiiics iippiiiilioncs css(> d;iciii(Miiiiii,ipii liii- {}\uh\ iiulciii c\ coclo . ;iiil iiifcrno <l;iiiin;it(iruiii
iruul so ossr luiiiuas dc piirjiiilorio (•x<'uiiU*s.cl siif- rcvociiri posscnt iid vil.iiii . vidcrolur incrcdilulc ,
vrn^\,\ posliiliinlcs. Il;i Tciliiiliiiiiiis lili. dc iiiiiiii;i iiisi (>\st;irciit cxciiipl;i, (piiO! iic^';iri iion possnnl.
circii lin. cl iiuctor (piiic.slioiimii ;id Aiiliocliiiiii .Niiiii li. (In^^jorius lili. I. diiilo^'or. (•;!(). !». siiihit,
(lUiicsl. il.el l.'{. idcni vidcnlur ilic(>rc (llirysosto- ii s. Forliiiiiilo cxcitiitiim fiiissi! iMiircclliim (jiiom-
mus lioinil. 21). iii M.illli. cl lioniil. 2. cl 5. dc l.ii- diiin viriiiii s;inctuni.(|iii iib iiii;,'('lis iii o()timiim lo-
/.;iro, cl riico|iliyl;ii liis iii c;i|).,S.M;illli. (pi.mKjii;!!!! ciim (liicliis luciiil. Kl cii(i. 12. sciiliit. ;i s. Scvcro
lii iluo, si l)ciu>, lc^Miiliir , noii duiiiit, iiuiio modo c\cil;iliim (piciiidiim vinim [ic.ssiimim , fiiii ;i d;ie-
()Oss(! iuiimiis ogrodi ;id nos,sc(l uon posse cjjrcdi nionibus in iufornum deduccl)iiliir.K},;osip[ius scri-
|)ro iirhilrio siio, ncc. vcrli iii d;iciii(mos. n(>c v;i};;>- Ml lil). '.\. ciiii.^.li.Pclnim o\cil;isso iilliiicm (piom-
ri iiilcr iios iiiorc diiomomim. lliicrolici Imjus tom- d;im (liiosiiris clliniciim ii morlc. iNcc didiiliiri [lO-
poris omncs iip[)iiritionos iininiiirum ridcnl , liim- lcst, quiu <i|)Osloli aliijuos otliiiicos cxcit.irinl.Ma-
(piiim daomomim illusionos, praccipuc Magdcbur- xinuissorm. 2. dc siiiiclii A^rnclc! , dicil. ;ili ca ox-
i^^^ii^cs. ciUiliim liliiim i)raofocli.(]ui in |iccc;ito mori li ohi-
Vcrissima tiimon csl Auguslini scnlcnlia. lili.do (!ral. I]l Kvodiiis lihro 1. do mir;iouIis s. Stopliiini,
cura pro morliiis. cap. 15. cl 1(1. nimiac impudon- dicil, puoruliim morliium iiiilc ba|)tisinum.ad reli-
tiac ossc nc^Mro aninKis inlcrdiim ad nos rcdirc quias s. Slopliani oxoilalom.
Deo jiihcnto, vcl iiormilioiUc. llahciims , ciiim lc- Dico iKiliir. hoalos jiim oxislcnlos non posse re-
slimonia gravissimorum auctoriim,dc rofrressu ani- vocari ail vilam.Siquidcm hoalitudo includil cerli-
manuii o\ omnihiis roooiilaculis , praclcrquam cx ludinoni do non amittcnda iin(]muii hilicilato , iit
liiiiho pucrorum.iNam (piod o.\ coclo animac hca- h. Aus^uslimis doccl dc corrcpl. cl i,'rali;i, cap. 10.
lac ad nos iiliipiando vcnianl. smil cxcmpla oortis- el Mtio csl manifesla, quia healiUido csl slatus o-
sima apiid Eiisohiiun lih. (5. histor. oap. ,'). Aiigu- mniuin honorum aggrcgalionc pcrfcclus;non hahcl
slinum dc cura [iro morUiis. cap. 16. Snlpilium in aulom omnia hona . qiii noii li;ihol illam ccrtitudi-
vila iMarlini . Paulinum in vila Amhrosii , Tlicodo- ncin.Si igiliir aliqui siincti viri rclierunl ad corpus,
rclum lib. 5. histor. cap. 2t. (Iregorium iih. :L non fuerunl beali, sed Deus praevidens eoruin e.x-
dialogor. oap. 2i . ct 2."). et in Yll. synodo, acl. i. citationcin. distulil corum hcalificationcm. el inle-
Uuod ox lymho Palrum apparucrint animae j.ro- riin dolinuil eos in oplimo aliiiuo loco , ul accidit
biit Auguslinus lih. de cura pro morluis, o. !j. el Marccllo illi, de quo Grcgorius loquilnr.
K). o.\ lih. 1. Ucgum. oap. 2S uhi Samnolis anima Dc damnalis similiter dico. danmatum ahsoiule
a|)paruil Sauli . ct cx Matlli. 17. uhi Moysos appa- ad poenas aoternas , non posse rcvocari ad vitam.
ruil cuin llclia in nmnlc Tliahor:quamvis cnim lli- quoniam alioqui fierel incerta impiorum damnalio;
larius in luinc looum. el Amhrosius lib.I. de Cain. ct sane h. Auguslinus lib. 21. rie Civil. Dv'i . cap.
ciip. 1. dicuiil. iMoyscm adlim! vivcro . tamon con- 24. niniiae praesumptionis csse dicit asserere, eos
triiriuin cxprcsse hahelur Dculeron. ult. el Jo- non mansuros pcrpeluo in igne, quibus verilas di-
^^^ '• cit: Ite in ignem aelernum. Dicit autem hoc veri-
Quod cx purgatorio apparuerinl , sunl cxompla tas omnibus.quos damnaltam in parliculari.quam
apud Grogorium lib. 4. dialogor. cap. 40. ct jj.ol in universali juriicio. Praelorea nulius ossel da-
alios auclorcs siipra citalos. Quori dcniquo cx in- mnatorum, qni non possel spcraresalutem, et pro
fcrno , prohat mullis e.xemplis auctor librorum dc quo non posscmus orare. IVunc enim non oramus
proprietatihus apum, ct idcm apparel ox illa appa- pro infidelibus damnatis.quia secunrium lidora cre-
ritione (locloris parisiensis in vila h. Brunonis.qui riimus cos non posso salvari; al si possunl sallem
post triduum a morlc. dixil se condcmnalum. Cre- ex privilegio salvari,corte pro illis orandum esset,
dibile cst. animam illam mox a inorto in inronuim sicul in hoc munrio oramiis pro ohslinali in raalo,
dcsccndisse,scd laincn lerapparuissc.ol primo.ma- ul Dcus dcl illis gr;iliam cnicaccm, (luac cerlc noa
mfeslassc suani accusalionom. Sccundo, suum ju- dalur, nisi ex [irivilcgio.
400
L)E PUhGATOlUO
Sed objicH Abulensis quaest.57.ia 4.1ib.Regum,
ei. qui excilalur ab inferno daninaloruni , non re-
millilur neque culpa , neque poena per ipsam ex-
citationem.neque aliud miraculum bic necessarium
est,quam simplcx mortui resuscitatio,crgofifiri po-
test, ul tales redeanl. Kespondeo: INon remitii cul-
pam, neque poenara, sed dari beneficium aequiva-
lens , quia ponilur in slatu, in quo poteril a culpa
et poena libcrari : ex quo scquunlur omnia nbsur-
da supra dicta,quod non eril certa impiorum da-
mnalio:quod illi sperare polerunl:quod liccbit pro
eis orare.
Ad illa excmpla, quae adferuntur,respondel So-
lus in 4. dist. 4o. quaest. 2. art, 2. omnes etbni-
cos , quos aposloli excilarunt , laborasse ignoran-
tia invincibili fidei , et proinde in purgalorio fu-
isse.
At quid respondebil Sotus Ambrosio , qui serm.
*J0. ct Maximo, qui serm. 2. dicunl, bealam Agne-
tem cxcilassc filium praefccli , qucm diabolus ne-
caverat.cum voluisset ipsam virginem sanctam stu-
prare? Igitur dico, cos qui sunl excitati , cum me-
rcrentur poenas aeternas non fuisse damnatos,sed
suspensam eorum sententiam , et inlerim punitos
secundum praesentem justiliam,ul b. Thomas do-
cet in 4. sentent. dist. 45. quaesl. 2. arlic. 2.quo-
modo eliam respondet Ricbardus, Durandus et alii
ibideni.