Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Sacraments in General · Book I: On the Nature and Causes of the Sacrament
Chapter 3: The falsehoods of Philip Melanchthon
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. III, De Sacramentis in Genere, Book I: On the Nature and Causes of the Sacrament. 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).
First, in the Confession itself, article 13, he condemns the Scholastics because they do not teach that faith is required in the use of the Sacraments. But more fully and clearly he set forth his mind in the Apology of the same article, where he thus says: “Here we condemn the whole people of the Scholastic Doctors, who teach that the Sacraments confer grace ex opere operato on him who places no obstacle, without a good motion of the user. This is simply a Jewish opinion, to think that we are justified by a ceremony, without a good motion of the heart, that is, without faith; and yet this impious and superstitious opinion is taught with great authority in the whole Pontifical kingdom.” So he. This falsehood is far more impudent than the falsehoods of Luther. For Luther did not accuse all, but only the Scotists; but Philip condemns the whole people of the Scholastics, nay even the whole Pontifical kingdom. And that it is a most open falsehood is so manifest that it needs no proof. For, as we said above, all the Scholastics with the Master, book 4 distinction 4, require an actual faith, which cannot be without a motion of the heart; and the same Philip himself, in the Apology of the article On Penance, says that the Catholics require contrition or attrition. And what is contrition or attrition but a motion of the heart?
Secondly, also in the Augsburg Confession itself, in the article On the Mass: “Our Churches are falsely accused,” they say, “of abolishing the Mass; for the Mass is retained among us, and celebrated with the highest reverence.” That this is a falsehood we can prove from the Smalcald articles, which are of no less authority among the Lutherans than the Confession itself, whence they too are placed, together with the Confession itself, in the Book of Concord. In those articles, then, we thus read: “But that tail of the Dragon (I mean the Mass) has brought forth manifold abominations and idolatries.” And a little before: “The Mass is deservedly to be abrogated.” So they. If then the Mass, as a tail of the Dragon, is to be abrogated, why did they not abrogate it? Or, if they abrogated it, why do they complain that they are accused of having abolished the Mass? They will say perhaps that they abolished the Papistic Mass, but retain the Christian one, namely the distribution and reception of the Sacrament; for this Philip calls the Mass in the Apology. But the Lutherans are not accused by us of having abolished that Mass, that is, the Communion, but of having taken away the true Mass, that is, the oblation and the whole Canon. And so, if by the Mass they understand the Communion, it is a falsehood that they are accused; but if they understand the oblation, it is a falsehood that they are falsely accused.
Thirdly he lies in the same article: “The ancients before Gregory,” he says, “make no mention of the private Mass.” The same he repeats in the Apology of the same article. But if by the private Mass he understands a Mass which is said in a private name, or which profits one only, he lies that such a Mass began after the age of Gregory. For there is not, nor ever was, a private Mass in that sense; for every Mass is public, since it is celebrated by a priest as a public minister, and for the common and public utility of the whole Church. But if by the private Mass he understands a Mass which is said by one priest without a distribution of the Eucharist made to the people, he lies that such Masses were not before the times of Gregory. For Augustine, book 22 of the City of God chapter 8, mentions a private Mass; for he writes that one of his presbyters offered the sacrifice of the body of the Lord in the country house of a certain noble man, which was troubled by the infestation of malignant spirits, and that immediately that house was freed: “He went,” he says, “the one offered there the sacrifice of the body of Christ, praying as much as he could that that vexation might cease; and, God at once having mercy, it ceased.” So he. Here certainly Augustine, who preceded Gregory by two hundred years, mentions a Mass said by one, in a private place, without a distribution of the Sacrament made to the people, and one which was most pleasing to God, as the event proved.
Fourthly he lies in the same Augsburg Confession, in the article On Confession, where he thus says: “Formerly satisfactions were immoderately extolled, but of faith, and of the merit of Christ, and of the justice of faith, no mention was made.” And thus indeed he speaks in the Confession; but in the Apology, article 11, he thus exaggerates the matter: “Now, of this faith which obtains the remission of sins, there is not a syllable in so great a mass of Constitutions, Glosses, Summae, Confessionals; nowhere there is Christ read.” And below in the Apology article 15: “There exist,” he says, “immense books, nay whole libraries, with not a syllable of Christ, of faith in Christ, etc.” These, however, are great falsehoods, so that it is a marvel if all Germany can swallow them. For there is no Catholic book in which any Sacrament is treated, without faith and Christ being often named in it. Certainly St. Thomas, who is by no means an obscure author, part 3 question 62 article 3, says and proves that all the Sacraments have their virtue from the merits of Christ, and that the merits of the same Christ are applied to us through faith.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT III. Mendacia Philippi. Primo in ipsa Confessione art. 13. dam¬ nat Scholasticos, quod non doceant requiri fidem in usu Sacramentorum, Sed fusius, et clarius exposuit mentem suam in Apologia ejusdem articuli, ubi sic ait : « Hic damna¬ mus totum populum Scholasticorum Docto¬ rum, qui docent, quod Sacramenta non po¬ nenti obicem, conferant gratiam ex opere operato, sine bono motu utentis. Haec sim¬ pliciter Judaica opinio est, sentire, quod per caeremoniam justificemur , sine bono motu cordis, hoc est, sine fide ; et tamen haec im¬ pia, et superstitiosa opinio, magna auctori¬ tate docetur in toto regno Pontificio. » llaec ille. Hoc mendacium est longe impudentius mendaciis Lutheri. Nam Lutherus non accu¬ sabat omnes, sed Scotistas tantum^, Philip¬ pus autem totum populum Scolasticorum damnat : imo etiam totum regnum Pontifi¬ cium. Esse autem mendacium apertissimum, tam est manifestum, ut probatione non egeat. Nam, ut supra diximus, omnes Scholastici cum Magistro lib. IV, distinet. 4. requirunt actualem fidem , quae sine motu cordis esse non potest : et ipse idem Philippus in Apo¬ logia articuli de Poenitentia , dicit, Catholi¬ cos requirere contritionem vel attritionem. Et quid est contritio, vel attritio, nisi motus cordis. Secundo in ipsa etiam Confessione Augus¬ tana in articulo de Missa : «Falso, inquiunt, accusantur Ecclesiae nostrae , quod Missam aboleant: retinetur enim Missa apud nos, et summa reverentia celebratur. » Hoc esse mendacium, probare possumus ex articulis Smalchaldicis , qui non minoris sunt auctoritatis apudLutheranos, quam ip¬ sa Confessio : unde etiam simul cum ip¬ sa Confessione ponuntur in libro Concordiae. In illis igitur articulis sic legimus : « Caete- rum Draconis cauda ista (Missam intelligo) peperit multiplicesabominationes, et idolola¬ trias. » Et paulo ante : « Abroganda meri¬ to Missa est. » Haec illi. Si igitur Missa, ut cauda Draconis abroganda est, cur eam non abrogarunt? Aut , si abrogarunt, cur que¬ runtur accusari se , quod Missam aboleve¬ rint? Dicent fortasse se Missam Papisticam abolevisse, Christianam autem retinere ; ni¬ mirum Sacramenti distributionem , et per¬ ceptionem : hoc enim Philippus vocat Mis¬ sam in Apologja. At non accusantur a nobis Lutherani, quod istam Missam, id est, Com¬ munionem aboleverint, sed veram Missam, id est, oblationem, et totum Canonem sustu¬ lerint. Itaque si per Missam intelligunt, Com¬ munionem, mendacium est , quod accusen¬ tur : sin autem intelligunt oblationem, men¬ dacium est, quod falso accusentur. Tertio mentitur in eodem articulo : «Ve¬ teres, inquit, ante Gregorium non faciunt mentionem privatae Missae. » Idem repetit in Apologia ejusdem articuli. Sed si per Missam privatam intelligat Mis¬ sam, quae dicatur nomine privato , aut quae uni tantum prosit, mentitur ejusmodi Missam coepisse post Gregorii aetatem. Nulla enim est, nec fuit unquam Missa privata ad istum modum : omnis enim Missa publica est, cum celebretur a Sacerdote , ut est publicus mi¬ nister, et pro communi , et publica utilitate totius Ecclesiae. Si vero per Missam privatam intelligat Missam, quae ab uno Sacerdote di¬ catur sine distributione Eucharistiae populo facta, mentitur ejusmodi Missas non fuisse ante Gregorii tempora. Nam Augustinus lib. XXII. de Civit. Dei cap. 8. meminit Missae privatae : scribit enim unum ex suis presby¬ teris sacrificium corporis Domini obtulisse in domo rustica cujusdam nobilis viri, quae ve¬ xabatur infestatione malignorum spirituum, et continuo eam domum liberatam fuisse : « Perrexit, inquit, unus obtulit ibi sacrifi¬ cium corporis Christi , orans quantum po¬ tuit, ut cessaret illa vexatio, Deoque proti¬ nus miserante cessavit. » Haec ille. Hic certe Augustinus, qui ducentis annis Gregorium praecessit, meminit Missae dictae ab uno , in loco privato, sine distributione Sacramenti populo facta; et quae Deo gratissima fuerit, ut eventus probavit. CAPUT IV. 341 Quarto mentitur in eadem Confessione Au¬ gustana, in arlic. de Confessione, ubi sic ait : <i Antea immodice extollebantur satis¬ factiones, fidei vero, et meriti Christi, ac jus- titiae fidei, nulla fiebat mentio. » Atque ita quidem loquitur in Confessione, in Apologia autem art. 11. ita rem exaggerat : « Nunc, inquit, de hac fide consequente remissionem peccatorum, nulla est syllaba in tanta mole Constitutionum, Glossarum, Summarum, Confessionalium ; nusquam ibi Christus legi¬ tur. » Et infra in Apolog. art. Io : « Exstant, inquit, immensi libri, imo bibliothecae totae, nullam syllabam de Christo, de fide in Chris¬ tum etc. » Haec tamen magnasuntmendacia, utmirum sit, si ea tota Germania capere possit. Nullus enim est liber Catholicus, in quo de Sacra¬ mento ullo agatur, quin in eo saepe fides, et Christus nominentur. Certe S. Thomas, qui minime obscurus est auctor. III. par. quaest. LXII. art. 3. dicit et probat, Sacramenta omnia vim habere ex meritis Christi , et ejusdem Christi merita per fidem nobis ap- plciari.