Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Sacraments in General · Book II: On the Effect, Number, and Ceremonies of the Sacraments
Chapter 15: The same proved from the Fathers
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. III, De Sacramentis in Genere, Book II: On the Effect, Number, and Ceremonies of the Sacraments. 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).
This difference must be proved also from the Fathers, both that the matter may be more confirmed, and because Kemnitz in the second part of the Examen page 30 and following, as far as page 60, strives to show that we have only one place, and that from Augustine, which yet he strives to snatch from us. We shall, then, bring forward twenty old authors — Hebrew, Greek, Latin — besides Augustine.
1. Philo in the book On Circumcision, setting forth all the causes of Circumcision, which he confesses he received from his forefathers, neither clearly says nor obscurely insinuates that it was instituted as a remedy of sin. 2. Josephus book 1 of the Antiquities chapter 12 renders no other cause of Circumcision than that the posterity of Abraham might be distinguished from the other nations. And yet if anyone could know to what end Circumcision was instituted, it was chiefly these, who were Hebrews, and most learned, and had lived even at the time when the law still flourished. 3. Justin in the Dialogue with Trypho, before the middle: “Nay,” he says, “from this, that women cannot be circumcised, it is understood that Circumcision was given for the sake of a sign, not for a work of justice.” And in almost the whole Dialogue he proves this, that Circumcision did not justify, but was given only that the Jews might be distinguished from others. 4. Dionysius the Areopagite in the book On the ecclesiastical hierarchy chapter 5 part 1 teaches that the Church is a mean between the synagogue and the heavenly country; because the synagogue had carnal Sacraments, and shadows and figures; the heavenly Jerusalem has the bare truth without any corporeal signs; our Church shares in both, since it has corporeal signs and at the same time spiritual gifts. 5. Irenaeus book 4 chapter 30: “Circumcision,” he says, “God gave not as a consummator of justice, but in a sign, that the race of Abraham might remain recognizable.” And below: “And because man was not justified through these, but they were given to the people in a sign, he shows that Abraham himself without Circumcision believed God, and it was reputed to him unto justice.” See the same in the same book chapters 28, 29, 32, and 34. 6. Origen book 2 against Celsus says that Christians deservedly dismissed Circumcision, the Sabbaths, and the like, because they were carnal and corporeal things, and passed to the spiritual law of God. Likewise homily 3 on Genesis, where he explains the precept of Circumcision, he opposes that carnal Circumcision of the Jews to the spiritual Circumcision of Christians; and accordingly will have as great a difference between their Sacraments and ours as there is between flesh and spirit. 7. Eusebius of Caesarea book 1 of the Evangelical Demonstration chapter 10, and book 1 of the History chapter 1, beautifully teaches why carnal Sacraments and sacrifices were given to those first parents, as certain elements and adumbrations of spiritual things. 8. Eusebius of Emesa, or whoever is the author of those homilies, in the Homily for the Saturday after the first Sunday of Lent, on that, Let us make here three tabernacles: “The first tabernacle,” he says, “is the synagogue; the second the Church; the third heaven. The first was in shadow and figure; the second in figure and truth; the third in truth alone. In the first the way is shown; in the second it is found; in the third it is possessed. For the Sacraments of the Church, unlike the Sacraments of the synagogue, do not only teach and show the medicine, but are themselves rather the medicine and the remission of sins.” 9. Athanasius, in the oration on that, All things are delivered to me by my Father, near the end, teaches at length that Circumcision was nothing else than a shadow and figure of Baptism, which is the true and spiritual Circumcision. 10. Epiphanius, heresy 8, which is that of the Epicureans: “There,” he says, “was carnal Circumcision, which served the time until the great Circumcision, that is, Baptism, which circumcises us from sins.”
11. Basil in the book On the Holy Spirit chapter 14: “He who, comparing the truth to the shadow, and conferring with the figures the things which are signified by the figures, undertakes to abolish at once the whole Evangelical dispensation.” And below: “Why,” he says, “dost thou compare lavers with lavers, which have only the appellation of the name in common, but of the things there is as great a difference as there is between dreams and truth, between shadows and images, and between the things which really are?” 12. John Chrysostom homily 27 on Genesis: “Observe,” he says, “that God willed Circumcision to be set up for a law, not because this could effect anything for the salvation of the soul, but that the Jewish children might carry about this token of gratitude, as a sign and seal, and that it might not be lawful for them to be mingled with the mixtures of the nations. Hence blessed Paul calls this a sign, saying: And he gave the sign of Circumcision, a seal; for to justice Circumcision itself conduces nothing.” See the same homily 39 and 40 on Genesis, the homily On the betrayal of Judas, homily 7 on the epistle to the Romans, and homily 14 on the epistle to the Hebrews. The same teach 13. Cyril book 10 against Julian, past the middle; 14. Theodoret, question 67 on Genesis, and book 7 to the Greeks; 15. Damascene book 4 On the faith chapters 10, 14, and 26; 16. Theophylact on chapter 2 to the Romans; 17. Oecumenius on chapter 4 to the Romans. Now from the Latins: 18. Tertullian in the book against the Jews chapter 1: “If Circumcision,” he says, “purges a man, why, when God made Adam uncircumcised, did he not circumcise him, or after he sinned, if Circumcision purges?” And below: “God foreseeing that he was to give this Circumcision for a sign, not for salvation.” In the same place he proves from the Prophets that the sacrifices and Sacraments of the Jews did not justify, where also he calls those carnal and ours spiritual. 19. St. Cyprian book 1 against the Jews chapter 8 opposes the carnal Circumcision of the Jews to the spiritual Circumcision of Christians, and adds that Adam, Henoch, Noe, and Melchisedech were just without Circumcision: “Because,” he says, “the seal of the seed profits nothing.” The same, book 3 epistle 8 to Fidus, says that the carnal Circumcision, the spiritual coming, vanished like a shadow at the coming of the light. 20. St. Ambrose in epistle 72 to Irenaeus: “A sign,” he says, “is corporeal Circumcision, the truth is spiritual Circumcision: the one cuts off a member, the other cuts off sin.” The same, on chapter 4 to the Romans: “Circumcision, then, has not any dignity, but is only a sign; which sign the sons of Abraham received, that they might be known to be his sons, who believing God had received this sign, that they might be emulators of their father's faith.” See the same book 1 On Abraham chapter 4, where he professedly treats of Circumcision, and book 1 On the Sacraments chapters 4 and 6, and the book On those who are initiated into the mysteries chapters 8 and 9. 21. St. Jerome on chapter 3 to the Galatians renders the cause why Circumcision was instituted, and does not even by a little word indicate that it was for a remedy of sin: “Because,” he says, “from the seed of Abraham Christ was to arise, and from Abraham to Christ many ages were to pass, God, foreseeing lest the offspring of the beloved Abraham should be mingled with the other nations, and his family little by little become uncertain, marked the Israelite flock with a certain cautery of Circumcision. Finally, for forty years in the desert no one was circumcised; for they lived alone, without the mixture of another nation. As soon as the people crossed the bank of the Jordan, Circumcision, necessarily about to be, provided against the error to come from the mixture of the nations. But that under Jesus the second leader the people is written to be circumcised signifies that in the desert Circumcision ceases, which in Egypt was reasonably practiced; and that by our Lord Jesus Christ believers are to be cleansed by spiritual Circumcision.” The same, on chapter 1 of Isaias, says that God rejects the Jewish ceremonies, and that the laver of Baptism pleases him: “Which alone,” he says, “can purge sins.”
Finally St. Augustine on Psalm 73: “The Sacraments,” he says, “are not the same; because some Sacraments are giving salvation, others promising the Savior: the Sacraments of the New Testament give salvation, the Sacraments of the Old Testament promised the Savior.” To this place alone Kemnitz and Calvin answer. Kemnitz in the Examen pages 59 and 60 answers that Augustine speaks of the old Sacraments which had not an annexed promise, but were mere signs, according to Luther's distinction. The solution is not valid, because Augustine speaks in general of the old Sacraments, and chiefly of the sacrifices, and says that all were changed because they did not give salvation. Besides, since Augustine says that those Sacraments were promising the Savior, he seems to speak chiefly of those which have an annexed promise. For how did they not have an annexed promise, if they promised the Savior? Secondly, he answers with Calvin, book 4 chapter 14 section 26 of the Institutes, that Augustine speaks not of the efficacy of the Sacraments, but of the signification; and that he will have only this difference between those and these, that those signified Christ to come, these signify him already exhibited and given. But on the contrary: for Augustine does not say that ours signify the Savior, but give salvation. Besides, in the same place he says: “The Sacraments are changed, made easier, fewer, more salutary, more happy.” But these pertain to efficacy, not to signification. Finally the same Augustine in other places plainly sets down a difference as to efficacy. Epistle 19 to Jerome: “Why should I not say,” he says, “that the precepts of those old Sacraments were not good, because by them men are not justified? For they are shadows foretelling the grace by which we are justified.” So he. What clearer? Does not Augustine say the very thing which the Council of Florence afterward defined? Book 19 against Faustus chapter 13: “Other Sacraments were instituted,” he says, “greater in virtue, better in utility.” So he. Therefore ours excel the old in utility and virtue, not in signification alone. Tract 41 on John: “In the sacrifices,” he says, “there was not the expiation of sins, but a shadow of things to come.” Question 25 on the book of Numbers: “If,” he says, “the old Sacraments be regarded in themselves, in no way can they heal; but if the very things of which these are Sacraments be inquired into, in them can be found the purgation of sins.” This concerning the testimonies of the Fathers.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XV. Idem probatur ex Patribus. Probandum est hoc discrimen etiam ex Pa¬ tribus, tum ut res sit magis confirmata, tum quiaKemnitius in 2. par. Examinis pag. 30. et sequentibus usque ad 60. conatur osten¬ dere, unum tantum locum nos habere, eura- que ex Augustino , quem tamen ipsum eri¬ pere nobis conatur. Proferemus igitur auc¬ tores veteres, Hebraeos, Graecos, Latinos vi- ginti, praeter Augustinum. I. Philo in lib. de Circumcisione , expo¬ nens omnes causas Circumcisionis, quas a majoribus se accepisse fatetur , .neque clare dicit, neque obscure insinuat, eam institu¬ tam fuisse in remedium peccati. II. Joseph lib. I. antiq.cap. 12. non aliam causam Circumcisionis reddit, nisi ut poste¬ ritas Abrahae ab aliis Gentibus discerneretur. Et tamen si quis nosse potuit , quorsum es¬ set instituta Cireuihcisio , isti maxime , qui Hebraei erant , et doctissimi , et vixerant etiam eo tempore quo adhuc lex vigebat. III. Justinus in Dialogo cum Triphone, ante medium : « Quin etiam, inquit, ex eo, quod non possunt feminae circumcidi , in- telligitur signi causa datam esse Circumci¬ sionem, non pro opere justitia?. Et toto fe¬ re Dialogo hoc probat, Circumcisionem non justificasse, sed datam solum , ut discerne¬ rentur Judaei ab aliis. IV. Dionysius Areopagita in lib. de Hie- rarchia Ecclesiastica, cap. o. par. 1. docet, Ecclesiam esse mediam inter synagogam et coelestem patriam; quod synagoga carnalia Sacramenta, et umbras, ac figuras habuerit; coelestis Hierusalem habeat nudam veritatem sine ullis signis corporalibus : Ecclesia nos¬ tra cura utraque communicpt , quoti ha¬ beat signa corporalia , et simul spiritualia dona. V. Irenaeus lib. IV, cap. 30 : « Circumci¬ sionem, inquit, non quasi justitiae consum- matricem, sed in signo eam dedit Deus , ut cognoscibile perseveret genus Abrahae. » Et infra : « Et quia non per haec justificabatur homo, sed in signo data sunt populo, osten¬ dit, quod ipse Abraham sine Circumcisione credidit Deo, et reputatum est illi ad justi¬ tiam. » Vide eurndem in eodem libro c. 28, 29, 32 et 34. VI. Origenes lib. II contra Celsum dicit, Christianos merito dimisisseCircumcisionero, Sabbata, et similia , quod res carnales , et corporales essent, et transisse ad legem Dei spiritualem. Item homil. 3. in Genes, ubi explicat Circumcisionis praeceptum, opponit carnalem illam Circumcisionem Judaeorum, Circumcisioni spirituali Christianorum : proinde vult tantum interesse inter Sacra¬ menta illorum, et nostra, quantum interest inter carnem, et spiritum. VII. Eusebius Caesariensis lib. I demonst. Evangelicae, cap. 10. et lib. I hist. cap. 1. pulchre docet , cur data fuerint primis illis parentibus Sacramenta carnalia , et sacrifi¬ cia, tamquam elementa quaedam, et adum ¬ brationes rerum spiritualium. VIII. Eusebius Emissenus sive quicumque estauctor illarum homiliarum, Homil. inSab- *bato post primam Dominicam Quadragesi¬ mae in illud : Faciamus hic tria tabernacula. « Primum, inquit , tabernaculum est syna¬ goga ; secundum Ecclesia; tertium coelum. Primum in umbra fuit, et figura ; secundum in figura et velitate; tertium in sola verita¬ te. In primo via ostenditur; in secundo in¬ venitur; in terlio possidetur. Non enim Sa¬ cramenta Ecclesite, sicut Sacramenta syna¬ gogae medicinam tantum docent , et osten¬ dunt, sed ipsa potius sunt medicina , et re¬ missio peccatorum. » . IX. Athanasius orat, in illud: Omnia mihi tradita sunt a Patre meo, circa finem, fuse do¬ cet Circumcisionem nihil fuisse aliud nisi umbram, et figuram Baptismi, qui est vera, et spiritualis Circumcisio. X. Epiphanius haer. 8. qute est Epicureo¬ rum : « Illic, inquit, Circumcisio fuit carna¬ lis, quoe deserviit tempori usque ad magnam Circumcisionem, hoc est, Baptismum , qui circumcidit nos a peccatis. » CAPUT XV. 459 XI. Basilius lib. de Spiritu sancto , cap. 14 : « Qui veritatem, inquit, umbrae compa¬ rans, cumque figuris conferens ea , quae fi¬ guris significantur, universam pariter Evan- gelicam dispensationem elevare aggreditur.» Et infra : «Quid, inquit, confers lavacra cum lavacris , quae solam nominis appella¬ tionem habent communem, rerum vero tan¬ ta est di fferen lia , quanta est inter somnia, et veritatem , inter umbras et imagines , et inter ea, qua) revera sunt. » XII. Joannes Chrysostomus hom. 27. in Gen. : « Attende, inquit, quod Deus Circum¬ cisionem pro lege statui voluit, non quod ad animae salutem efficere hoc possit aliquid, sed ut Judaei pueri hoc gratitudinis indicium circumferrent; quasi signum, et sigillum, et ne liceret eis commisceri gentium commis- tionibus. Hinc B. Paulus signum hoc vocat dicens : Et signum dedit Circumcisionis si¬ gillum; nam ad justitiam ipsa Circumcisio nihil conducit. » Vide eumdem hom. 39 et 40. in Gen. hom. de proditione Judae, hom. 7. in epist. ad Rom. et hom. 14. in epist.ad Heb. Idem docent XIII. Cyrillus lib. X. in Ju¬ lianum ultra medium. XIV. Theodoretus; quaest. 67. in Genes, et lib. VII ad Graecos. XV. Damascenus lib. IV de fide, c. 10, 14 et 26. XVI. Theophylactus in cap. II ad Rom. XVII. (JEcumenius in cap. IV ad Rom. Jam ex Latinis XVIII. Tertullianus in lib. conlra Judaeos , cap. 1 : «Si circumcisio, inquit, purgat hominem, Deus Adam incir- cumcisum cum faceret, cur eum non circum¬ cidit, vel posteaquani deliquit, si purgat Circumcisio? » Et inlra : « Providens Deus, quod hanc Circumcisionem in signum, non in salutem esset daturus. » Ibidem probat ex Prophetis , sacrificia et Sacramenta Ju¬ daeorum non justificasse , ubi etiam illa vo¬ cat carnalia, et nostra spiritualia. XIX. S. Cyprianus lib. I. contra Judaeos, cap. 8. opponit carnalem Circumcisionem Judaeorum , spirituali Circumcisioni Chris¬ tianorum, et addit Adamum, Henoch, Noe, et Melchisedech justos fuisse sine Circumci¬ sione : « Quia, inquit, signaculum seminis nihil proficit. » Idem lib. III, epist. 8. ad Fi¬ dum, dicit carnalem Circumcisionem, adve¬ niente spirituali, tamquam umbram luce ad¬ veniente evanuisse. XX. S. Ambrosius in epist. 72. ad Ire- naeum : « Signum, inquit, Circumcisio cor¬ poralis, veritas Circumcisio spiritualis : illa membrum amputat, ista peccatum. » Idem: « Si tamen idem, in cap. IV ad Rom. : «Non ergo, inquit, Circumcisio aliquid habet dig¬ nitatis, sed signum est tantum; quod sig¬ num ideo accipiebant filii Abrahae, utsciren- tur ejus filii esse , qui credens Deo hoc sig¬ num acceperat, ut aemuli essent paternae fi¬ dei. » Vine eumdem lib. I de Abraham, cap. 4. ubi ex professo agit de Circumcisio¬ ne, et lib. I de Sacramentis, cap. 4 et 6. et lib. de iis, qui initiuntur mysteriis, cap. 8 et 9. XXI. S. Hieronymus in cap. III ad Gal. reddit causam cur fuerit Circumcisio insti¬ tuta, et ne verbulo quidem indicat, fuisse in remedium peccati : « Quia, inquit, ex se¬ mine Abrahse erat Christus oriundus, et ab Abraham , usque ad Christum multa erant saecula transitura, providens Deus, ne sobo- les dilecti Abrahae caeteris nationibus misce¬ retur, et paulatim familia ejus fieret incerta, gregem Israeliticum quodam Circumcisionis cauterio denotavit. Denique per quadragin¬ ta annos in eremo nullus est circumcisus : soli quippe sine gentis alterius commistione vivebant. Statim ut Jordanis ripam trans¬ gressus est populus, Circumcisio necessario futura ex commistione Gentium providit er¬ rori. Quod autem a Jesu duce secundo scri¬ bitur populus circumcisus, significat in ere¬ mo cessare Circumcisionem, quae in ^Egypto rationabiliter exercebatur ; et a Domino nos¬ tro Jesu Christo spirituali Circumcisione credentes esse mundandos. » Idem in cap. I Isaiae dicit, Deum respuere caeremonias Ju¬ daicas , et placere ei lavacrum Baptismi : « Quod solum , inquit, potest purgare pec¬ cata. » Denique S. Augustinus in Psalm. LXXIII: « Sacramenta, inquit, non sunt eadem, quia alia sunt Sacramenta dantia salutem , alia promittentia Salvatorem : Sacramenta novi Testamenti dant salutem, Sacramenta vete¬ ris Testamenti promiserunt Salvatorem. » Ad hunc solum locum respondent Kemni- tius et Calvinus. Kemnitius in.Exam. pag. 59. et 60. respondet Augustinum loqui de Sacramentis veteribus, quae non habebant an¬ nexam promissionem, sed erant mera signa, juxta Lutheri distinctionem. Non valet solutio, quia Augustinus loqui¬ tur in genere de Sacramentis veteribus , et maxime de sacrificiis , et dicit omnia esse mutata, quia non dabant salutem. Praeterea 460 LIBER II. cura Augustinus dicit, illa Sacramenta fuis¬ se promittentia Salvatorem, videtur maxime loqui de illis, quce habent annexam promis¬ sionem. Quomodo enim non habebant anne¬ xam promissionem, si promittebant Salva¬ torem. Secundo, respondet cum Calvino lib. IV, c. 14. §. 26. Instit. Augustinum non loqui de efficacia Sacramentorum, sed de signifi¬ catione; et hoc solum velle interesse inter illa et ista, quod illa significabant Christum venturum, ista significant eum jam exhibi¬ tum, et datum. At contra; nam Augustinus non dicit, nostra significare Salvatorem , sed dare sa¬ lutem. Praiterea ibidem ait : « Mutata sunt Sacramenta, facta sunt faciliora, pauciora, salubriora , feliciora. » At haec ad effica¬ ciam, non ad significationem pertinent. De¬ nique idem Augustinus in aliis locis aperte ponit discrimen quoad efficaciam. Epist. 19. ad Hieronymum : « Cur non dicam, inquit, praecepta illa veterum Sacramentorum, nec bona fuisse, quia eis non justificantur homi¬ nes ? Umbrae enim sunt praenuntiantes gra¬ tiam, qua justificamur. » Haec ille. Quid cla¬ rius? Nonne idem prorsus dicit Augustinus, quod postea definivit Concilium Florenti¬ num? lib. XIX contra Faustum, cap. 13 : « Instituta sunt, inquit, alia Sacramenta vir¬ tute majora, utilitate meliora. » Ilaec ille. Igitur nostra excellunt antiquis , utilitate, et virtute; non sola significatione, tract. 41. in Joan. : « In sacrificiis, inquit , non erat ex¬ piatio peccatorum, sed umbra futurorum, » quaest. 25 in lib. Num. : « Si, inquit, per se attendantur Sacramenta vetera, nullo pacto possunt mederi : si autem res ipsae, quarum haec Sacramenta sunt, inquirantur, in eis inveniri poterit purgatio peccatorum.» Haec de testimoniis Patrum.