Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Sacraments in General · Book II: On the Effect, Number, and Ceremonies of the Sacraments
Chapter 18: On the Character
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).
There follows the third question on the effect of the Sacraments, which is on the character: namely, whether some Sacraments imprint on the soul an indelible character. We shall say three things. First, what the adversaries think of the character. Second, what is the opinion and doctrine of the Catholics on the character. Third, we shall demonstrate this truth from Scripture, the Fathers, and reasons; from which the arguments of the adversaries will vanish.
As to the first, John Wycliffe, book 4 of the Trialogue chapter 15 (Thomas Waldensis being witness, tome 2 On the Sacraments chapter 109), affirms that the sacramental character can be proved neither by Scripture nor by reason. The same in this time all the heretics teach, and chiefly John Calvin in the Antidote to the Council session 7 canon 9, and Martin Kemnitz in the second part of the Examen page 129 and following, and Tileman Heshusius in the book On the errors of the Pontificians title 5.
The arguments are three which Kemnitz uses. The first, that in the Scriptures and the Fathers there is a wonderful silence about this character. Which argument is also Calvin's; and from the things we shall say, it will fall of itself. The second is that even among the Scholastics themselves nothing is certain; which he proves from Gabriel. And this argument too will a little later vanish. The third, that the first author, or deviser, of the character was Pope Innocent III, who partly decreed, partly also did, many evils, and among others procured that Otho be created Emperor, and afterward excommunicated and deposed the same. In which argument there are two falsehoods. One, that Innocent III first devised the character; which is a falsehood. For the same Innocent, chapter Majores, On Baptism, reports the opinion of certain men saying that those who are baptized unwilling receive only the character, like those who are baptized feignedly. Not, therefore, did he himself first devise the character. The other, that the same Pontiff was evil; for he was one of the most praised Pontiffs. For, to omit his works — the books On the contempt of the world, the sermons and epistles, which breathe piety — he is praised by all historians as most excellent and most learned. And, to omit the Italians — Blondus, Platina, and others — let us hear only the testimony of two Germans.
Albert Krantz, a German, and one who wrote before the Lutheran contentions, and accordingly was led neither by hatred nor by love, book 9 of the Metropolis chapter 1: “Many praiseworthy things he wrote, many he established”; and book 12 chapter 2: “Innocent III presided as Pontiff, whose equal in much learning and magnificence of affairs that age had not.” The same, book 7 of Saxony chapter 37, writes that the Emperor Otho was a rebel against the Church, and therefore nothing prospered for him, and at last in death he had the greatest grief and contrition for that sin, so that he even bade the lowest servants of his household, in sign of penance, trample his neck with their feet; which penance certainly shows that not the Pope, but the Emperor, erred. The Abbot of Ursperg, likewise a German, and one who lived in the time of Innocent, and was not well disposed toward him, because he favored the Emperor Philip, whom the Pope opposed; and finally the only author whom Kemnitz cites against Innocent — this author, I say, thought most rightly of him. For where he writes of the Emperor Philip, he says that it is not to be believed that the Pope wished to prefer his own will to God, though he opposed Philip; which is to say that the Pope favored not Philip not from an evil mind, but from some false information. And below, speaking of the excommunication of Otho, he says that Otho, against the oath made to the Lord Pope, had invaded in hostile manner and wished to usurp to himself the lands of St. Peter. Likewise he adds that the Pope, for the good of peace, was willing to tolerate all injuries, and yet not even so could the obstinacy of Otho be bent. In the same place he says that the Pope, as a brave man and confiding in the Lord, accomplished three arduous affairs: namely, the deposition of Otho; an expedition for the aid of the Holy Land; and a general Council, the greatest and most useful to the Church.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XVIII. De Charactere. Sequitur tertia quaestio de effectu Sacra¬ mentorum , quae est de charactere : An sci¬ licet Sacramenta aliqua imprimant in anima indelebilem characterem. Tria dicemus. Primo, quid adversarii sentiant de charac¬ tere. Secundo, quae sit sententia ac doctrina Catholicorum de charactere. Tertio, demons¬ trabimus ex Scriptura, Patribus, et rationi¬ bus hanc veritatem. Ex quibus argumenta adversariorum evanescent. Quoad primum Joannes Wiclefus lib. IV Trialogi, c. 15. (teste Thoma Waldensi tom. II de Sacramentis, c. 109.) characterem Sa- cramentalem affirmat nec Scriptura, nec ratione posse probari. Idem hoc tempore docent omnes haeretici, ac in primis Joannes Calvinus in antidoto Concilii sess. VII, can. 9. et Martinus Kemnitius in II. part. Exam. pagina 129 et seq. et Tibnannus Heshusius in lib. de erroribus Pontificiorum tit. V. Argumenta sunt tria , quibus utitur Kem¬ nitius. Primum, quod in Scriptulis, et Pa¬ tribus de charactere isto mirum silentium sit. Quod argumentum etiam Calvini est; et ex his, qua; dicemus, per seipsum cor¬ ruet. Secundum est, quod inter ipsos etiam Scholasticos nihil sit certum; id quod ex Ga- briele probat. Et hoc etiam argumentum paulo post evanescet. Tertium, quod primus auctor, sive exco¬ gitator characteris fuerit Innocentius III Pa¬ pa; qui multa mala partim decrevit, partim etiam fecit, ac inter alia Othonem Impera¬ torem creari curavit, ac postea eumdem ex- communicavit, ac deposuit. In quo argu¬ mento duo sunt mendacia. Unum, quod In¬ nocentius III excogitaverit primus charac¬ terem ; quod mendacium est. Nam idem In¬ nocentius cap. M.ljores, extra de Baptismo, refert opinionem quorumdam dicentium, eos, qui inviti baptizantur, recipere tantum characterem, ut illi, qui baptizantur ficti. Non ergo ipse primus excogitavit characte¬ rem. Alterum , quod idem Pontifex malus fuerit : fuit enim unus ex laudatissimis Pon¬ tificibus. Nam ut omittam opera ejus, libros de contemptu mundi, sermones et epistolas, quae pietatem spirant : laudatur ab omnibus historicis, ut optimus, et doctissimus. Ac ut omittam Italicos, Blondum, Platinam, et alios, solum audiamus testimonium duorum Ger¬ manorum . Albertus Krantzius homo Germanus, et qui ante Lutheranas contentiones scripsit, proinde nec odio, nec amore ducebatur lib. IX Metropolis cap. I : « Laudabilia, inquit, multa scripsit, multa constituit,» et lib . XII, c. 2 : « Praefuit, inquit, Innocentius III Ponti¬ fex, cui parem multa doctrina, rerum mag¬ nificentia aetas illa non habuit. » Idem lib. VII Saxoniae, c. 37. scribit, Othonem Impe¬ ratorem rebellem Ecclesiae fuisse , et ideo nihil ei prosperum successisse, et tandem in morte summum dolorem, et contritionem ob id peccatum habuisse, adeo, ut etiam jube¬ ret ab infimis famulis domus suae in signum poenitentiae collum sibi pedibus conculcari ; quae certe poenitentia; non Papam , sed Im¬ peratorem errasse docet. Abbas Urspergcnsis, item Germanus, et qui tempore Innocentii vixit, et non bene erga eum affectus fuit, quod studeret Phi¬ lippo Imperatori, cui Papa adversabatur; et denique quem solum Kemnitius citat contra Innocentium, iste, inquam, auctor rectissi- sime de illo sensit. Nam ubi scribit de Phi¬ lippo Imperatore, dicit, non esse creden¬ dum, quod Papa voluntatem suam Deo prae¬ ferre voluerit, licet Philippo adversaretur, quod est dicere Papam non ma'o animo, sed ex aliqua falsa informatione non favisse Phi¬ lippo. Et infra loquens de excommunicatio¬ ne Othonis dicit, Othonem contra juramen¬ tum Domino Papae factum invasisse hostili- (1) Hebr. XIII, 8. 470 LIBF.R I. ter, et sibi usurpare voluisse terras S. Petri. Item addit Papam pro bono pacis omnes in¬ jurias tolerare voluisse, ettaraen ne sic qui¬ dem potuisse flecti Othonis obstinationem. Ibidem dicit Papam ut fortem virum, et in Domino confidentem tria ardua negotia pe¬ regisse, nimirum Othonis depositionem ; ex¬ peditionem pro auxilio terrae sancta1, et Con¬ cilium generale maximum , et Ecclesiae uti¬ lissimum.